Quantcast
Channel: Trina's Kitchen
Viewing all 2752 articles
Browse latest View live

Iraq and the avoidance

$
0
0
Bill Van Auken (WSWS) covers Iraq today:


In Iraq itself, these dangers can be seen clearly. The latest fighting was triggered by the sectarian-based repression unleashed by the Shiite-dominated government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki against the predominantly Sunni population of Anbar province. The violent arrest of a prominent Sunni politician and the bloody crackdown on a year-old Sunni protest encampment in Ramadi led at the beginning of the year to Sunni militias seizing control of Fallujah and Ramadi. Armed clashes between the militias and the Iraqi army are continuing.
Among those involved in the fighting is the Al Qaeda-affiliated ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria), which has been one of the most prominent elements in the Western-backed proxy war to oust the government of President Bashar al-Assad across the border in Syria.
The sectarian conflict is not, as much of the media would have it, an age-old blood feud between Sunnis and Shia. It was triggered and fueled by the US intervention, which sought to exploit the sectarian issue as part of a divide-and-conquer strategy. This criminal policy found expression in the ethnic cleansing operations carried out under the cover of the US military “surge” of 2007-2008. The Maliki government was placed in office under the US occupation, while the Iraqi military was transformed from a conscript army drawing its troops from every segment of society into an armed force based on the sectarian militias of the various Shiite parties.
As for Al Qaeda, it did not exist in Iraq before the US invaded. Now it has been vastly strengthened by the US-backed war in Syria and the flood of money and weaponry funneled by Washington and its regional allies to the so-called “rebels.”


That's good.  Not great.

Until we get honest about what the US government did in 2010, we're not being honest.


Ned Parker notes the truth in "Who Lost Iraq?" (POLITICO):

It was the April 2010 national election and its tortured aftermath that sewed the seeds of today’s crisis in Iraq. Beforehand, U.S. state and military officials had prepared for any scenario, including the possibility that Maliki might refuse to leave office for another Shiite Islamist candidate. No one imagined that the secular Iraqiya list, backed by Sunni Arabs, would win the largest number of seats in parliament. Suddenly the Sunnis’ candidate, secular Shiite Ayad Allawi, was poised to be prime minister. But Maliki refused and dug in.
And it is here where America found its standing wounded. Anxious about midterm elections in November and worried about the status of U.S. forces slated to be drawn down to 50,000 by August, the White House decided to pick winners. According to multiple officials in Baghdad at time, Vice President Joseph Biden and then-Ambassador Chris Hill decided in July 2010 to support Maliki for prime minister, but Maliki had to bring the Sunnis and Allawi onboard. Hill and his staff then made America’s support for Maliki clear in meetings with Iraqi political figures.

The stalemate would drag on for months, and in the end both the United States and its arch-foe Iran proved would take credit for forming the government. But Washington would be damaged in the process. It would be forever linked with endorsing Maliki. One U.S. Embassy official I spoke with just months before the government was formed privately expressed regret at how the Americans had played kingmaker.

In 2010, Iraqis voted and the US government, the White House, overrode the votes of the people and backed Nouri (whose State of Law lost to Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya) and that's how Nouri got a second term and was able to terrorize the Iraqi people.


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


Tuesday, January 14, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, Ramadi's in the control of rebels, the assault on Anbar continues to target women and children, Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq asks for US monitors to Iraq's upcoming elections, Iraqiya leader Ayad Allawi explains the US has never given Nouri conditions for their support, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon visits the KRG (including a Syrian refugee camp), and more.

We'll start with Monday's US State Dept press briefing when spokesperson Jen Harf was asked about Iraq.


QUESTION: On Iraq, please.

MS. HARF: Iraq?

QUESTION: Iraq.

MS. HARF: Yes.

QUESTION: Do you have anything about the recent – I mean, updating about the cooperation with the Iraqi Government regarding --

MS. HARF: Yeah, let me – yeah – sorry, I didn’t mean to cut you off there.

QUESTION: -- confronting different --

MS. HARF: Yep. Let me just --

QUESTION: -- challenges?

MS. HARF: -- give you a few updates here, and then if there are any follow-ups, I’m happy to get to it.
So just a couple of things. We put out a fairly lengthy statement about Deputy Assistant Secretary Brett McGurk’s travel to Iraq. Just a little update on the situation on the ground, and we talked about this a little last week – but basically that if we think back on, I think it was January 1st when AQ took over much of Ramadi, Fallujah, that the Iraqis, their local police, with the support of the army in a supporting role, have really cleared out most of Ramadi, and basically did it in about a week, a little longer, and now have a plan to use some of those same tactics to do the same thing in Fallujah. We’re working with them very closely on this.
Obviously, Fallujah’s a more complicated situation, but I think it’s important to note when there is success in doing this. A lot of people covered when AQ took over Ramadi. I think there should be as much attention paid to when the Iraqi local police was able to push them out to the outskirts of Ramadi. So we’re working with them on a whole host of issues, really. It’s working with them politically – as you saw Deputy Assistant Secretary McGurk met with everybody, I think, in Iraq over his few day trips there – but also on the military and counterterrorism side, certainly accelerating our cooperation.
I don’t have more details other than what we talked about last week.

QUESTION: Yeah, I mean, if it was the talk about 72 hours ago or 48 hours ago, was about this Apache helicopters and missiles and all these things are – these things are finalizing, or on --


MS. HARF: Well, we certainly hope so. This is – these are things we certainly support, the Administration supports. We will keep working with Congress to as quickly as possible get more things, for lack of a more technical term, more materials to the Iraqi Government they can use in this fight. We are very committed to supporting them in this way through foreign military sales, and also politically and diplomatically.


It's rather sad that on the day the United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon begins a visit to Iraq, the US State Dept doesn't even note the visit.  Monday, Ban Ki-moon spent the day in Baghdad.  Among those he met with?  Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.  Deutsche Welle explains, "Visiting refugees from neighboring war-torn Syria in the Kurdish-hub of Irbil in northern Iraq on Monday, Ban had urged Iraqi leaders to seek 'political dialogue' and said he was saddened to 'so many young children and vulnerable groups who suffer from this man-made tragedy'."  UPI notes, "Their meeting followed a bloody Sunday that left 22 dead and 80 injured. On his fifth trip to Iraq, the UN leader expressed concern about the deteriorating security situation and encouraged political unity and civic participation." ABC News Radio says the violence "overshadowed" the Secretary-General's visit to the capital.


Today, he visited the KRG in northern Iraq.  The UN News Centre reports:






Visiting with Syrian refugees in northern Iraq, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today called “heart-breaking” what he saw in Kawrgosik camp, saying he was particularly saddened to see so many young children, women and vulnerable people suffering from “this man-made tragedy.”
“I am here to send our strong solidarity and support to all the refugees who came from Syria, on behalf of the United Nations and the international community,” said Mr. Ban alongside the High Commissioner for Refugees, Antonio Guterres, and Valerie Amos, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and UN Emergency Relief Coordinator.
“We are also here to listen to the concerns and aspirations of all the refugees here,” the UN chief said, recalling the people with whom he met in their tents. “Families shared their struggles to survive, find their loved ones and cope with the sadness of those who have been lost.”
The Kurdistan Regional Government is hosting more than 220,000 Syrian refugees. Mr. Ban highly commended “its commitment to humanitarian principles” in establishing refugee camps, transit sites and a humanitarian corridor to north-east Syria. 

And they note:

In a private meeting in Erbil with the President of the Kurdistan Region, Massoud Barzani, and Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani, Mr. Ban urged the Government to keep the border open for refugees fleeing the conflict.
  The request was echoed by Mr. Guterres, who said it “breaks my heart” to see Syrian refugees risking their lives to escape from the country, such as the reported 200 people who drowned in a Nile River ferry accident.
“Your border is open,” he said, urging Governments to take in refugees and assume full-burden sharing with neighbouring countries “in the noble need to respond to this dramatic situation.”




The KRG notes the Erbil meet-up with President Barzani and Ban Ki-Moon was also attended by Prime Minister Barzani and Deputy Prime Minister Imad Ahmed as well as other officials. Ban Ki-Moon expressed his thanks for the KRG hosting the Syrian refugees and that the situations in Syria and Iraq were discussed.







Amir Taheri (Asharaq Al-Awsat) observes:

Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki has claimed that the city, which drove governmental forces out last week, is now controlled by Al-Qaeda. His aides have warned that the new Iraqi army has received orders to “liberate” the city with a shoot-to-kill strategy. “We are not going to take any prisoners,” says Muwaffaq Al-Rubai, a veteran advisor to Maliki. Using the Al-Qaeda bogeyman, Maliki has managed to persuade the Obama administration in Washington to speed up arms deliveries, including drones using Hellfire missiles, to Iraqi government forces.
However, the black-and-white picture painted by Maliki does not tell the whole story. To start with, although radical Islamist groups are involved in the current crisis in Fallujah, it is simply wrong to brand them all with the Al-Qaeda label. Elements from the groups operating under the label of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) are certainly present in Fallujah and, to a lesser extent, in Ramadi, another town in Anbar. But the insurgency that has wrested control of Fallujah away from Maliki has also attracted armed Arab Sunni tribes that helped drive Al-Qaeda out of the city almost a decade ago. Some of the radical Sunni armed groups came to Fallujah from neighboring Syria, where they have suffered a series of defeats at the hands of rival Islamist groups. In a sense, Maliki provoked them into direct control by launching operations at the Kilometer 90 junction where the borders of Iraq meet with those of Jordan and Syria, a major crossing point for radical Islamists fighting against President Bashar Al-Assad in Syria.


Nouri's assault on Anbar Province continues.   Alsumaria reports that Anbar Province's Health Committee announced today the vast number of victims (300 dead and 251 injured) in the two week assault have been women and children.  Mu Xuequan (Xinhua) reports, "Gunmen on Tuesday regained control of more districts in Ramadi, the capital of the volatile Anbar province in western Iraq, after fierce clashes with Iraqi army backed by Sunni tribes. [. . .]  On Tuesday, they managed to retake control of most areas in central and northern city, a provincial police source told Xinhua." Al Jazeera adds, "Rebel fighters have staged coordinated attacks near the western Iraqi city of Falluja, destroying two army tanks and capturing a police station, police have said."AFP notes of Ramadi, "Most civil servants have returned to work and many shops reopened, but schools remained closed." Meanwhile World Bulletin reports the Anbar tribal leaders held a press conference today:

Tribal chieftains held a conference on Tuesday in provincial capital Ramadi at which they issued a joint statement condemning what they called "the unjust war waged by the government of [Prime Minister Nouri] al-Maliki" on the province.
The province was rocked by clashes early this month when Iraqi security forces dismantled a months-old anti-government sit-in. The sit-in was staged by Sunni tribesmen to protest perceived anti-Sunni discrimination by the Shiite-dominated government.

Chieftains said that the crackdown on the province had led armed tribesmen to take up arms against government troops "in defense of their souls and the pride of the tribes that al-Maliki tried to undermine."


UNHCR issued a statement today which included:

The UN refugee agency said on Tuesday that it has been able to deliver aid over the past week to some of the estimated 70,000 people displaced by fighting and insecurity in central Iraq's Anbar province.
"Aid from the UN and partner agencies has been reaching some of the affected communities since January 8, and yesterday a further 12 trucks of UNHCR relief reached neighbourhoods around Fallujah, carrying non-food aid," spokesman Adrian Edwards said, adding that the International Rescue Committee was conducting the distribution for UNHCR.
"At present, insecurity and access difficulties are still hampering the overall effort. The UN is advocating with the government of Iraq to ensure access to displaced persons and safe passage of humanitarian aid," he added.


Other responses to Nouri's assault on Anbar?  Deutsche Presse-Agentur reports,  "Up to 10,000 Iraqi commandos would get antiterrorism training from the United States to bolster Baghdad's fight against al-Qaida under a plan currently being negotiated, diplomats said on Tuesday.  Washington and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki are finalizing a security pact that would arrange for antiterrorism training for between 8,000 and 10,000 Iraqi commandos in Jordan, US diplomats based in Amman said." Tom Roeder (Colorado Gazette) reports on Fort Carson service members in Kuwait:

Soldiers with the 2nd Brigade Combat Team are preparing for three major training exercises in the next 40 days, with the biggest matching their tanks against a Kuwaiti battalion. The training allows the 3,800-soldier unit to fulfill its mission of helping America's friends while honing skills that leaders hope deter threats in the roiling region.
"It has taken on increased significance and meaning, many of us in the brigade are veterans of Iraq," said Col. Omar Jones, brigade commander and a veteran of fighting in Fallujah, Baghdad and Mosul.
The brigade deployed to Kuwait in the fall, replacing Fort Carson's 1st Brigade Combat Team for a nine-month stint.
Keeping Fort Carson troops at Camp Buehring, Kuwait, near the Iraqi border is seen as a safeguard against violence that could spread beyond Iraq. The Colorado Springs soldiers also are the nation's first responders if trouble arises in the Persian Gulf region.


And there are other reactions to note as well.  Michael Holmes (CNN) reports on Iraq today including interviewing Iraqiya leader Ayad Allawi:

Ayad Allawi:  And I warned all the leaders in the world and the region that unless this is averted then Iraq really is on the -- has started the civil war but hasn't reached the point of no return.  Once it reaches the point of no return then, unfortunately, the whole region will burn up.  

[. . .]

Michael Holmes [. . .] what he's saying about the US is that they backed al-Maliki which he says is fine.  They have no put enough pressure on him to reign in this sectarianism, to be more inclusive.  Here's part of what he [Allawi] said about the US.

Ayad Allawi:  They should support Maliki, it's up to them.  But they should also clarify to Maliki that their support is conditional on the inclusivity of the political process and respecting the Constitution and respecting human rights.  But unfortunately, the Americans are not doing this. 


Michael Holmes:  And he's a very worried man.  You know, I've had that sense coming back this time.  He's very worried that this could slip down that road to all-out sectarian war.  He says at the moment it's an asymeterical war with the car bombings, the assassinations.  He said it wouldn't take much for it to become a symeterical war -- that is armed rebellion, if you like, by the Sunnis in this country.  And that would be a disaster for the region and the country.


Today Iraq Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlak was among those speaking in DC at the United States Institute of Peace.  Excerpt.

Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq:  Cruelty and abuse and marginalization can create a rich environment for terrorism and al Qaeda specifically.  And that's why al Qaeda is growing again in Iraq. And now we need all the effort to come together to help Iraq get rid of that danger -- likewise in the region.  I would like to emphasize that your brothers -- Sunnis, Shi'ites, Kurds and Arabs -- are quite determined to clean the country from  sectarianism and terrorism.  And they really need your help. I am quite sure that at the end we will be able to defeat terrorism in Iraq.  So we need help from the United States [. . .]  But today we need your help with the heads of the political groups to have a reconciliation in the country because we believe that arming the Iraqi army is not enough by itself because, you know, there's a society, cohesive society is needed to fight terrorism.  If you don't have these two factors, things will be really difficult.  And, as you know, that the American army with its might could not defeat al Qaeda unless they could have the cooperation of the local people.  

Hannah Allam and Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) add, "In telephone interviews, residents of Anbar echoed Mutlaq’s talking points but said they no longer viewed him as a legitimate envoy for their concerns because he’d refused to resign from the Maliki administration. Tribal leaders said Mutlaq should have consulted with them about their priorities before he went to Washington representing the Sunni population." Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) covers it here.  We'll note the speeches tomorrow as well.  Eli Lake (Daily Beast) interviews al-Mutlaq and reports:


 Saleh al-Mutlaq, a deputy prime minister of Iraq, arrived in Washington this week with a modest request for a president he says prematurely withdrew American forces from his country at the end of 2011. He is asking President Obama to provide observers for the national elections in Iraq scheduled for the end of April.
As far is it goes, election monitors are not a big ask for Iraqi politicians. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has asked for the United States to send advanced aircraft, attack helicopters and other munitions for his military. He is getting some hellfire missiles and surveillance drones now that al Qaeda has claimed dominion over the western Iraqi city of Fallujah.
But Mutlaq—who is his country’s second highest ranking Sunni Arab politician after Usama al-Nujayfi, the speaker of Iraq’s parliament—would like the United States to try to save Iraq’s fraying political system before strengthening its army. 


al-Mutlaq's call for election monitors comes on the same day as a Nineveh Electoral Commission official was assassinated in Mosul.  In other violence today, NINA reports a Kadhimiyah roadside bombing left six people injured, a western Baghdad (Adil neighborhood) bombing claimed 2 lives (one was a police member) and left three people injured, 1 corpse was discovered in the streets of Buhriz ("bullet in the head and chest"), 1 Supreme Judicial Council judge and his driver were shot dead northwest of Baghdad, Nouri's forces and forces of Anbar tribes killed 21 Daash in Ramadi, a Mosul shooting left 1 man dead and his brother injured, an armed attack in Albotama Village left 4 Iraqi soldiers dead and five more injured, a Baghdad car bombing (Sadr City) left 4 people dead and ten injured, a Khalis clash left 2 people dead and three more injured, an Alwihdah bombing left 1 police members and 1 Sahwa dead as well as five more police injured, an attack to the east of Ramadi left 1 Iraqi soldier dead and four more injured, a western Baghdad car bombing (Ghazaliya area) left 6 people dead and thirteen injured, a Baghdad armed attack left 3 police members dead, "At least four civilians were wounded when two bombed cars expoded on Tuesday evening 14, Jan. south and east of Kirkuk," and a Baghdad armed attack (Al-Ersan) left 2 fighters dead, Qarma mortar attacks left 2 children and 1 man dead and ten more people injured.   EFE identifies the assassinated judge as Muttar Hussein.  Mu Xuequan (Xinhua) notes, "In Diyala province, gunmen attacked two houses at the edges of the city of Khalis, near the provincial capital city of Baquba, some 65 km northeast of Baghdad, killing five people, three of them from one family, and wounding two others, a provincial police source told Xinhua."



National Iraqi News Agency reports Abu Karma mosque (Diyala Province) was set fire to leaving "material damages" and that this follows the bombing of "two mosques in the Zaganiah village 14 km northeast of Baquba" yesterday.  In addition, they note:

Director of Laylan District Mohammed Wayis announced the burning of two shrines south east of the city.
Mohamed Wayis said in a press conference that an unidentified armed group set fire on Tuesday 14, Jan. to the shrines of Sayyed Abdul Majid and Sultan Kozlh Baba on the main road linking between Kirkuk and Laylan District, a matter that led to serious material damages in them. "



And if you think things can't get worse there's MP Kadhim al-Sayadi.  He's billed as 'independent' by the press but he usually makes news for doing Nouri's bidding.  All Iraq News reports he's insisting he won't return to Parliament until Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi resigns.  al-Nujaifi is a member of Iraqiya.  Worth noting since last fall, al-Sayadi got into a fist fight with Iraqiy MP Hayder al-Mula.  Also last September he began demanding that Iraqiya MP Ahmed al-Alwani be stripped of immunity.  You may remember Ahmed al-Alwani.

Nouri ordered the dawn raid and illegal arrest of him on December 28th which kicked off the current conflict.  (Six people were killed in the raid including al-Alwani's brother.  When Osama al-Nujaifi attempted to lead an investigation into the raid, Nouri's military would not allow al-Nuajifi to leave Baghdad and enter Anbar.)

There is nothing independent about Kadhim al-Sayadi.  When Nouri's ass itches, Kadhim provides the scratch.  Kadhim is often the trial balloon for Nouri's next plan.  So the notion that Nouri wants to get rid of Osama al-Nujaifi is very frightening.  Osama is the last check on Nouri.

Nouri controls the judiciary.  He's run off Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi (Sunni and a member of Iraqiya).  The country has no president.  December 2012,  Iraqi President Jalal Talabani suffered a stroke.   The incident took place late on December 17, 2012 (see the December 18, 2012 snapshot) and resulted in Jalal being admitted to Baghdad's Medical Center Hospital.    Thursday, December 20, 2012, he was moved to Germany.  He remains in Germany currently.

There are no checks left on Nouri al-Maliki except for the Speaker of Parliament -- a post held by a member of the political slate that beat Nouri's State of Law in the March 2010 elections.

UPI reports Turkey's state-run Turkey Petroleum Co. announced today "it discovered oil while working in what it described as tough conditions near the borders with Iraq and Iran." There are many implications for this and some will try to see it in terms of the KRG and Turkey's oil deal.  That's not what's going to be the issue here.  Iraq and Iran are already in border disputes -- you could argue the eight year war from 1980 to 1988 between the two countries had something to do with border disputes.  Since 2003, Iran and Iraq have repeatedly disagreed about where the border between their two countries are.  It's something a real prime minister of Iraq would have established long ago.  This will only add more pressure to the issue and that's before you factor in third party Turkey.


Turning to an ongoing topic, Michael Mathes (AFP) reports, "Several US lawmakers led by Republican Senator Rand Paul introduced legislation Tuesday that would finally bring to an end Washington's authorization to wage war in Iraq. President Barack Obama's White House backs the efforts, in principle, having withdrawn US forces in December 2011." As noted in Friday's snapshot, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand Tweeted. "Co-sponsoring 's bill to , to end authority for war and prevent more troops being sent there." John Hudson (Foreign Policy) notes today:


 An administration official made clear that repealing the Iraq AUMF was not a priority for the White House because the effect would be largely symbolic. But the statement may provide cover for other Democrats who voted against Paul's attempt to repeal the Iraq AUMF in 2011 due to concerns that it would hamstring the administration. (At the time, Paul's repeal effort failed by a landslide 30-67 vote).
[. . .]

The bill is now backed by a bipartisan group of co-sponsors including Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Mike Lee (R-UT), Jon Tester (D-MT) and Jeff Merkeley (D-OR).








































US Rep Brian Higgins weighs in on Iraq

$
0
0
Ava here filling in for Trina. We were at the House Homeland Security Committee hearing this morning.  They heard testimony from  former Senator Joe Lieberman, former US House Rep Jane Harman, retired General Jack Keane and the RAND Corporation's Dr. Seth Jones.

I'm just going to note US House Rep Brian Higgins.  He's a Democrat from the state of New York.


Brian Higgins:  The one thing you know in a zero-sum-game is that the sum will always be zero. But in game theory, there's also a variable-sum-game where there can, in fact, be multiple winners. And there can only be multiple winners in a pluralistic society when the rights of minorities are protected. Now there was a debate here, last year, about -- or last couple of months -- about military intervention in Syria.  We certainly did not support the Assad regime.  The justification for authorizing the administration to use military force -- albeit not troops on the ground -- was that Assad had murdered, through chemical weapons, 100,000 people in Syria.  Well the rebel fighters were beheading people. And in that part of the world and in that conflict, I think that the concern is not that you're supporting Assad but, as a minority, you're afraid that all non-Sunnis will be murdered. Marwin Muasher just released a book called The Second Arab Awakening and in it he identifies the Middle East as being a pluralistic society -- a pluralistic region of Sunni, Shia, Kurds, Christians and a lot of tribes.  And he also says that 500,000 American troops in Iraq and a trillion dollars couldn't implant a lasting pluralism or peace in Iraq and therefore no outsider can.  You know what's going on in the Middle East today is a continued -- the Chairman had said there was a culmination of Sunni Shi'ite conflict. It's really the continuation of it.  And what's going on is Shia and Sunni are continuing to litigate a conflict that goes back to the 7th century of who the rightful successor to the Prophet Mohammed is.   And this is not about peace, this is not about democracy, this is about control.  And so long as you don't have -- as Fareed Zakaria would say -- the inner stuffings in his book The Future of Freedom -- and a Constitution that protects minority rights, you're always going to have these conflicts.



He went on to speak about George Mitchell's work on the peace process in Northern Ireland and how the takeaway for Mitchell is that peace comes from exhaustion.  When both sides have exhausted themselves fighting and see nothing has come from it, they can broker peace. 

He went on to add that Nouri al-Maliki was among the "no good allies" that the US has in the region (he also named Karzai in Afghanistan in that statement). 

In reply, Jane Harmen immediately went to what country in the region?  Yes, Israel.  And she worked in that it was "a democracy."  (I'm not mocking Israel.  I am mocking Jane Harman's never ending cheerleading for that foreign country.)  Joe Lieberman feels that there are many friends in the Middle East.  Seth Jones echoed him insisting "we do have allies" while General Keane felt that it was too simplistic to see the conflict in the Middle East as one between Sunnis and Shi'ites.


Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"


Wednesday, January 15, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, rebels seize more territory in Anbar, Nouri orders a newspaper shut down, Nineveh wants to become semi-autonomous, Nouri ticks off the Kurds again, Iraq is noted in a US Congressional hearing today, an investigation is launched to determine whether US service members disrespected Iraqi corpses in Falluja in 2004, and more.


TMZ announces today:

The United States military is conducting a formal investigation into American soldiers burning the dead bodies of what appear to be Iraqi insurgents.
TMZ obtained 41 pictures that we're told were shot in Fallujah in 2004.  Two pictures show a Marine appearing to pour gasoline or some other flammable on the remains of what officials believe are 2 insurgents.  Two other photos show the bodies on fire.  You then see charred remains.
Another photo shows a Marine crouched down next to a dead body and mugging for the camera.
Still another pic shows a Marine rifling through the pocket of the pants on a corpse.
We have not included all of the photos.  Many are just too gruesome.  There are well over a dozen bodies in the pics and some are covered with flies and one is being eaten by a dog.
We turned them all over to the Pentagon last week, and a Pentagon official tells us the pics have triggered a Marine Corps investigation.


ABC News Radio explains, "The defiling of remains is a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice but the photos may also be a violation of U.S. Central Command’s General Order Number One, which provides the guidelines for how American troops serving in the Middle East should conduct themselves." The issue was raised at today's State Dept press briefing delivered by spokesperson Marie Harf:




QUESTION: On Iraq.

MS. HARF: Uh-huh.

QUESTION: I was wondering if you could say something about these pictures that were released about military soldiers pouring gasoline on the bodies of Iraqis in Fallujah in 2004. I understand there’s an investigation going on.

MS. HARF: I have not seen those. I’m sorry. I would point you to DOD. They probably have the lead on this. I’m happy to check with our folks. I just haven’t.

QUESTION: I’m just wondering. I mean, right now as you are trying to work with the Iraqis on countering what’s going on, the violence on the ground, if this kind of damages your credibility in terms of someone that can be helpful right now.


MS. HARF: Well, we’re certainly extremely committed to working with Iraq in a variety of ways to counter this threat together. We’ve talked a lot about that in the past few weeks in a combination of political and counterterrorism support. I’m not familiar with the specifics about these photos, but we certainly are very committed to the relationship and have no indication that the Iraqis aren’t as well.

This comes as Michael Lipkin (Law360) reports, "The American Civil Liberties Union and other human rights organizations renewed their attempts on Wednesday to force the U.S. Department of Defense to release photos of prisoner abuse in U.S. facilities in Iraq and Afghanistan, arguing conditions had changed since the DOD last rejected their requests." And as the US Air Force is rocked by a test cheating and drug scandal.  At the Pentagon today, Secretary of the Air Force Deborah Lee James took questions about the investigation.  Those alleged to have been involved are members of the ICBM force -- the intercontinental ballistic missile force.  Phil Stewart (Reuters) reports, "The Air Force has suspended security clearances for 34 officers and is re-testing the entire forces overseeing America's nuclear-armed missiles after uncovering widespread cheating on a key proficiency exam." Secretary James declared at the press conference, "I've directed that the OSI put full resources against this investigation so that we get to the bottom of exactly what happened, who was involved, and the extent of this so that we can hold people appropriately accountable for this."


Former US Senator Joe Lieberman:  Yet increasingly we hear voices -- on both sides of the political spectrum -- who say that the threat from terrorism is receding, the end of this conflict is here or near, and therefore that we can withdraw from much of the rest of the world. This narrative is badly and dangerously mistaken. There is no question, the United States -- under President Bush and President Obama -- has inflicted severe damage to 'core' al Qaeda, the senior leadership that reconstituted itself in the mid-2000s in the tribal areas of northwestern Pakistan, after being driven by the American military from neighboring Afghanistan after 9/11. To borrow a phrase from General David Petraeus, while the progress we have achieved against core al Qaeda is real and significant it is also fragile and reversible . What has degraded core al Qaeda in the tribal areas of Pakistan has been the persistent, targeted application of military force against these indi viduals and networks. The precondition for these operations, and the intelligence that enables them , has been our presence in Afghanistan. If the United States withdraws all of our military forces from Afghanistan at the end of this year -- the so-called "zero option," which some now advocate -- you can be sure that al Qaeda will regenerate, eventually on both sides of the Afghan-Pakistan border. If you doubt this, I urge you to look at what is now happening in western Iraq, where just a few years ago, during the US-led surge, al Qaeda was dealt an even more crippling blow than core al Qaeda has suffered in Pakistan. Yet now it is al Qaeda that is surging back in Iraq, hoisting its black flag over cities like Falluja and Ramadi, murdering hundreds of innocent Iraqis this year, with violence surging back to 2008 levels. 





Lieberman went on to advocate for "a small number of embedded [US] advisors on the ground" in Iraq as well as for the US to provide "airpower." He was testifying today before the House Homeland Security Committee -- US House Rep Michael McCaul is Committee Chair and US House Rep Bennie G. Thompson is the Ranking Member.  Also testifying were former US House Rep Jane Harman, retired General Jack Keane and the RAND Corporation's Dr. Seth Jones.

Gen Jack Keane:  After the strategic blunder of leaving no residual force in Iraq -- and immunity for US troops was a false issue -- equally damaging was distancing ourselves from a long term strategic partnership between the US and Iraq leaving the al Qaeda to have re-emerged and the level of violence today is as high as it was in 2008 and destined to get higher.  The al Qaeda are quickly taking control of western Iraq while they have seized control of northern Syria.

Harman had nothing to offer on Iraq -- possibly because she was still focused on the Defense Policy Board briefing on South Asia that  "I've just come from" -- a briefing which she described as "bone chilling." (What was she referring to?  US assessments on where nuclear war stands currently between Pakistan and India.)

We'll note this exchange.  It's typical of the hearing -- talking down to Americans, preaching war and death and destruction.

Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson:  A lot of us our faced, when we go into our districts, with an effort that's gone on a long time.  The people are becoming weary -- not defeated, but weary. And they say, "Why don't you do something to bring this to an end?" If we had a magic wand, we could do that. So, listening to some of our constituents who talk about the 6,000 people who died and the enormous costs so far, and I'll go, because I've heard it -- what would you suggest as a response to those constituents going forward, as to what members of Congress, the House and the Senate should do to bring that to an end? I'll start with you, Senator.

Former Senator Joe Lieberman:  Thanks, Congressman Thompson, that's a -- that's a really important question.  I'm glad you asked it because that's the reality.  And I know that's what you face and what members of both parties probably face -- when you go home.  So here's the point at which -- I mean one first reaction I have, which won't really convince people, but it - but it's an important one.  I will tell you that every time I went to a funeral of a soldier from Connecticut who was killed in Iraq or Afghanistan, I was amazed and moved by the families saying, 'Please make sure that our son/daughter/husband/whatever didn't die in vain.' So there is that element.  I mean, if we just, we learned some lessons from Iraq and Afghanistan, that if we just walk away, we do risk saying to those families whose family members gave their lives because we ordered them to go there in our defense that they did die in vain.  I don't think we ever want that to happen.  Second thing, I want to go back to and, in some ways, I want to make this personal about President Obama. Put it in this context, President Obama ran for office in 2008 and again in 2012 with one of the basic themes -- in addition to all the change and dealing with domestic problems -- was that he was going to get us out of the wars that we were in and not get us into additional wars around the world/  And, uhm, you know, fair enough.  But sometimes the world doesn't cooperate with a presidential narrative and I think that's where we are in the countries that I've talked about: Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya.  Which, if we don't do something more than we're doing now, they're going to tip over.  So, I say this personally, I'm not here just to criticize what the Obama administration has done.  In some sense, I'm here to appeal to the Obama administration -- which, after all, the president's going to be our president for three more years and a lot that could be good or bad for our security couldan happen.  I repeat, what's a lesson learned that's consistent with the message that the president -- the policy that the president has adopted?  We're not going to send tens of thousands of troops on the ground to any of these countries.  But there's something in between that and just pulling out.  And I think what we've all , in different ways, tried to argue today, both militarily and in other ways in terms of aid and support where if we don't -- and this is what I'd say to the constituents -- if we don't at least maintain a presence, if we don't help the freedom fighters in Syria, the non-extremists, anti-Assad people, if we don't build up the Libyan military to maintain order against the militias, if we don't make the kind of agreement and support the government in Iraq, then we're going to get attacked again. Same from Afghanistan.  And, uh, then we're going to have to go back in there and have to spend more, risk more American lives.  It's not an easy argument to make -- and particularly, not in tough economic times.  But so I think, bottom line, we've learned from Iraq and Afghanistan, it's not going to be hundreds of thousands of troops but if we just turn away we're going to suffer and, therefore, we need your support, Mr. and Mrs. Constituent, to help us do that. 

Former US House Rep Jane Harman: I can think of five things -- some of which I've already mentioned, but I'll tick them off.  One, honor the service of those who followed orders and went to Iraq and Afghanistan.  Tens of thousands grievously wounded.  Many came home in decent shape.  Honor their service.  Make sure we have in place a welcome mat that includes all the benefits they're entitled to but also hopefully efforts to build good jobs for them -- the unemployment rate among returning vets is disproportionate to the unemployment rate of others.  Second, engage in a whole of government approach to solve this problem.  We've discussed that at length, I won't go into it again.  Third, continue the counter-terrorism mission in not just the Middle East but around the world.  The US has interests in other places other than our own country but we surely don't want training grounds to develop again in pick a place.  And we know that some are and we need to be active there using all the tools that we have. Fourth, continue our surveillance system although I think some reforms are in order.  The president will speak on Friday.  I was quite impressed with the report that was presented to him.  It's not clear exactly what he'll adopt but we need to have an effective system that can spot bad guys and prevent and disrupt plots against us.  And finally, enact cyber security legislation so that we are protected against what is a growing threat and could in the end be a more -- many predict -- a much more severe threat than some other form of terror threat against the homeland.

Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson:  General?

Retired General Jack Keane: Yes, I would first say to them that never before in the history of the country have so few sacrificed so much for so many and have done it for so long.  And the fact of the matter is that the reason why it has been so long is because of the mistakes that we made and be honest about it.  The fact of the matter is that our strategy initially in Afghanistan -- military strategy I'm talking about here -- and our military strategy in Iraq after we liberated Iraq was flawed  And that led to protracted wars.  And we should have an honest discussion with the American people and with your constituents. Now the fact of the matter is that if you know America's military -- and I can say this with some knowledge -- is that we normally get off on the wrong foot and we have throughout our history with some rare exceptions.  But because we're reflections of the American people, the American society, we're intellectually flexible and operationally adoptable.  And we sort of get to the answer faster than other people would when we're on a much larger war than what we're dealing with here.  And we did figure it out eventually in Iraq and we have figured it out in Afghanistan as well.  And the sacrifice is definitely worth it to protect the American people.  I mean, when you talk to the troops we deployed in the 90s and we were all over the world doing things in Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Herzegovina, you name the place, there were problems and we were there.  Not necessarily fighting to the degree that we've done post-9/11 but nonetheless deployments and some fighting.  From 9-11 on, and we have a 9-11 generation in the military, we have a 9-11 generation in the Central Intelligence Agency -- The fact of the matter is when you talk to these troops, it's all about the American people.  Before it was about helping others.  This is about protecting the American people and they get it.  That's why they willingly go back and do four, five, six tours.  We have generals that have been away from their families for 8 out of 10 years.  I mean it's quite extraordinary the sacrifice that is willingly be made. Tell that story.  It's extraordinary because they are protecting the American people and our way of life.  And they're willing to do something that most of the American people cannot do and that is die for that.  And that is really quite extraordinary.  So I say be honest with them.  And then, in terms of this troublesome area, I know intellectually we like to talk about we're pivoting to the east because of the emergence of China.  Does anyone in this room believe that in any near term we're going to go to war with China? Not that we shouldn't be vigilant about them.  We can't be serious about that.  The fact of the matter is we have huge problems in the Middle East that threaten the United States.  And we have to stay engaged, Mr. Congressman, that is the word that we need to use.  We partner with our allies in that region and we support people who want to overthrow dictatorial regimes -- like in Libya, like in Tunisia, like in Syria.  In Libya and Syria, they just want us to help them.  They don't want our troops. And in Iraq, where we did help them, we walked away and look at the mess we have as a result.  That should inform us of how dangerous this situation is and how important American commitment is to stay engaged.  And we have to do that if we're going to protect the American people. 

Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson:  Dr. Jones?

Dr. Seth Jones:  I would say three things that are worth reminding constituents and all Americans that we talk to.  One is, as much as we would like this war and this struggle to end, there are organizations committed to fighting Americans and conducting attacks overseas that will not end.  They don't have a desire to end this and the struggle on their part will continue.  Therefore, the struggle continues.  As much as we want to end it, the terrorists we've talked about today are committed to continuing this struggle.  Second, I would say, as everybody here has noted, the days of large numbers of American forces targeting terrorists overseas -- particularly conventional forces -- are over.  And I think that as we have seen over the past several years, they have tended to radicalize populations rather than to facilitate.  So what that does leave us is, I would say, a third point.  There is a more modest approach.  I think we have learned we're talking about smaller number of forces, lethal ones overseas -- as well as civilians; we're talking about smaller amounts of American dollars that are being sent.  There is a need for direct action -- some direct action activity.  We have stopped plots targeting the US homeland from overseas because of this action.  We also have an interest in building some of the local partnership capacity so that we don't have to do all of this -- so that we don't have to do all the fighting and dying and that locals can do it.  This is the direction we've moved on in several fronts.  So I would say there has been a learning process.  But let me just conclude by again just reminding constituents and Americans, that from the al Qaeda and jihadists perspective, the war continues and, in that sense, we cannot retreat. 




Some quick take aways.  Joe Lieberman has never understood 9-11, not even the official story.  If you examine his claims about how inaction will cause another 9-11, you should realize quickly that the only inaction in the official story is the failure to heed warnings.  The reasons given for the attack are not reasons calling for more US troops stationed around the world. In fact, one reason given for the attacks was US troops stationed in the Middle East.  Second, it's really sad that two people who voted for the Iraq War -- Lieberman and Harman -- can do nothing to justify the war but hide behind dead soldiers.  Contrary to their embarrassing remarks, you don't continue insanity because some people died.  You learn from your mistakes.  Or, in Lieberman and Harman's case, you never learn.  Last main point we'll make: only a smaller number of forces will be used.

That's what the War Hawks said.  And that can be seen as a victory.  The force size -- even at its largest -- in Iraq was never as great in number as what the US sent to Vietnam.  So it's worth noting that the Iraq Wae which was supposed to bury memory and fact (more popularly known as "the Vietnam syndrome") didn't work.  And even War Hawks have to face that in the next go rounds the numbers sent will be even smaller.

Lieberman and others, of course, say send advisers so we should probably point out that this is the way they birth wars -- start it with advisers and kick it up to something greater.

I'll probably come back to the hearing tomorrow to note one more thing regarding Iraq.  Also in today's State Dept press briefing:

QUESTION: Marie --

MS. HARF: Uh-huh. Yep.

QUESTION: I have one more – Iraqi members of parliament are in town. Have they met anyone from the State Department?


MS. HARF: Members of parliament?


QUESTION: Yeah.



MS. HARF: I can check. I don’t know. I’ll check.



That's what we need to cover and I'll kick that back to tomorrow.  This is about the DC event that we covered in yesterday's snapshot.  We'll try to pick up the Iraq from the hearing and one of the MPs from yesterday.  Also Ruth and Kat were at this morning's hearing and plan to write about it at their sites tonight focusing on Benghazi.  Ava and Wally were at the hearing and are debating if they've got anything else they can cover.






Yesterday, Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq began a visit to DC.  Speaking to  Eli Lake (Daily Beast) al-Mutlaq called for the US to send election monitors to Iraq.   He made his call for election monitors on the same day as a Nineveh Electoral Commission official was assassinated in Mosul.  Today, National Iraqi News Agency reports, "Unknown gunmen assassinated on Wednesday 15, Jan. an employee at Nineveh Elections Office, near his home in eastern Mosul."

The elections are the parliamentary elections which are supposed to take place April 30th.
Some have argued that Nouri al-Maliki's current assault on Anbar Province is a campaign move as he seeks a third term as prime minister.  Others have argued Nouri's assault is an attempt to delay the elections.
Alistair Lyon and Yara Bayoumy (Reuters) provide an analysis of Nouri's rule and we'll note this part on the 2010 parliamentary elections where Nouri's State of Law was beaten by Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya but the White House insisted Nouri be given a second term:

A former senior adviser to Maliki is cited by Iraq expert Toby Dodge of the London School of Economics as saying the prime minister began keeping decision-making far more to himself after the formation of his government in 2010.
"Maliki's paranoia went stratospheric and he wouldn't listen to any advice," Dodge quoted the adviser as saying.
The election also discouraged Sunnis who, after boycotting earlier U.S.-sponsored elections, had put their faith in the ballot box and supported Iraqiya - only to see it stymied after its success. "It's against that background that violence and alienation has flourished in Anbar," Dodge said.
In 2010, the Iraqi people voted and the White House stripped them of their votes.  Since then things have gotten progressively worse each year in Iraq leading up to the just finished 2013 which Prensa Latina describes as follows: "The city [Baghdad] is sunken in a wave of violence that left a death toll of 9 500 people last year, caused by the resurgence of the conflict between the Sunni Muslim Community, which feels discriminated, and the Shiite-led government."

Nouri's assualt on Anbar continues.  Colin Freeman (Telegraph of London) reports that, "in the town of Saqlawiyah, west of Fallujah, Iraqi police fled their station after being outgunned by militiamen, who used a mosque’s loudspeakers to urge them to leave. "  AFP notes that "militants took more territory from security forces in crisis-hit Anbar province.  The twin setbacks for authorities, grappling with Iraq’s worst period of unrest since the country emerged from a sectarian war that killed tens of thousands, come just months before parliamentary elections."F. Brinley Bruton (NBC News) reminds, "Sunni militants took over the city of Fallujah west of Baghdad two weeks ago, in a direct challenge to the rule of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki."  Sameer N. Yacoub and Qassim Abdul-Zahra (AP) report:

The World Health Organization said the few health facilities in the province were no longer able to provide even lifesaving interventions and residents in Ramadi and Fallujah face acute health needs due to the conflict. The organization said it has dispatched 2 tons of medicine and supplies.
The International Committee of the Red Cross said it has delivered food and essential supplies over the past few days to nearly 12,000 displaced people in Anbar and several other mainly Sunni areas. It warned the families "are enduring considerable hardship," and their situation has shown no signs of improvement.

Iraq Body Count counts 52 dead from Tuesday's violence and, through yesterday, 458 violent deaths for the month so far.


Sky News counts at least 75 dead today as does Alistair Lyon (Reuters) while EFE notes at least 152 people were left injured.   NINA reports 1 Shabak was shot dead in Mosul, an eastern Baghdad car bombing (Palestine Street) left twelve people injured, a northeastern Baghdad car bombing claimed 5 lives and left twelve people injured, 2 people were shot dead in Baghdad, Baghdad Operations Command announced they shot dead 1 suspect, an armed clash in Jlami-dor left 3 fighters dead, an Alhamrah Village roadside bombing left 3 police members dead and two more injured, a Baghdad sticky bombing killed 1 police officer, an eastern Baghdad roadside bombing (al-Obeidi area) left 2 people dead and five more injured, a Jalawla sticky bombing left 1 person dead, a Baghdad sticky bombing (Sadr City) left 1 person dead and two more injured, 4 corpses (1 woman, 3 men) were discovered dumped in the streets of Baghdad, a Mosul bridge bombing left 7 Iraqi soldiers dead and nine more injured, Anbar security announced they killed "11 members of Daash when military helicopters bombed" Saqlawiyah, an Ein al-Jahash roadside bombing left Ismail al-Jubouri wounded (he's the Director of Nineveh Operations Command), a south Baghdad roadside bombing (Zafaraniyah) claimed 2 lives, a western Baghdad car bombing (Shu'la) claimed 2 lives and left ten people injured, a south Buhruz funeral bombing left 13 people dead and twenty-one more injured, and a central Baghdad car bombing (Sena'ah Street) left 1 person dead and nine more injured. Sky News notes of the funeral bombing "In the deadliest single incident, a bomb blew up in a funeral tent in Buhriz - 35 miles north of Baghdad - where mourners were marking the death of a Sunni Muslim pro-government fighter." All Iraq News notes 1 corpse was discovered dumped northwest of Mosul (gunshots to the chest).

Let me point out what we said here before Nouri's assault on Al Anbar Province began -- it would not stop violence in Iraq and that previous assaults by Nouri only stirred up violence in the parts he wasn't attacking.  That has proven to be the case this go round as well.  Of today's violence, Lateef Mungin and Jomana Karadsheh (CNN) observe, "Much of the violence recorded Wednesday was in and around Baghdad." Michael Holmes (CNN) has a strong look at Iraq today which includes:

Plenty has been reported about the violence in Ramadi and Fallujah and the resurgence of al-Qaeda linked radicals, but the killing is widespread -- from Mosul in the north to Baghdad to the south of the country.
Dr. Ayad Allawi was Iraq's first post-Saddam head of government, serving as interim Prime Minister in 2004 and 2005. Tough as nails, but a committed secularist, he looks at his country today with more than a dose of pessimism.
"Unfortunately the country is moving on a sectarian road now," he tells me as we sit in his office, hidden behind blast walls and protected by government and private security.
"It was very dangerous to start with, and I warned leaders in the region. (Now) Iraq has started a civil war -- it hasn't reached the point of no return, but if it does then the whole region will burn up."
He points the finger of blame in many directions, from Syria to the U.S. to Iran, but mainly at the man who now holds his old job -- Prime Minister al-Maliki.
"He doesn't believe in power sharing, he doesn't believe in reconciliation," Allawi says. "He promised to do these things once he became Prime Minister, but in effect he talks against this -- accusing everyone else of being a terrorist, or corrupt, or extremist and so on.

"Authoritarian regimes don't work in this country -- we tried this before and it didn't work. No one sect can rule, no one party can rule, no one man can rule -- we want a democratic country but this is not, unfortunately, what this government wants."



The Irish Mirror notes that Nouri made a high drama statement today, "If we keep silent it means the creation of evil statelets that would wreak havoc with security in the region and world." Some assume he means Falluja and Ramadi.  He may just as well be talking about provinces that want to declare their own independence (as guaranteed by the Iraqi Constitution).  Bassem Francis (Al-Monitor) speaks with Nineveh Province's Governor Atheel al-Nujaifi (brother of Iraq's Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi).  Atheel explains Nineveh is thinking about declaring its independence:



In a discussion with Al-Hayat, Nujaifi said: “The province is worried about the recent events in Anbar. Any conflict between the security forces and the Sunnis will be quickly reflected on the people in Ninevah. These events have made the people of Ninevah province despair that the conditions of the Sunnis in general, and the people of Ninevah province in particular, will be reformed any time soon. … Therefore, our only option to restore hope to the people of the province is to come out with a new project that has specific features. We have all agreed to request either the establishment of an [autonomous] Ninevah province or to demand the internationalization of the situation of the Sunnis in Iraq because of the injustice they are suffering.”
Nujaifi said: “[Iraqi Prime Minister] Nouri al-Maliki wants to risk the security of Iraqi society for electoral purposes. He always uses the [recess periods] to make his moves. Every year during the Christmas period he provokes a major crisis, taking advantage of the world being on holiday. … In today’s case, his aim is the election. [He wants] to achieve a victory over his Shiite rivals and at the same time to push the Shiite extremism project a step forward.”
Ninevah’s government accuses Maliki of confiscating its authority over the deployment of the army in major cities, and for launching arrest campaigns by exploiting the laws of “accountability and justice” and “the fight against terrorism,” as well as for depriving the province of a budget that is commensurate with its population.


Nouri's also stirring up problems with the Kurds.  Kitabat reports Kurdish Cabinet members walked out of the meeting on the budget today due to Nouri's efforts to penalize the Kurdistan Regional Government for the KRG's oil deal with Turkey. This is the second year in a row where Nouri has failed to work out what the Kurds see as a fair budget.  Though the budget's been forwarded to Parliament, Baghdad residents won't read about that in the Middle East.  The Baghdad and Saudi Arabia daily newspaper has been shut down.  Kitabat reports that Nouri's forces stormed the paper's Baghdad offices and shut it down.  Iraq's Journalistic Freedoms Observatory has called for an explanation and cites journalist Hamza Mustafa explaining that the Ministry of the Interior forces stormed in late Tuesday, shut them down and told them they were no longer allowed to print a newspaper in Baghdad.



















jomana karadsheh
 

Workers Inquiry Into The Detroit Bankruptcy

$
0
0




That's a video about the fleecing of Detroit. There's going to be a Workers Inquiry Into The Detroit Bankruptcy.  It will be Saturday, February 15th, from ten in the morning until five p.m. at Wayne State University.



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


Thursday, January 16, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, the assault on Anbar continues, Nouri hands the White House a weapons wish list, the Council of Ministers announce they'll sue the UN World Food Program, KRG President Massoud Barazni prepares for a Davos visit, and more.


Iraq is in so many crises that even the US can't ignore it (continue to ignore it) these days.  It was an issue raised repeatedly yesterday in the House of Representatives' Homeland Security Committee.  We covered the hearing in yesterday's snapshot, Ruth covered it in "Benghazi addressed in Congress,"Kat in "Homeland Security Committee hearing,"Wally in "Beto O'Rourke talks about Iraq" and Ava in "US Rep Brian Higgins weighs in on Iraq."  US House Rep Michael McCaul is Committee Chair and US House Rep Bennie G. Thompson is the Ranking Member.  The Committee heard testimony from former US Senator Joe Lieberman, former US House Rep Jane Harman, retired General Jack Keane and the RAND Corporation's Dr. Seth Jones.  We're going to drop back to the hearing for these remarks from Keane during US House Rep Sheila Jackson-Lee.

Retired General Jack Keane:  I disagree with you, Congresswoman, on Iraq.  The fact of the matter is that the immunity issue was not a serious issue, it was a false issue presented by Maliki as face saving because the United States envoy came in after the military had recommended 24,000 soldiers stay in Iraq.  The president's envoy put 10,000 on the table.  Maliki knew that was not a serious proposal and it eventually got down to nothing.  The immunity issue got brought up at the end.  And was more face saving for him inside Iraq than anything else.  The fact of the matter is that is a significant strategic blunder -- not leaving forces there -- much as we did post-WWII, not for security reasons but for influence.  And we lost this influence over Maliki.  And even further than that, it's more than just the troops.  We disengaged geo-politically with Iraq in terms of partnering with them which they wanted very much so.  They forced a Strategic Framework Agreement on us.  We wanted to have a Status Of Forces Agreement on the troops and they said no.  Maliki said we're not doing that until we agree to have a strategic partnership that will last twenty years. That was their idea.  We walked away from that as well.  And now we have this debacle on our hands. 


We're including that because a simplistic memory has replaced actual history.  Just last week, The National Interest was mocking Senator John McCain over accurate remarks that McCain was making.  The idiot at National Interest wasn't even aware that McCain had been making those accurate remarks publicly since November 2011.  McCain knows a great deal about the political mood in Iraq during the negotiations for a new SOFA.

I didn't support another SOFA.  I also don't think the lack of one is what's responsible for Iraq's problems today.  Those are my strongly held opinions.  My opinions do not allow me to lie about McCain or anyone else.  It's a shame The National Interest has standards lower than mine.

Keane's facts on the negotiations are solid.  His interpretation of the facts you can agree with or not.

But the notion that has taken hold has been a huge lie.  On the 'left,' for some (the ya'll drawling radio host for one -- whose Libertarian, not left) the lie was Nouri defeated the US!!!! WE LOVE NOURI!

Which is why Antiwar Radio has been the biggest joke for years -- unable to call out Nouri al-Maliki because the host was too busy sucking his knob.  Nouri didn't do anything wonderful to end a war.

Nouri's plan was to renew the SOFA, that is known.  It became more difficult due to political considerations on the ground.  When the numbers dropped from what he wanted (at one point, the US State Dept was aware Nouri wanted 36,000 US troops to remain in the country), it became, for Nouri, not worth the risk of the SOFA.  But he was saying for that time and planning to pick the topic back up.  This was testified to Congress by Leon Panetta.

A lot of people who have heard none of the Congressional testimony on this issue have weighed in with half-baked b.s. So much so that The National Interest thought they could mock John McCain for telling the truth.  There are a lot of times I have mocked John McCain in the past -- and I'm sure will do so in the future -- but I've never mocked for speaking the truth.

We may come back to the hearing tomorrow, we may not.  But for the record, my belief is and has been that the current crises in Iraq stem from the White House's refusal in 2010 to support Iraqi voters and instead back Nouri for a second term as prime minister even though his State of Law came in second to Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya.  From Ned Parker's "Who Lost Iraq?" (POLITICO):



It was the April 2010 national election and its tortured aftermath that sewed the seeds of today’s crisis in Iraq. Beforehand, U.S. state and military officials had prepared for any scenario, including the possibility that Maliki might refuse to leave office for another Shiite Islamist candidate. No one imagined that the secular Iraqiya list, backed by Sunni Arabs, would win the largest number of seats in parliament. Suddenly the Sunnis’ candidate, secular Shiite Ayad Allawi, was poised to be prime minister. But Maliki refused and dug in.
And it is here where America found its standing wounded. Anxious about midterm elections in November and worried about the status of U.S. forces slated to be drawn down to 50,000 by August, the White House decided to pick winners. According to multiple officials in Baghdad at time, Vice President Joseph Biden and then-Ambassador Chris Hill decided in July 2010 to support Maliki for prime minister, but Maliki had to bring the Sunnis and Allawi onboard. Hill and his staff then made America’s support for Maliki clear in meetings with Iraqi political figures.
The stalemate would drag on for months, and in the end both the United States and its arch-foe Iran proved would take credit for forming the government. But Washington would be damaged in the process. It would be forever linked with endorsing Maliki. One U.S. Embassy official I spoke with just months before the government was formed privately expressed regret at how the Americans had played kingmaker.


Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates spoke with Piers Morgan (CNN -- link is text and video) last night and declared of Iraq, "I think that we succeeded in the mission in 2008 and 2009 in terms of being able to turn over to the Iraqis a fragile, but real, democratic government . . . as well as security and stability in the country.  We basically handed them their future on a silver platter . . . I think we accomplished our mission, and we withdrew in a way that was not a strategic defeat with global consequences for us." So if Iraq was, in Gates' opinion, handed "a fragile, but real, democratic government," what changed that?  Maybe in 2010, the White House refusing to endorse the election results and demand that the voters and the country's Constitution be followed?


Tuesday, Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq spoke in DC at the US Institute of Peace.  We noted it in that day's snapshot.  We also noted some of the small coverage the event got.  I said we'd come back to the event.


MP Nada al-Juburi: It is very important when we talk about violence and sectarianism and corruption, I think there is a relationship between the three.  And these three topics came together in Iraq and effected the work of these institutions. I'm not here pointing at one certain institution but all the institutions.  At the end of the day, the citizen is not satisfied generally speaking.  And this is a very important issue especially at this stage.  And what is going on right now, during the two terms of Parliament and the political blocs that are inside the Parliament played many roles and played important roles.  I think there are two terms of the Parliament are considered to be very important to the history of Iraq when we talk about democracy because it established and worked in a very difficult time, there is no doubt about it.  But, on the other hand, when we look into the political divisions and differences impeded the stability.  And some of the political elements, I say a few, they might have a direct link to the violence.  Bu they are not representing a huge sector.  But when you look into the discourse that sometimes comes out that could also lead to violence in the street.  So I say it is very important the quality of the political discourse.  The message inside the political discourse will direct the street to a certain direction.  And also the terrorists will exploit these occasions when there is inflamatory political speech, these terrorists will exploit the chance to conduct terrorist actions everywhere and it increases.  When we talk in Mosul but in Mosul suffering a lot oof killing of people and journalists.  So when we look into 2012 it was a tragedy compared to any place in the world. So, again, the political blocs will play an indirect role to increase the violence through its political discourse.  So if we have a rash now -- political discourse -- and supporting national reconciliation, especially after the withdrawal and where all the politicians were all elected.  And so I think again that national reconciliation, if it took place clearly and transparently and will give high assurance to the people -- especially at this time where we are witnessing new elections parallel to combating terrorism.

I said we'd come back because the coverage we noted sometimes noted a male MP but no one noted female MP Nada al-Juburi.  We'll note her here.  All the Iraqi participants spoke through an interpreter (and a bad interpreter at that, yeah, I said it). Also Zuber Hewrami (Rudaw) reports today on al-Mutlaq's speech.


al-Juburi spoke of corruption which brings us to the next topic.  In 2009, IRIN noted food insecurity was increasing in Iraq.  Food insecurity continues today.  The UN's World Food Program notes:

The situation in Iraq remains volatile due to long years of ongoing instability. Since 1990, both accessibility and the quality of essential services have deteriorated significantly in a country where one quarter of the population lives below the poverty line of US$2 per day. 
According to the Iraq Knowledge Network (IKN) survey conducted in 2011, food deprivation in Iraq decreased from 7 percent in 2007 to 6 percent in 2011. Vulnerability to food deprivation also decreased from 20 percent to 14 percent during the same period. Food deprivation in Iraq is transforming from a rural to an urban phenomenon due to improved government investment in agriculture and improvement in rural incomes due to rising food prices. 
However, substantial regional differences persist. Districts suffering from the highest levels of food deprivation are concentrated in the south and north-west of the country. Limited income and lack of access to enough food remains the main cause of food insecurity in Iraq. Although Iraqis’ dependency on the Public Distribution System (PDS) has decreased from 67 percent in 2007 to 57 percent in 2011, it remains the main source of food for the poorest Iraqis.

More than 1.7 million Iraqis – of which 49 percent are women and 51 percent men – have been internally displaced since February 2006. Recent studies show that internally displaced people’s (IDPs) access to food has drastically decreased as a result of irregular PDS distributions. In some governorates, up to 92 percent of IDPs claim food to be their most pressing need.  


Food's been an issue for some time.  Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi regularly called for Iraq to diversify its economy and to revive the farming industry.  Mike Tharp (McClatchy Newspapers) noted in 2009, of the the country that was once the bread basket of the Middle East,  "Iraq now imports nearly all the food its people eat: California rice, Washington apples, Australian wheat, fruits and vegetables from its neighbors. All are staples in Iraqi groceries and on the dinner table. The decline of the farming sector creates other problems. Agriculture accounts for half or more of Iraqi jobs and is the second-largest contributor to the gross domestic product. The prices that people and the government pay for shortfalls in what they used to grow weaken the country's economy." Also in 2009, Jack Dolan and Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reported Iraq's Minister of Trade, Abed Falah al-Sudani, was leaving his office:


All of Baghdad seemed to watch last weekend when Sudany appeared on state TV to answer questions about his two brothers allegedly skimming millions from a national food program as ordinary Iraqis went without staples such as rice, wheat and cooking oil.
Sudany also struggled to answer charges that when government investigators arrived at the Trade Ministry, his guards had fired into the air, allowing his brothers to escape out a back door, and about why an inspector general was transferred to Beijing after he asked about shipments of spoiled food.


The corruption has never gone away.  Equally true, a number of food providers have seen Iraq as the place to unload anything.  Alsumaria reports today 7 people have been arrested in Maysan suspected of planning to sell expired food.  They also report that the Parliament's Integrity Committee is questioning a Ministry of Commerce sugar contract.   These food issues follow another one from earlier this week -- the issue of bisquits.

National Iraqi News Agency reports:


Allawi said in a statement on Wednesday 15, Jan. that the government and the concerned parties are responsible for the case of forgery and corruption about the deal for importing invalid biscuits for the Ministry of Education within the school feeding program, and the manipulation of mafias from abroad in the duration of the validity of the biscuits sent to Iraq by the World Food Program.

He called for stopping the import of the biscuits from the World Food Programme, and to stop supplying the schools with all kinds of biscuits existing in the warehouses of the Ministry of Education.

Allawi stressed the need to fight financial and administrative corruption that is eating away the body of the Iraqi state, blaming the Iraqi government responsible for exacerbating this phenomenon, which increased from the tragic situation in the country, represented by the deterioration of security, infrastructure, environmental services, social, educational, and the absence of professional and genuine partnership in the management of all state institutions



Ghassan Hamid (Alsumaria) reported yesterday that 139 tons of these biscuits had been distributed to schools in Dhi Qar Province.  Alsumaria reports today that the UN World Food Program has expressed regrets over the concerns regarding the "high-energy biscuits" and their "validity" (UN Representative Jane Pearce's word) and called on the Iraqi media to mitigate negative publicity.  Pearce is also the country director for the WFP on Iraq. Iraq Times notes this UN  scandal follows the UN's earlier oil-for-food scandal.  Al Rafidayn reports that Minister of Education Mohammad Tamim has announced that the Council of Ministers has decided to sue the World Food Program over the biscuits.  Saturday, Iraq Times reported that the biscuits spoiled in the heat after having been stored in rented warehouses in Jordan prior to being transported and that the expiration dates on the biscuits were changed in Jordan.  Majid al-Khafaji (Kitabat) feels the biscuit issue is a crime but feels the government should be focused on larger crimes like the lack of public services and the lack of security.

Iraq Body Count counts 94 violent deaths yesterday and 604 for the month so far.


And the violence continues.  BBC News reports, "The bodies of 14 Sunni Muslim men have been found in an orchard near Baghdad, say Iraqi authorities.  The bodies were found with gunshot wounds near the Sunni Arab town of Mishahda, about 30km (20 miles) north of the capital."AP adds the 14 were kidnapped by assailants "in military uniforms." Jomana Karadsheh (CNN) reports 8 of the fourteen were family members.  National Iraqi News Agency reports a Madain roadside bombing claimed 2 lives and left eight more people injured, a western Baghdad roadside bombing (Ghazaliya district) left 2 people dead and nine more injured, a Tikrit armed attack left 1 Sahwa and his brother dead, a Falluja mortar attack killed 2 people and left four more injured, a northern Baghdad sticky bombing (Morocco Street) left one person injured, a Baghdad armed attack left 1 Iraqi soldier dead and another injured, 2 Baquba home bombings claimed 3 lives and left three more people injured, a central Baghdad bombing claimed the life of 1 Department of Justice employee, "the Ministry of Interior announced the killing of three gunmen . . . in west and south of Baghdad,"a Mosul roadside bombing left two people injured, "on the road link between Baquba and Muqdadiyah" a car was attacked leaving 1 person inside dead and the other injured, Baghdad Operations Command announced they shot dead 2 suspects, 4 fighters were killed east of Ramadi with the assistance of military helicopters, a south Baghdad roadside bombing (Madain area) left 2 people dead and eight more injured, a western Baghdad bombing (Aliskan area) left 1 military officer dead and another injured, and  Joint Operations Command announced they had killed 3 suspects near the Syrian border.


Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq is currently on a visit to the United States.  Alsumaria reports today he met with US politicians.  With Senator John McCain, he discussed relations between Iraq and the US, terrorism and political reconciliation.  Senator McCain's office issued the following statement on the meet-up:




Jan152014

Washington, D.C.– U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) released the following statement on his meeting yesterday with Iraq’s Deputy Prime Minister, Dr. Saleh Mutlaq:
“I had an excellent meeting yesterday with Iraq’s Deputy Prime Minister, Dr. Saleh Mutlaq. We discussed the tragic developments in Anbar province, and he offered great insights into how our two governments can work together in addressing Iraq’s current crisis. We both agreed that strengthening and improving the capabilities of Iraq’s armed forces is essential at this difficult time, but we also agreed that there is no purely military solution to Iraq’s problems.
“The only way to halt Iraq’s slide into instability and achieve lasting peace and prosperity is through greater democracy, power sharing, and reconciliation. All Iraqi citizens should be empowered through the political system, and all Iraqis have an obligation to reject violence and extremism and take steps to further political reconciliation. In particular, both members of Congress and the Obama Administration should continue to urge Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and his government to reach out to all Iraqis, to govern more inclusively, and to pursue the necessary political reforms that can strengthen national unity and marginalize Al-Qaeda and other violent extremists.”

###



Nouri al-Maliki's assault on Anbar Province continues.  Safaa Abdel Hamid (Alsumaria) reports that Hussain al-Shahristani, Deputy Prime Minister for Energy, today called for a political solution stating he doesn't believe the problems can be solved via a military operation in Anbar.  This as the Ministry of Defense announces it has "conducted 235 air-raids" in Anbar since the start of the assault at the end of December.  That's nothing to be proud of but it does argue that, no, Iraq is not in immediate need of F-16s from the United States -- unless US President Barack Obama's point is to aid Nouri in the killing of the Iraqi people. Loveday Morris (Washington Post via Arizona Star) reports, "Iraq has provided Washington with a list of weapons it needs to wrest back control from anti-government and al-Qaida-linked militants in restive Anbar province, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said Thursday, and soon plans to request counterterrorism training from U.S. forces."


Safaa Abdel Hamid (Alsumaria) reports the Iraqi military is shelling Falluja's residential neighborhoods and, citing a police source, that 13 homes have been damaged.  A police source also reveals to Alsumaria that the military's bombing campaign killed 16 civilians ("including women and children").  Amjad Salah and Mohammad Shafiq (Alsumaria) reports the bombings is forcing dozens more families to flee.  January 9th, Human Rights Watch noted that 13,000 Anbar residents had fled to Erbil.  Thousands of families have been displaced and Iraq already has a serious IDP problem before Nouri launched his latest assault.


National Iraqi News Agency reports:

Speaker Osama Najafi discussed by phone call conversation with the Minister of Finance by interim Safaa al-Safi how to overcome the difficult ordeal suffered by the people of Anbar population and urged to pay state staff salaries , food , living supplies to end the humanitarian crisis resulting from the ongoing military operations which caused the displacement of thousands of families and severe lack of food and fuel.



Though many are calling on dialogue and for an end to military operations in Anbar, that's not happening.  Alsumaria reports that the Iraqi military this morning cut off all communications -- cellular and internet -- in Khalidiya, east of Ramadi.  This was done in preparation of an assault on Khalidiya.  There was some hope that United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's visit would help end the assaults.  That hope vanished quickly.   Not only, in their joint-press conference on Monday, did Nouri publicly rebuke Ban Ki-moon's call for reconciliation but, as All Iraq News reported Tuesday, Iraqiya leader Ayad Allawi called the visit a failure, "Ki-moon is failed because he was supposed to meet the chieftains in Anbar instead of the government officials."

On the topic of visits, Missy Ryan (Reuters) reports Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi is scheduled to visit DC next week.   Amjad Salah (Alsumaria) reports KRG President Massoud Barazani is off to Europe where he will participate in the World Economic Forum (Davos, Switzerland, January 22-25th).  He's leading a delegation from Erbil -- a KRG delegation.  Bad news for Nouri, he's not apparently going to be heading a delegation out of Baghdad.  Well, it's a World Economic Forum and Nouri's a joke on the international stage, better he stay home in his kennel and let Barzani represent Iraq.


Meanwhile, Iraq's budget has gone to Parliament.  National Iraqi News Agency reports that Kurdish MP Mahmoud Othman calls the forwarding of the budget -- which led the Kurds to walk out of the Cabinet -- "unwise." NINA also notes Kurdish MP Ashwaq al-Jaf notes the Kurds plan to use Constitutional steps in Parliament to address the issue.  Steve LeVine (Quartz) explains:


The Iraqi government has raised the stakes yet again in its brinksmanship with Kurdistan—unable so far to halt the Kurds’s headlong push as an independent oil exporter, Baghdad has prepared a 2014 budget that entirely cuts off the northern region.
Baghdad’s move on Jan. 15 is a response to Kurdish plans to sell their first piped oil at the end of this month at Turkey’s Mediterranean port of Ceyhan, the first stage in an apparent strategy for wholesale economic independence from Iraq proper. With it, Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki raises the temperature not only on the Kurds, but also the foreign oil companies on which Kurdistan is relying—ExxonMobil, Chevron, France’s Total, Gazprom and a group of wildcatters.
Maliki said there will be no restoration of the Kurds’s $12 billion-a-year budget allocation until they produce 400,000 barrels of oil a day—worth about $14.6 billion a year at today’s prices. But the oil companies’ current plans do not yield that scale of production until well into next year. So to stave off economic mayhem this year, the Kurds will be lobbying both Maliki to see reason and the oil companies to up their game. 


UPI notes, "Genel Energy, led by former BP boss Tony Hayward, said Wednesday it expects oil from a pipeline in the Kurdish north of Iraq to be exported from Turkey soon."



And finally,  David Swanson's War Is A Crime carries the announcement from the Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence (SAAII):

The Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence (SAAII) have voted overwhelmingly to present the 2014 Sam Adams Award for Integrity in Intelligence to Chelsea (formerly Bradley) Manning.
A Nobel Peace Prize nominee, U.S. Army Pvt. Manning is the 25 year-old intelligence analyst who in 2010 provided to WikiLeaks the "Collateral Murder" video – gun barrel footage from a U.S. Apache helicopter, exposing the reckless murder of 12 unarmed civilians, including two Reuters journalists, during the “surge” in Iraq.   The Pentagon had repeatedly denied the existence of the "Collateral Murder" video and declined to release it despite a request under the Freedom of Information Act by Reuters, which had sought clarity on the circumstances of its journalists' deaths.
Release of this video and other documents sparked a worldwide dialogue about the importance of government accountability for human rights abuses as well as the dangers of excessive secrecy and over-classification of documents. 
On February 19, 2014 Pvt. Manning -  currently incarcerated at Leavenworth Prison - will be recognized at a ceremony in absentia at Oxford University's prestigious Oxford Union Society for casting much-needed daylight on the true toll and cause of civilian casualties in Iraq; human rights abuses by U.S. and “coalition” forces, mercenaries, and contractors; and the roles that spying and bribery play in international diplomacy.
The Oxford Union ceremony will include the presentation of the traditional SAAII Corner-Brightener Candlestick and will feature statements of support from former SAAII awardees and prominent whistleblowers.  Members of the press are invited to attend.
On August 21, 2013 Pvt. Manning received an unusually harsh sentence of 35 years in prison for exposing the truth -- a chilling message to those who would call attention to wrongdoing by U.S. and “coalition” forces.
Under the 1989 Official Secrets Act in the United Kingdom, Pvt. Manning, whose mother is British, would have faced just two years in prison for whistleblowing or 14 years if convicted under the old 1911 Official Secrets Act for espionage.
Former senior NSA executive and SAAII Awardee Emeritus Thomas Drake has written that Manning "exposed the dark side shadows of our national security regime and foreign policy follies .. [her] acts of civil disobedience … strike at the very core of the critical issues surrounding our national security, public and foreign policy, openness and transparency, as well as the unprecedented and relentless campaign by this Administration to snuff out and silence truth tellers and whistleblowers in a deliberate and premeditated assault on the 1st Amendment."
Previous winners of the Sam Adams Award include Coleen Rowley (FBI); Katharine Gun (formerly of GCHQ, the National Security Agency’s equivalent in the UK); former UK Ambassador Craig Murray; Larry Wilkerson (Col., US Army, ret.; chief of staff for Secretary of State Colin Powell); Julian Assange (WikiLeaks); Thomas Drake (NSA); Jesselyn Radack (former ethics attorney for the Department of Justice, now National Security & Human Right Director of the Government Accountability Project); Thomas Fingar (former Deputy Director of National Intelligence, who managed the key National Intelligence Estimate of 2007 that concluded Iran had stopped working on a nuclear weapon four years earlier); and Edward Snowden (former NSA contractor and systems administrator, currently residing in Russia under temporary asylum).
The Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence are very proud to add Pvt.  Manning to this list of distinguished awardees.
-- 
David Swanson's wants you to declare peace at http://WorldBeyondWar.org  His new book is War No More: The Case for Abolition. He blogs at http://davidswanson.org and http://warisacrime.org and works for http://rootsaction.org. He hosts Talk Nation Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @davidcnswanson and FaceBook.  



For the record, Chelsea Manning has asked not to be called "Pvt Manning" and prefers "Ms. Chelsea Manning" if a title is to be used.






mike tharp

cnn
jomana karadsheh






al rafidayn
missy ryan
reuters

Roast in the Kitchen

$
0
0
Belinda has a problem: Her grocery store had a sale on roast.  But it was small roasts.  She bought a package -- with two -- that was less than nine pounds and that was one of the bigger ones.

She wonders what to do?

Well consider it a blessing.  We should be eating less meat.

Cook the roasts in two different meals.

Get a bit pot -- stock pot if you have it, dutch oven will also work.

With a small roast, I'd cook it on the stove top. 

You can dredge it in flour and then brown it in a skillet. 

Or you can make a point to cook it in the boiling water.

Peel six potatoes and cut them into wedges.  (Or leave the skins on, if you like the skins.  In which case, just cut them into wedges.)

Chop one white onion (medium size).

Chop six carrots. 

After you've browned the roast, if you're browning it, put it in the dutch oven or stock pot.  Add two cloves of garlic.  I like to add six, but I like garlic.  Add potatoes.  Cover with water.  Bring to a boil. 

Once it's boiling, turn the heat down to allow it to simmer,  Add onion.  Add a tea spoon of cumin, a tea spoon of red pepper, a tea spoon of basil, a tea spoon of thyme and a tea spoon of paprika.  Cover.  You can tilt the lid on top of the pot.

After 30 minutes, add carrots.  Then cover.

If you need to add water during the cooking, do so. 

30 minutes after you add the carrots, add a can of corn.  (Or frozen or fresh kernels of corn.)

If you'd like to add more, feel free to do so.  You can add more potatoes, you can chop up some celery, you can add mushrooms.

The point of the adding to the roast is to expand the meal.  You've got a little meat and this will let you stretch that out.

Should you have left overs, you can peel some more potatoes before you put the pot back on the stove for dinner number two.  You can also add another can of corn to it and some more carrots.  You're going to add water to it as well.  Especially since potatoes tend to absorb a lot of water.


Okay, the neoliberal attempts to destroy Detroit continue.  Thomas Gaist (WSWS) reports:


 

Detroit Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr met with officials from the Detroit Institute of Arts Thursday to demand that the museum contribute $100 million to the “rescue” package being assembled by Governor Rick Snyder and a group of wealthy foundations, including the Ford Foundation, the Kresge Foundation and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation.

The proposed deal would raise $330 million from the nine foundations and another $350 million from the state, with the money supposedly going to “protect” the DIA and city workers’ pensions from the impact of the bankruptcy.

Orr’s demand that the DIA contribute $100 million exposes the so-called “rescue” plan as a fraud. It is a means of removing the DIA from public ownership, placing it under the control of powerful private interests, and crippling its finances and operations in order to funnel its funds to the city’s bondholders and bank creditors.

The so-called “protection” of city workers’ pension benefits is no different. They will be drastically slashed with or without the “rescue” package.

The $100 million demand amounts to an act of extortion and would have a ruinous impact on the museum’s balance sheet. While an unnamed source cited by the Detroit Free Press said the city considers $100 million over 20 years “a number the DIA can get to,” museum representatives said paying such an amount was “completely unfeasible.”


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


Friday, January 17, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue,  Barack wants to arm and train Nouri's killers, BRussells Tribunal talks reality on Iraq, Robert Gates calls for conditions on any arms to Iraq, NPR and Tom Bowman edit out Gen Martin Dempsey's most important remark in an interview, and more.



The topic of Iraq was raised in today's State Dept briefing delivered by spokesperson Jen Psaki.


QUESTION: Do you have a readout about the Deputy Burns meeting with the Iraqi deputy prime minister?

MS. PSAKI: Sure, with the Iraq – mm-hmm.
Deputy Secretary Burns, as part of his regular diplomatic engagement with senior Iraqi officials, met today with Iraqi deputy prime minister – with the Iraqi deputy prime minister to discuss bilateral issues, including the ongoing situation in Anbar Province, the upcoming elections, and our shared commitment towards a long-term partnership under the Strategic Framework Agreement.

QUESTION: Was any part of that discussion regarding the Iraqi Government seeking arms or increased arms supplies from the United States?

MS. PSAKI: Well, we’ve, of course, seen those reports in the public comments, I guess it would be a more accurate way of referring to them. Certainly, we’re not going to get into a laundry list of FMS support. You’re familiar with what we have provided, the fact that we’re working with Congress on pieces like Apaches. In terms of whether they discussed that or not, I’m happy to see if there’s more detail to provide.

QUESTION: Jen, on the same issue --

MS. PSAKI: Let’s just finish Iraq. Go ahead --

QUESTION: Yeah, on Iraq.

QUESTION: Also, was there any discussion about the willingness by – excuse me – the U.S. military to train Iraqi troops in a third country?

MS. PSAKI: I know there have been reports of that which are, I believe, referring to Jordan which are inaccurate, but --

QUESTION: Jordan, that’s inaccurate --

MS. PSAKI: I can check and see if there’s more about the meeting to read out to address your question as well as Arshad’s.

QUESTION: So is the report inaccurate that the U.S. military is ready to train troops in a third country, or just the part that it might be in Jordan? Which one is accurate?

MS. PSAKI: Well, I don’t have any more specific details for you beyond the fact that the report that has been specifically referring to Jordan and training and U.S. involvement at that is inaccurate.[i]

QUESTION: In the meeting with – between the Deputy Secretary Burns and Dr. Saleh al-Mutlaq, has the issue of the sectarian divide come up? The reason I ask this, because Mr. Mutlaq is saying all over the place that basically the sectarian differences are irreconcilable. He’s basically accusing his boss, al-Maliki, of being irreformably sectarian.

MS. PSAKI: Let me check, as I mentioned to Jo and Arshad, if there’s more that we can share about Deputy Secretary Burns’ meeting on all of your specific questions.

QUESTION: The reason I ask this is because the reconciliation has been really at the crux of the issue, but the United States has not taken any steps to sort of take initiative or perhaps lead the initiative on reconciliation.

MS. PSAKI: I think we – the United States has done a great deal to engage the Iraqi Government – not just providing military equipment to Iraq, but also working with all parties to better address the needs of the Iraqi people. We’ve had a range of officials on the ground, including Brett McGurk, as recently as, I believe, a week ago.

QUESTION: Right.


MS. PSAKI: We’ve engaged the government closely. We’ve encouraged unity repeatedly and consistently over the course of months. So I would just refute the notion of your question.


And they added this footnote to the transcript:



[i] Spokesperson Psaki understood the question to be about *current* training operations.
As we have said, we do consider the Government of Iraq an essential partner in a common fight against terrorism and our two countries continue to build a mutually beneficial partnership under the Strategic Framework Agreement. We remain deeply committed to supporting Iraq in its battle against terrorist threats and in its efforts to advance political and economic development. As part of our support, we seek to offer a broad range of security, counter-terrorism, and combat support capabilities for Iraq to draw on to help meet its significant security challenges in the near term and invest in its future over the longer term.


Let's talk about arming and training.  AFP speaks to an unnamed Defense Dept official, "Pending an agreement with Jordan or another nation to host the effort, the training was "likely" to go ahead as both Baghdad and Washington supported the idea, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity." Luis Martinez (ABC News) adds:

Pentagon spokesman Col. Steve Warren told reporters Friday there were discussions underway with Iraq about future training possibilities for Iraq’s security forces.  “We are continuing to discuss with the Iraqis how we can train them and how we can keep their security forces at the highest possible levels,” Warren told reporters.
“The department recognizes that it is important for the Iraqis to have a capable force,” said Warren.  He would not detail whether those discussions would have U.S. troops doing the training or where such training might occur if it is agreed to.


Loveday Morris and Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) report, "Maliki said during the interview that he would support a new U.S. military training mission for Iraqi counterterrorism troops in Jordan, marking the first time he has expressed support for a plan that the Pentagon has been contemplating in recent months. U.S. military officials have not provided details on the scope or timing of such a training mission."


That's the training issue.  And it should be noted that training in Jordan isn't a new idea.  It dates back to the Bully Boy Bush administration when Jordan was going to be used as a location to train Iraqi police.  Let's move over to the arming.  Oren Dorell (USA Today) reports, "The Obama administration said Friday it is sending more weapons to Iraq to help Baghdad put down a resurgent al-Qaeda that is battling government troops in cities that U.S. troops helped liberate during the Iraq war." David Lerman (Bloomberg News) adds, "The aid will be delivered “as rapidly as possible” to meet a request made by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, said Army Colonel Steve Warren, a Pentagon spokesman."


In light of the above, it's interesting that the Chair of Joint-Chiefs of Staff, Gen Martin Dempsey declared, "No one has asked, nor have we offered direct military involvement because of the underlying religious issues and extremist issues."

That statement may surprise some.

It will certainly surprise the listeners of NPR who caught Tom Bowman's lousy report for Morning Edition today.

It really is amazing how NPR works to pull news from their broadcasts.

Dempsey made the quoted remark to Bowman.  It didn't make the edit.

Jim Garamone (DoD's American Forces Press Service) found the remark newsworthy:



 The United States is looking at how to help solve the problems of the region. Dempsey said the U.S. military can help in planning and logistics. “No one has asked, nor have we offered direct military involvement because of the underlying religious issues and extremist issues,” he said.

Claudette Roulo (DoD's American Forces Press Service) also found the remark newsworthy:



“No one has asked, nor have we offered direct military involvement because of the underlying religious issues and extremist issues,” Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey told NPR this week.


On the heels of embarrassing adoption 'report,' NPR really didn't need to get caught with bad editing choices again.  But they have been caught.

Tom Bowman didn't report Dempsey saying,  "No one has asked, nor have we offered direct military involvement because of the underlying religious issues and extremist issues."

It's a real shame Tom Bowman fell in love with his own voice (he offers several cut-aways as though he's Peter Griffith on Family Guy) and lost interest in the subject of his supposed report.  What "underlying religious issues and extremists issues" was Dempsey referring to?


It's a shame Bowman and NPR didn't feel the need to allow the American people to hear the discussion.

Robert Gates is a former US Secretary of Defense (December 2006 to July 2011).  He has a new book he's promoting entitled Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War.  The Christian Science Monitor hosted a press breakfast for him this morning.  Anna Mulrine (Christian Science Monitor) reports he declared that the US military had accomplished the goals they were tasked with and handed control of the country over to the Iraqi government:

The mistakes that have since been made by Iraqi President Nouri al-Maliki have included isolating Sunnis in a country dominated by a Shiite-led government and "treating the Sunnis in such a hostile manner over the last couple of years or so."


The Christian Science Monitor has posted a brief clip of Gates speaking about Iraq.

Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates:  Well I think if I were sitting in the [White House] Situation Room today, I would recommend that we offer the Maliki government a wide range of military assistance -- both equipment and training.  But I would be very explicit about conditioning it on his outreach to the Sunnis and pulling back on all these acts such as trying to arrest Vice President [Tareq al-] Hashemi and other Sunni officials from his government, make some investments in Anbar and other Sunni areas that give the Sunnis some reason to believe this government in Baghdad does represent them and is better -- is better than any other.  I think -- I think there are two causes of the situation that we face, that is going on in Iraq.  One is Maliki treating the Sunnis in such a hostile manner over the last couple of years or so.  And -- and the other then is the spillover from Syria.

For more on the breakfast, refer to FORA TV which has more clips (and the recording of the entire breakfast is available for $9.95). Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq makes similar points to Joshua Keating (Slate):


The U.S. government has reportedly now agreed to supply the Iraqi government with more weapons in order to defeat the “al-Qaida linked” Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) militants now in control of the city of Fallujah in Anbar province, after conversations between Maliki and Vice President Biden earlier this week. But Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq, a prominent secular Sunni leader whose party opposes Maliki’s, told Slate that today that “stability will not happen through supplying arms only” because Sunnis in the region “feel they are being marginalized, and they are uprising now.”

“There is a wrong feeling that what’s happening in Anbar is merely al-Qaida and da’ash (a nickname for ISIS). This is a mistake,” he said. “People in Anbar are uprising now because when the army was sent to defeat al-Qaida in Anbar [last year], they changed their direction and went after demonstrators. The attacked the demonstrators, removed their tents, and arrested one of the parliamentary people in Ramadi. This gave people the impression that the aim is not al-Qaida, that the aim is the demonstrators.”


And things are probably about to get even worse if previous patterns are any indication.  Currently, parliamentary elections are scheduled for April 30th.  What happened last time in the lead up to parliamentary elections?  Saleh al-Mutlaq should remember, it was done to him.

Candidates were disqualified.  They were labeled 'terrorists' and 'Ba'athists.' This happened if they were political rivals of Nouri al-Maliki and it was done via the Justice and Accountability Commission.  Dar Addustour reports the Justice and Accountability Commission will be vetting candidates shortly.

They weren't supposed to vet anything in 2010.  They were a one-time committee that was supposedly phased out as part of Nouri's efforts to meet the White House benchmarks -- which included to move towards national reconciliation and to end Paul Bremer's de-Ba'athifaction process.


Sunnis are targeted by Nouri.  That's among the reasons they protest.






Above is Samarra from earlier today -- Iraqi Spring MC posted the video here.  December 21, 2012, a wave of protests kicked off in Iraq and they continued today. Protests also took place in Amiriya, Rawa, Falluja,  Tikrit, Baiji, and Baquba.

NINA reports:

Vice Chairman of the Council Faleh al-Issawi told / NINA / that the local government , represented by the provincial council and governor of Anbar province , is holding talks and continuous meetings with tribal sheikhs and elders , in order to end the crisis and the tense situation in the province.
Issawi added that the purpose of these meetings and discussions, is to know the demands of the clans, and to work on bringing together their points of views with the central government in order to end the current crisis and end armed manifestations in Anbar. 


This week, BRussells Tribunal's Eman Ahmed Khamas spoke with RT about the assault on Anbar.


Eman Ahmed Khamas:  I was saying that the US-led invasion and occupation of Iraq is to be blamed for this violence.  And of course there are many other reasons behind this violence: the non-functioning state, for example, the corrupt and fascist government, the absence of any kind of services, the failing state, all of these -- and above all the persecution of people --  especially those who protest against the fascist policies of the government.  All these togethar are behind the escalation of violence.  [. . .]  Actually for the last year -- more than a year Iraqis are protesting peacefully I mean protesting against the government's policies and, above all, the executions and the detentions.  You know Iraq now has the first rate of executions in the world.  And, again, the non-functioning state, the failings, etc.   What the government did is that they attacked the peaceful protesters and they killed many of them.  For example, a few months ago, they slaughtered 45 people in Hawija, people who were protesting peacefully.  And in other places -- in Diyala, in Mousl, and Anbar -- all these killings.  Yes, Iraqis are trying to cope with this violence but simply the government has to stop persecuting the people.


Mustafa Habib (Niqash) reports:

Iraq’s senior politicians are tripping over themselves to come up with proposals to solve the current crisis in Anbar. Despite the fact that some of the ideas are plausible and positive, it seems unlikely that any will get off the ground because of entrenched political antipathies in Baghdad. What is needed is a neutral mediator to bring all the enemies to the bargaining table.

National tension is running high due to the events in Anbar province over the past fortnight. Now that an all out military confrontation – between the Iraqi army and non-army forces in the southern province - appears to have been avoided several senior politicians in Baghdad have come up with plans to try and resolve the situation politically.

Some of the plans seem to have come about as a result of diplomatic pressure from Iraq’s allies, from countries like the US, and others may well be popularity ploys aimed at Iraq’s upcoming federal elections, due to be held in April. However whether any of them gets off the ground is a whole other issue.

The first of these initiatives came from former Iraqi Prime Minister and leader of the opposition, Ayed Allawi. Allawi is a Shiite Muslim politician who leads an opposition bloc made up mainly of Sunni Muslim politicians and who always emphasises the non-sectarian nature of his political positions. His suggested plan involves withdrawing the Iraqi army from Anbar province and looking seriously at the legitimate demands of Sunni Muslim protestors who have been conducting anti-government demonstrations for almost a year now.

Allawi also wants a committee formed to look into the issues – the committee should be made up of representatives of the government and other main parties in Baghdad as well as representatives from Anbar’s tribes and the Sunni Muslim demonstrators – and which would uphold the Iraqi Constitution and ensure that the first two parts of his plan are carried out.  

A second plan was announced by Ammar al-Hakim who leads the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq. His party is part of the ruling, mostly Shiite Muslim coalition headed by Iraqi Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki. But in recent times, the Shiite Muslim organization has been forging its own path and maintaining a healthy distance from the increasingly unpopular al-Maliki.
Al-Hakim suggests the formation of a council of elders made up of representatives from Anbar’s tribes as well as constructing self defence militias made up of members of Anbar’s tribes. Additionally al-Hakim thought that accelerating reconstruction projects in Anbar would also help increase satisfaction in the area and give demonstrators less to complain about.

“Al-Hakim's initiative is aimed at preventing military intervention in Anbar,” Habib al-Tarfi, an MP for the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, explained to NIQASH. “It reassures Iraq’s Sunnis while stressing the importance of peaceful dialogue as the only way out of this crisis.”

The latest – but probably not the last – plan came several days ago from the President of the semi-autonomous region of Iraqi Kurdistan, Massoud Barzani. In a press release, Fadhil Mirani, a senior member of Barzani’s Kurdistan Democratic Party, or KDP, said that the President was working on a comprehensive initiative to contain the Anbar crisis.
Mirani suggested that, “currently Iraq’s Kurds might be more acceptable mediators to work with each opposing party in this conflict because they’re not a part of the problem.”
al-Hakim's proposal is the on that the US government has been backing for two weeks now -- as al-Hakim has repeatedly noted in public.

Through yesterday, Iraq Body Count counts 640 violent deaths for the month.  Today?  National Iraqi News Agency reports a Tikrit armed attack left 1 Sahwa leader dead and his son injured,  1 corpse (gun shot wounds) was discovered dumped in the street northeast of Baquba, a Shura armed attack left 1 Iraqi soldier dead, a Mosul roadside bombing left one military Lt Col injured, an Almishahdah armed attack left 2 rebels dead, a Ramadi suicide bomber took his own life and that of 9 "Anabar's tribes sons," a Jorfi-ssakhar elementary school was bombed, and a bridge linking Anbar Province to Karbala was blown up.

Turning to the topic of war resistance, J.B. Gerald (Global Research) notes:

Canada continues to deport contemporary deserters to U.S. military prisons. One or two resisters have found safe haven through legal cases and appeals against the orders to remove them. Polls have shown a majority of Canadians supports war resisters, but in 2010 Parliament failed to pass bill C-440 amending the Immigration act in their favour. The Harper government continues to deny refuge and asylum. Aside from known cases there are unknown numbers of resisters.
Among the deported were Robin Long, Clifford Cornell, and Kimberley Rivera. In the U.S., sentenced to 14 months, Kimberley Rivera gave birth in prison Nov. 26th, and was released Dec. 12th, after serving 10 months. In reporting her release, the U.S. military paper, Stars and Stripes, noted her dishonourable discharge doesn’t necessarily mean she won’t be able to find work. Jeremy Hinzman, an upfront conscientious objector, after numerous complex legal battles received a permission to stay in Canada on humanitarian and compassionate grounds. The UN Human Rights Commission has shown ongoing support for the rights of conscientious objectors. Yet on long term AWOL from the U.S. Army, Rodney Watson, under government warrant, enters his fifth year of sanctuary asylum in the First United Church of Vancouver. Many legal cases have been won by resisters, then appealed by the government and legal cases of war resisters such as Joshua Key remain under consideration as though waiting for politicians to wake up. Some cases are rarely mentioned, as though notice might upset an applecart.


Julie Berry writes the editors of the St. Thomas Times-Journal to note, "Conscientious objector, Kimberly Rivera, has just finished serving a 10 month jail term in U.S. Military prison because of her refusal to take part in the Iraq war. She has spent months separated from her husband and children and now faces rebuilding her life with a felony conviction on her record. This injustice only happened because our government chose to force her to leave Canada and return to the US, arguing that it was 'merely speculative' that she would be punished." Last month, Courage to Resist noted Kim Rivera had completed her sentence.  While behind bars, Kim gave birth.  The San Diego Free Press reported November 30th,

Kimberly Rivera gave birth to her son Matthew Kaden Rivera in the Naval Hospital on November 25th.   Her husband Mario was initially denied access to the birthing room but was ultimately granted permission to attend the delivery.  Although the delivery itself went smoothly, this was no ordinary birth– Rivera has been serving a ten month sentence for deserting the US army while deployed in Iraq.  She deserted in 2007 because she felt morally unable to take part in the conflict.


Kim is part of a movement of war resistance which also includes Lt. Ehren Watada, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Justin Colby, Camilo Mejia, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson,  Kyle Snyder , Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Joshua Key, Ricky Clousing, Mark Wilkerson, Agustin Aguayo, Camilo Mejia,  Patrick Hart, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Jeremy Hinzman, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Brad McCall, Rodney Watson, Chuck Wiley and Kevin Benderman.

In January 2004, Jeremy Hinzman became the first US service member to go to Canada and seek asylum instead of deploying to Iraq to serve in the illegal war.  War Resisters Support Campaign explains:

Jeremy Hinzman was a U.S. soldier in the elite infantry division, the 82nd Airborne. He served in Afghanistan in a non-combat position after having applied for conscientious objector status.   After being refused CO status and returning to America, he learned that they would be deployed to Iraq.
  Hinzman did not believe the stated reasons for the Iraq war. In January 2004 he drove to Canada to seek asylum. He is currently living in Toronto with his wife Nga Nguyen and son Liam. His refugee claim was turned down in March 2005 by the Immigration and Refugee Board. This decision was upheld by the Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal, and on November 15, 2007 the Supreme Court refused to hear his appeal.
  On July 21 2008 their daughter Meghan was born in Toronto.
  Jeremy and his family was ordered to leave Canada by September 23, 2008, or face deportation to the United States where Jeremy would be turned over to the US military to face punishment for desertion. A judicial review of this decision was denied by the Federal Court in June 2009, but on July 6, 2010, the Federal Court of Appeal, citing serious flaws with the immigration officer's decision, ruled in favour of Jeremy and ordered a review of his application to stay on Humanitarian and Compassionate grounds.



Hinzman remains at risk of being forced to return to the United States.  Tom Riley writes the editors of the Toronto Star, "During the Vietnam era, Canada welcomed 50,000 draft resisters and deserters. I was one of them. It’s shameful that 40 years later, rather than continuing this proud tradition and affirming Canadian values, our government is using its resources to try to actively intervene in the cases of Iraq resisters to try to ensure they are forced out of Canada."  On Global Research's latest radio show, they speak with war resister Joshua Key who notes that those who speak out are especially punished when they return or are forced to return.  He shares that due to his writing a book about war resistance (The Deserter's Tale, written with Lawrence Hill), his granting many interviews on the topic, his appearing in documentaries and his acting as an advisor on Kimberly Peirce's Stop-Loss mean he would, according to one expert, get 20 years in prison if he was forced to return to the US.



Finally, David Bacon's last book, Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press), won the CLR James Award. He has a new book, The Right to Stay Home: How US Policy Drives Mexican Migration.  Teofilo Reyes reviews it for Labornotes:





While immigrants were fasting on the Mall near the U.S. Capitol last month to pressure for immigration reform, the Mexican Congress was allowing privatization of the country's public oil corporation, PEMEX.
Separated by 2,500 miles, these events might seem a world apart.
But David Bacon's The Right to Stay Home: How US Policy Drives Mexican Migration shows how the two are intertwined. Bacon weaves narratives across borders, following communities as they struggle at home, migrate, and then struggle again in their new homes.
Over half the Mexican population lives in poverty, according to the World Bank. And Mexico is the only country in Latin America that saw poverty increase last year.
 In 1994 Mexico formally scrapped its decades-old program of economic development based on industrial and agricultural self-sufficiency. The government turned instead to a policy based on open markets and foreign investment: NAFTA.
Shortly after the NAFTA ink dried, the U.S. fell into a recession and the poverty rate in Mexico quickly grew to over 60 percent of the population. Ross Perot's sucking sound of jobs rushing south across the border was drowned out by the noise of U.S. capital vacuuming up cheap labor.




















Barack attacks Ed Snowden

$
0
0
On Barack's illegal spying and his speech last Friday, Bill Van Auken (WSWS) writes:

If anyone had any doubts about the real content of President Barack Obama’s “reform” of the National Security Agency’s massive spying programs, they should have been cleared up Sunday by the vicious bipartisan witch-hunt of the individual who made the NSA’s illegal activities known to the public, Edward Snowden.

Three leading members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, appeared on television talk shows to brand Snowden a traitor and Russian spy, providing a justification for his being tried and executed. The former NSA contractor has been charged by federal prosecutors—though not yet indicted—with felony counts under the 1917 Espionage Act.

Without Snowden’s revelations of spying on the telephone calls, emails, text message and Internet activity of hundreds of millions of Americans and countless millions more around the world, there would have been no need for Obama to deliver his remarks at the Justice Department on Friday.

The US president’s response consisted of meaningless rhetoric about “privacy” and vague proposals for “oversight,” accompanied by a full-throated defense of the police state operations carried out by the NSA and other US intelligence agencies within the United States and around the world.

Obama’s lying remarks, which included an attack on Snowden, were a green light for the most right-wing sections of the ruling establishment to go on the offensive, braying for the whistle-blower’s blood.


I loved Ava and C.I.'s piece on the speech, "TV: The speech about nothing," and I'll stay with the topic of whistle-blower Ed Snowden and note this from Ava and C.I.'s article:


When dishonesty wasn't enough, he resorted to bitchery.

A put upon Barack shared, "Of course, what I did not know at the time is that within weeks of my speech, an avalanche of unauthorized disclosures would spark controversies at home and abroad that have continued to this day.  And given the fact of an open investigation, I’m not going to dwell on Mr. Snowden's actions or his motivations; I will say that our nation's defense depends in part on the fidelity of those entrusted with our nation's secrets.  If any individual who objects to government policy can take it into their own hands to publicly disclose classified information, then we will not be able to keep our people safe, or conduct foreign policy."

And if the government would only follow the law, no one would have anything to expose you with.



Exactly.  If the government hadn't been hiding illegal activity, Ed Snowden wouldn't have had anything to expose so it's past time that Barack found time to apologize for the actions of the government and he really needs to stop attacking Ed Snowden.



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


Monday, January 20, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, another journalist is killed in Iraq,  we drop back to remember the 70s when the US government pretended to be the Kurds friends while using (and then discarding them) like pawns, the IHEC fires a number of commissioners right ahead of the elections and offers no explanation, the Justice and Accountability Commission still has no head, and more.


As former UK prime minister and forever War Criminal Tony Blair likes to boast at his website, "Globalisation brings each of us closer together." Blair found out just how close today.  Felicity Morse and Jonathan Owen (Belfast Telegraph) report, "One of the world’s most controversial political figures had an unlikely brush with reality on Friday, with Tony Blair subjected to a humiliating citizen’s arrest by a DJ working as a barman at trendy London eaterie the Tramshed." Lizzie Edmonds (Daily Mail) adds:

The part-time producer said he put his hand on his shoulder and said 'Mr Blair, this is a citizen's arrest for a crime against peace, namely your decision to launch an unprovoked war against Iraq.'
Mr Garcia told Vice magazine how Blair then attempted to engage in a debate before one of his son's went to get security. The worker then left the restaurant to avoid any trouble.


The website Arrest Blair encourages people to make a citizen arrest of War Criminal Tony Blair.  Robin De Peyer (Evening Standard) notes, "After spending some time engaged in debate with the former Labour Prime Minister - who now focuses his energy on the Middle East peace process - the man said he realised one of Mr Blair's sons had gone to find security. Quitting on the spot, Mr Garcia said he then left the restaurant immediately."

And the war he co-started continues.  Saturday, Aswat al-Iraq reported, "Jordanian Minister for Communications and Media Mohammed al-Mo'mini announced the intention of his country to train Iraqi forces in anti-terrorism spheres on its soil." AP quotes al-Mo'mini stating, "We look positively at the training because it is consistent with our foreign policy goal of fighting terrorism and because we have one of the best security and military training facilities in the region." AFP reminds, "On Friday a US defense official told AFP that Washington was waiting for an agreement with Jordan or another country to go ahead with the training program. Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has asked the United States to help the army fight against Islamist extremists, blamed for a spiral of deadly attacks in recent months." Saturday, the White House issued the following:





The White House
Office of the Vice President

Readout of Vice President Biden's Call with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki



This afternoon, Vice President Biden spoke with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. The Vice President discussed with Prime Minister Maliki the United States’ support for Iraq’s fight against the Islamist State of Iraq and the Levant. The two leaders agreed on the importance of the Iraqi government’s continued outreach to local and tribal leaders in Anbar province. The Vice President emphasized the importance of seeking a mutually acceptable path forward with Erbil regarding oil exports from Iraq.


That's what the White House says.

Some will believe, some will wait and see.

Because the US government lies and lies frequently.

US President Barack Obama's illegal is a current scandal.  The United States has endured many other government scandals.

During one such period, The Village Voice published Aaron Latham's "Introduction to the Pike Papers." The February 16, 1976 report noted:



As a part of its investigation of covert action, the Pike committee examined three recent operations: our funding of pro-U.S. elements during the 1972 Italian election, our funding of the Kurdish rebellion in Iraq, and our assistance to one of the contending factions in Angola.


What was the Pike Committee?  The CIA offers a summary that's both hyper defensive and hyper combative.  Their summary opens:

A storm broke over the CIA on 22 December 1974, when Seymour Hersh published a front-page article in The New York Times headlined "Huge C.I.A. Operation Reported in U.S. Against Anti-War Forces." Hersh's article alleged that the Agency had been engaged in massive domestic spying activities. 1 His charges stunned the White House and Congress.

In response, President Ford established a blue-ribbon panel, the Rockefeller Commission, to investigate CIA activities in the United States. Ford later complicated the already-delicate issue further by hinting of CIA involvement in assassination attempts against foreign leaders. Congress soon launched its own investigation of the entire Intelligence Community (IC) and its possible abuses. On 27 January 1975, the US Senate established the Senate Select Committee to Study Government Operations With Respect to Intelligence Activities (the Church Committee). On 19 February 1975, the House voted to create a House Select Intelligence Committee (the Nedzi Committee, which was replaced five months later by the Pike Committee.)
These Congressional investigations eventually delved into all aspects of the CIA and the IC. For the first time in the Agency's history, CIA officials faced hostile Congressional committees bent on the exposure of abuses by intelligence agencies and on major reforms. In the Congress, there was no longer a consensus to support intelligence activities blindly. The old Congressional seniority system and its leadership was giving way. With the investigations, the CIA also became a focal point in the ongoing battle between the Congress and the executive branch over foreign policy issues and the "imperial presidency."
The investigations of the Pike Committee, headed by Democratic Representative Otis Pike of New York, paralleled those of the Church Committee, led by Idaho Senator Frank Church, also a Democrat. While the Church Committee centered its attention on the more sensational charges of illegal activities by the CIA and other components of the IC, the Pike Committee set about examining the CIA's effectiveness and its costs to taxpayers. Unfortunately, Representative Pike, the committee, and its staff never developed a cooperative working relationship with the Agency or the Ford administration.

The committee soon was at odds with the CIA and the White House over questions of access to documents and information and the declassification of materials. Relations between the Agency and the Pike Committee became confrontational. CIA officials came to detest the committee and its efforts at investigation. Many observers maintained moreover, that Representative Pike was seeking to use the committee hearings to enhance his senatorial ambitions, and the committee staff, almost entirely young and anti-establishment, clashed with Agency and White House officials.


Actually, the report specifically details Henry Kissinger of one of the main stalling points.

It details quite a lot.

In 1972, for example, Kurds in northern Iraq were funneled US dollars and they thought the US government cared about their situation.  The Kurds are considered the largest minority in the world without a homeland.  Those who were in Iraq were facing oppression under the government of Saddam Hussein.  What a blessing, what a heaven-sent gift for the Kurds that the US government supported them.

Oops!  It didn't.

Aaron Latham explained:


In 1972, Dr. Henry Kissinger met with the Shah of Iran, who asked the U.S. to aid the Kurds in their rebellion against Iraq, an enemy of the Shah.  Kissinger later presented the proposal to President Nixon who approved what would become a $16 million program.  Then John B. Connally, the former Nixon Treasury Secretary, was dispatched to Iran to inform the Shah, one oil man to another.
The committee report charges that: "The President, Dr. Kissinger and the foreign head of state [the Shah] hoped our clients would not prevail.  They preferred instead that the insurgents simply continue a level of hostilities sufficient to sap the resources of our ally's neighboring country [Iraq].  The policy was not imparted to our clients, who were encouraged to continue fighting.  Even in the context of covert action, ours was a cynical enterprise."
During the Arab-Israeli war, when the Kurds might have been able to strike at a distracted Iraqi government, Kissinger, according to the report, "personally restrained the insurgents from an all-out offensive on the one occassion when such an attack might have been successful."
Then, when Iran resolved its border dispute with Iraq, the U.S. summarily dropped the Kurds.  And Iraq, knowing aid would be cut off, launched a search-and-destroy campaign the day after the border agreement was signed.
A high U.S. official later explained to the Pike committee staff: "Covert action should not be confused with missionary work."


They were given support not because the US government hoped that they would be successful or even hoped that they would be successful.  In fact, Kissinger and the government were hoping that the Kurds "would not prevail." It was all about screwing over someone else and the Kurds were just the US government's unknowing pawns.


EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs Catherine Ashton:  The EU is doing all it can to support Prime Minister Al Maliki and his Government in their efforts to confront terrorism and address security challenges, particularly in the west of Iraq, I am very concerned about the humanitarian situation in areas affected by the recent fighting and it's vital that everything possible is done to protect the civilian population from further violence. 


KUNA reports she made those remarks in Brussels today at the Cooperation Council meeting the Eropean Union and Iraq held.  Iraq's Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari led the Iraqi delegation.

The European Union released a statement which includes:


The Cooperation Council between the European Union (EU) and the Republic of Iraq held its first meeting in Brussels on 20 January 2014. The meeting was opened by the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs, Catherine ASHTON, who headed the EU delegation. Deputy Foreign Minister of Greece, Dimitrios KOURKOULAS, was also present and chaired the remaining part of the meeting. The Iraq delegation was led by the Minister of Foreign Affairs H.E.Mr. Hoshyar ZEBARI. 
The Cooperation Council, which takes place within the framework of the EU-Iraq Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA), reaffirmed the commitment of both parties to continue strengthening their relations. The meeting took stock of progress in implementation of the EU- Iraq PCA, currently under provisional application, and discussed possible are as for future cooperation. Concrete implementation of the agreement began in 2013 with the holding of three technical sub-committees: Energy and related issues; Trade and related issues; as well as Democracy and Human Rights. In the margins of the meeting, the High Representative Catherine ASHTON and Minister Hoshyar ZEBARI held an exchange of views on a wide range of domestic and regional political issues. 



Yesterday, Nouri al-Maliki raged in public.  The AP cleaned it up to protect Nouri:  "Hours after the offensive was announced, Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki vowed to continue fighting 'terrorism,' but left the door open for a political solution."   NINA reported what AP was afraid to:

Prime Minister, Nuri al-Maliki described the demands of the protesters in the Anbar province as " trick fooled some of the politicians."
Maliki said in a speech during a ceremony of distributing land to the poor and squatters in Nasiriyah: "This trick has been revealed and this play has been ended." 



He's back to making public attacks on the peaceful protesters.

And the US government voices no displeasure over it.

When the US government 'helps' and nothing's being accomplished, it's time to examine what they're really doing.  The US government regularly lies about their intent, tricks people they're helping.  The Kurds, for example, should never believe a word the administration offers.

They used KRG President Massoud Barzani to get a second term for Nouri.  They brought him on The Erbil Agreement, got him to act as the Iraqi face of the agreement and they gave him their word that The Erbil Agreement was binding and had the full backing of the White House.  He then helped them sell it to the leaders of the other political blocs.  Nouri got his second term as prime minister like he wanted and he then refused to follow the promises he made in the agreement.

And did the White House rush to insist that The Erbil Agreement be followed?

No.

They turned their backs on Barzani and everyone else.

And that's what created Iraq's current crises.

The US government should have long ago been asked to explain publicly what their real intent was with The Erbil Agreement and why they refused to insist Nouri follow it.

But today's cowardly press spends all their time ignoring The Erbil Agreement.

In fact, this topic was addressed in yesterday's "Roundtable" at Third (Jim: "Participating in our roundtable are  The Third Estate Sunday Review's Dona, Ty, Jess, Ava, and me, Jim; Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude; Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man; C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review; Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills); Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix; Mike of Mikey Likes It!; Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz); Ruth of Ruth's Report; Trina of Trina's Kitchen; Wally of The Daily Jot; Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ; Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends; Isaiah of The World Today Just Nuts and Ann of Ann's Mega Dub"):

Jim: Why don't people know about The Erbil Agreement?  We'll be guessing here, I know, but this was November 2010, the US still had large numbers of troops in the country, there was still limited American media coverage of Iraq.  Why don't people know?

Ruth: Well go to the snapshots for that time period.  What you will notice -- what I have noticed when I pull them up now -- is that really The Guardian newspaper out of England did a better job than anyone.  After that, you have Reuters which is an international newswire service.  But American outlets really were not interested in covering The Erbil Agreement.

Jim: Because?

Ann: Because it reveals what a fraud the US government is.  I mean think about what was done there with that contract.  Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya beat Nouri's State of Law.  Allawi should be prime minister today.  Why isn't he?  Because Nouri refused to step down.  Can you imagine the outrage in January 2009 if Bush had said he wasn't leaving the White House?  That's what Nouri did.  And the US government backed him on that. He brought the country to a stand still for over 8 months.  Parliament wasn't meeting.  Nothing was happening.  And the White House backed him throughout this.  Then, to make it worse, they negotiate a contract that gives this loser a second term.  Of course the US media didn't cover it.

Wally: Right because it's so revealing.  The government lies that they're bringing democracy to Iraq but, in 2010, they don't like the way the Iraqi people voted so Barack pisses on democracy.  It's brand new to Iraq, this idea that citizens are in charge.  And Barack pisses on that notion, says forget who you wanted to lead the country, I want Nouri so he's going to lead.  Why even have elections if the US government's going to overrule you?  Of course the US media didn't cover The Erbil Agreement.  That contract goes against democracy, against everything we supposedly stand for as a country.

Isaiah: Yeah, but -- I agree with what Wally and Ann and Ruth are saying -- but if Bully Boy Bush had been in the White House in 2010, the media would have crucified him for this.  Certainly, The Progressive and The Nation would have gone to town on him.  But since it was Barack, everyone looked the other way.

Cedric: Can -- I'm sorry, Isaiah, were you done?

Isaiah: Yeah, it's fine.

Cedric: I think, and this is point Jim and C.I. have both made for years but one I'm finally starting to grasp, that Bully Boy Bush became an embarrassment to the country and so the media turned on him.  That's big media, small media, all of them out to get him.  And good, I don't care for Bully Boy Bush.  But they weren't upset about illegal wars.  They weren't upset about spying or Guantanamo.  They were upset that he was such a buffoon, he basically fell down and embarrassed himself and the actions.  So they get behind smooth talker Barack and they don't care about anything but helping him sell imperialism.  They don't care about anything.  And there real problem with Bully Boy Bush was that he became a lousy salesperson for empire.  If he'd been able to move more cars off the lot, they would have kept him and kept fluffing for him.

Isaiah: I think that's a really strong point.  The Nation and The Progressive should be leading the way right now but they're not able to.  Why?  Because Barack's a Democrat?  Maybe.  Or maybe it's because, for all of their pretense during the Bully Boy Bush years, they're okay with empire -- especially when it's a Democrat leading it.

Kat: Yes.  That's really the case.  I mean, let's remember, The Nation had an expose on Senator Dianne Feinstein and they killed it. She's helping her husband get rich and abusing her position but The Nation kills the piece.  They're not about reporting.  They're not about issues.  They're about pimping empire but from the Democratic Party side.  The magazine has never been as bad as it is today.  And it's been plenty bad before.  I can remember Naomi Klein, when she still had bravery, talking about how when she wrote about what James Baker was doing in Iraq, the magazine really didn't want to know about what Madeline Albright was doing -- both were involved.  The Nation is more than okay with empire when carried out by Dems.

Jim: And The Progressive?

Rebecca: It's Salon dumbed down even further.



The Erbil Agreement, clearly, for the US government existed solely to create a justification for Nouri to have a second term after his State of Law lost the 2010 elections to Iraqiya.  Their actions make that clear.  The contract had many, many clauses.  The only one the US government gave a damn about?  Nouri getting the second term.

CNN Global Public Square host Fareed Zakaria has a column at The Daily Star in which he reflects on Nouri:

I met with the current prime minister of Iraq, Nouri al-Maliki, in 2005 when he held no office. I described him then as “a hard-line Shiite, unyielding in his religious views and extremely punitive toward the Sunnis. He did not strike me as a man who wanted national reconciliation.”
It was also clear that, having lived in exile in Syria and Iran for almost two decades, Maliki was close to both those regimes, which had sheltered him and his colleagues. Bush administration officials dismissed these concerns and told me Maliki believed in democracy and pluralism.
Fareed Zakaria called it right in 2005.  Sunday AFP reported honestly about Nouri's ranting.  They also noted what led up to the assault on Anbar:

A large section of Ramadi and all of Fallujah, both former insurgent bastions west of Baghdad, fell from government control late last month.
It was the first time anti-government fighters have exercised such open control in major cities since the height of the insurgency that followed the US-led invasion of 2003.
Fighting originally erupted in the Ramadi area on December 30, when security forces cleared a year-old Sunni Arab protest camp.
It spread to Fallujah, and militants moved in and seized the city and parts of Ramadi after security forces withdrew.


Back in December, Nouri kicked off his latest assaults by illegally arresting MP Ahmed al-Alwani (and killing six people in that dawn raid, including al-Alwani's brother).  Today All Iraq News notes Ahmed al-Alwani has finally been charged.  He's charged with terrorism.  He was arrested a month ago.  (December 28th, to be exact.) He finally got charged.  Iraqi 'justice.' As Ayad Allawi -- among others -- has noted publicly, Nouri controls the Baghdad courts, there is no longer an independent judiciary -- largely because the US government looked the other way and humored the tyrant Nouri for 8 years.  And counting. December 27th, he went on TV to say he would burn the protest tents in Anbar down.  December 30th, his forces attacked the protest squares.



As NINA reports, Nouri's assault on Anbar Province continues today with armed clashes and heavy shelling in Falluja, Nouri's forces killed 32 fighters in Ramadi, 2 Iraqi soldiers were killed and three more injured northwest of Falluja,  the military killed 4 fighters in Ramadi, in another Ramadi clash -- with the help of helicopters -- security forces killed 6 fighters, a police station in Ramadi was set fire to, and "The security source in Anbar declared closing all roads lead to Fallujah with nearly provinces in preparation for storming the city's outskirts." Nafia Abdul Jabbar (AFP) observes, "Al-Qaeda-linked militants tightened their grip on Fallujah, a city on Baghdad's doorstep that has been outside of government control for weeks."


Elise Labot (CNN) offers a run through of events in Iraq which takes the form of five questions and answers:



1.I thought the Iraq war was over. Why is there still fighting?
Well, actually last year was the deadliest since 2008. The number of dead reached its worst levels since the height of the Iraq war, when sectarian fighting between the country's Shiite majority and its Sunni minority pushed it to the brink of civil war. Those tensions continue to be fueled by widespread discontent among the Sunnis, who say they are marginalized by the Shiite-led government and unfairly targeted by heavy-handed security tactics.

Dan Murphy (Christian Science Monitor) also goes with the Q&A format:


Did Iraq's civil war really end?

No. The very day the last US troops left Iraq, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, from the Shiite-Islamist Dawa Party, turned the screws on senior Sunni Arab politicians in parliament, signaling his intention to crush his political enemies. Mr. Maliki called for a vote of no confidence against Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq and issued an arrest warrant for Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi, the country's most senior elected Sunni Arab officials.
In the years since, Maliki's government has worked steadily to undo whatever progress toward political reconciliation had been made prior to the US exit. While Iraq is much less violent than it had been, thousands of civilians are still being killed in political violence each year. In 2012 civilian deaths jumped 17 percent. Last year such deaths more than doubled, to more than 8,000.



The violence was throughout Iraq today.  National Iraqi News Agency reports a southwest Baghdad car bombing (Alshorttah al-Rabaah neighborhood) killed 2 people and left seven injured, another southwest Baghdad bombing -- two bombs actually (in Saydiya area) -- left 1 person dead and ten more injured,  a north of Baghdad roadside bombing (Rashidiya) killed 3 people and left eight others, a Khanaqin bombing claimed 1 life and left one person injured, the corpse of 1 woman was discovered in the streets near Samawah (bullet wounds), 1 man's corpse was discovered in Tangro (bullet wounds), suspect Mohamed Fadel Abbas was shot dead by the Ministry of Interior forces, 2 corpses were discovered in Mosul (bullet wounds), a southeast Baghdad car bombing (Baghdadijiddeedah) left 4 people dead and fifteen injured, state-TV (al-Iraqiya) announced that "the Wali of Anbar named Ismail Latif" was killed by security forces in Ramadi, a southern Baghdad car bombing (Abu Dshir area) claimed 6 lives and left fifteen more injured, a southwest Baghdad car bombing (Bayaa area) left eight people injured, and a northwest Baghdad car bombing (Alhurriyah area) left 1 person dead and nine more injured. The Latin American Herald has a breakdown on the Baghdad bombings here.  All Iraq News adds 4 corpses were discovered in Ramadi (Iraqi soldiers) and Firas Mohammed Atea, "reporter of Falluja Satellite Channel [. . .] was killed while accompanying the security forces during their clashes." The International Federation of Journalists issued the following statement:

The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) has issued a renewed plea for Iraqi authorities to step up their efforts to protect the safety of journalists following the murder of reporter Firas Mohammed Attiyah today, Monday 20 January.

According to IFJ affiliate, the Iraqi Journalists' Syndicate (IJS), Attiyah, who worked for Fallujah TV, was killed in a bomb attack in the town of Khaldiyah, east of the Iraq's Anbar provincial capital, Ramadi. The blast occurred as Attiyah, his brother and Muayad Ibrahim, a reporter for Al-Anbar TV, were travelling in a car to report on fighting in the area.  Ibrahim and Attiyah's brother were both wounded in the attack.

As violence in Iraq continues to escalate, The IFJ has reiterated its appeal for the Iraqi government to introduce genuine measures that will bring an end to the killing of innocent journalists and ensure that those who carry out acts of violence against the media face the full weight of justice.


"We are deeply saddened at the news that the journalists Firas Mohammed Atttiyah has lost his life and we send our deepest condolences to his family and colleagues during this incredibly difficult time," said IFJ President Jim Boumelha.

"Standing in solidarity with our Iraqi affiliate, the IJS, we reiterate our call for the Iraqi government to set up a special task force with the resources to carry out a thorough and independent investigation into the murder of Attiyah and the many other journalists that have been brutally killed in Iraqi. Impunity must end and those responsible must answer for their crimes."


According to the IFJ's list of Journalists and Media Staff Killed in 2013, Iraq remains of the deadliest countries in the world for journalists. Thirteen journalists were murdered in the country last year, with eleven of those murders occurring towards the end of the year.

Reacting to the desperate situation, the IFJ last October launched its End Impunity campaign which is calling on the governments of Iraq, Pakistan and Russia to investigate killings of journalists and bring their perpetrators to justice.

Boumelha added: "We are deeply concerned about the escalation of violence against the media in Iraq in recent months. Our End Impunity campaign is calling for an end to violence against journalists in the country where it is estimated that at least 300 journalists have been killed since the US invasion in 2003.

"Our message is clear: the slaughter of journalists in Iraq must end now," continued Boumelha. "Such blatant and utterly appalling disregard for the lives of journalists quite simply cannot be tolerated."



For more information, please contact IFJ on + 32 2 235 22 17
The IFJ represents more than 600.000 journalists in 134 countries



Reporters Without Borders also issued a statement:

Reporters Without Borders is very concerned to learn that two Iraqi TV journalists were badly hurt in targeted attacks in the past eight days.
The first was Al-Mosuliya TVcameraman Salah Nezal in the northern city of Mosul on 12 January. The second was Sharqiya Newsreporter Saïf Talal near Baqubah, 60 km northeast of Baghdad, on 18 January.
“We firmly condemn these criminal attacks,” Reporters Without Borders said. “The appalling climate in which journalists have to work in Iraq constitutes a major threat to freedom of information in this country.
“We urge the authorities to deploy all necessary resources so that these crimes are independently investigated with the aim of arresting both the perpetrators and instigators and bringing them to trial. We also call for effective measures to guarantee journalists’ safety.”
Nezal was doing a report on the University of Mosul campus on 8 January when he and his driver were seriously injured by a bomb planted in the back of his car. They are both recovering.
Talal was driving near Baqubah, the capital of Diyala province, when unidentified gunmen repeatedly opened fire on his car, injuring him seriously.
Reporters Without Borders is deeply saddened to learn that Firas Mohammed Attiyah, 28, a freelance reporter working for Al-Fallujah TV, was killed today by a bomb in Khaldiyah, in the western province of Al-Anbar while accompanying police officers to the inauguration of new police station. Muayad Ibrahim, a freelance reporter working for Al-Anbar TV, was badly hurt by the bomb, which was targeted at the police.
Reporters Without Borders is concerned about the impact of the expansion of Jihadi groups such as Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) and its impact on media personnel in Iraq. A knock-on effect from the conflict in Syria, it is resulting in a decline in the safety of journalists in Iraq.
The past few months have been particularly deadly, with at least 10 media personnel killed in attacks by Jihadi groups.

Recent decisions by Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki’s government and signs of its growing hostility to pro-Sunni media are another source of concern. The government’s actions clearly point to a desire to closely control coverage of the ongoing tension and fighting.



On the issue of the killing of journalists, BRussells Tribunal carries ICSSI's "Journalists in Iraq: their freedoms obliterated by laws and policies while their lives are continually threatened!" which opens:


The Press Freedom Advocacy Association released its annual report for 2013, highlighting the serious deterioration in the working conditions and the safety of journalists in Iraq over the last year. The Association cited 286 cases of violent acts against journalists, including kidnappings and abductions, threats, bullying, beatings, and obstruction of their coverage of events. Twenty-one reporters and journalists were killed; most of these martyrs were specifically targeted because of their work. According to the Association, this is the most serious decline in the situation of journalists since 2007 when widespread civil conflict claimed the lives of thousands of citizens, including journalists.
The Association stated that this violence is largely caused by armed militias that operate freely in many areas, regularly threatening journalists with violence and death. The government allows these perpetrators to carry out their attacks with near total impunity. The province of Nineveh was identified by the Association as the most dangerous place in Iraq for journalists to work. Indeed, most journalists there have abandoned their work as a result of the threats and killings.

Even as the government has failed to address the dramatic increase in violence that journalists are experiencing, it has reinstituted laws and practices of the Saddam era that pose tremendous challenges to freedom of the press. Journalists have been detained, arrested and tried. The Association cited more than 700 cases in which members of the press have been brought before the court of “publication and media” regarding “crimes of libel and defamation” based on an Iraqi law of 1969. In addition, new legislation adopted in 2011, the so-called “Rights of Journalists Law”, severely threatens freedom of the press, and with it the transformation to democracy in Iraq. The Association worked for the repeal of this law, and later proposed amendments to the sections of the law that threaten press freedom to the Parliament’s Committee of Culture and Media in September 2013. It also filed a lawsuit in the Federal Court to force the government to revise the law, but until now, the Parliament has not placed discussion of these crucial issues on its agenda.


Jomana Karadsheh and Hamdi Alkhshali (CNN) remind, "On Saturday, U.S. Vice President Joe Biden talked with Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki about U.S. support for Iraq's fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, a group trying to overthrow the Iraqi government. Biden's office said the two leaders agreed on the importance of the Iraqi government's continued outreach to local and tribal leaders in Anbar province." It doesn't matter.  Nouri doesn't give a damn what Joe Biden says.  If US President Barack Obama got on the phone with Nouri and said, "No weapons, no aid, until you start implementing power-sharing and listen to the Sunnis demands"?  That might frighten Nouri enough to start a real dialogue.  Short of that, the assault's continuing.


When this started as December wound down, a State Dept friend assured me Nouri would wrap up the "action" in 7 days "10 tops."

That hasn't happened.

Not only is that threatening to the residents of Anbar, has the White House forgotten that parliamentary elections are supposed to take place April 30th?

In December, you might be able to pretend that there was a time for an assault.  It's now January 20th, closer to the end of the month than the start and April 30th looms.

When is the White House going to get serious?

Or is the plan not to?  Is the plan to just prop Nouri up for a third term?

World Bulletin reports:


Eleven Independent High Electoral Commission chairmen have been dismissed prior to the upcoming parliamentary elections on April 30 in Iraq.
Iraqi Kurdish Regional Administration Independent High Electoral Commission President Ali Qadir who is among the sacked officials was not permitted to make a statement and was barred from his office.

In a press statement Kasim Abdurrezak, a member of the Iraqi Kurdish Regional Administration Independent High Electoral Commission, stated that Qadir has been discharged by the board because he did not perform his duties appropriately and because of corruption allegations.

The IHEC still hasn't posted a statement about this.  But this is not good 'timing.' With an election so close, they're firing people from the Commission?  There's too much work to be done for this nonsense.  Last week, for example, the IHEC issued the following:

The IHEC Chief Electoral Officer (CEO), Mr. Mukdud al Sharify reported on 11 January that the IHEC has agreed with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) to form a joint committee to follow up the upcoming Iraqi Parliamentary elections (IPE) of Iraqis abroad scheduled on 30 April 2014.
Mr. al Sharify said that the IHEC has held a broadened meeting with the delegation of MoFA to develop a general framework for cooperation and coordination to succeed the voting process for the upcoming IPE of Iraqis abroad.
He added that the meeting addressed several issues to facilitate the IHEC's work and to give opportunity for all eligible voters overseas to participate in the upcoming IPE. The recommendations came out to form a joint committee to facilitate the procedures of the IHEC's staff to open the electoral offices in the states where elections to be held, as well as to overcome the obstacles that may face the IHEC's work.
The MoFA delegation expressed their full readiness to provide all the facilities and cooperation to support the IHEC's role to run the elections abroad in 13 countries and four polling centers in other countries, in conjunction with the same date to run the IPE inside Iraq on 30 April 2014.


They have problems with incomplete voter rolls in Kirkuk and they need to include the external refugees in the voting, there's a lot to be done besides the printing of ballots, their distribution, the training of poll workers and security at the poll stations.  April 30th is not in the distant future. As EU High Representative Catherine Ashton observed today,  "April's general elections will be a crucial test for Iraq's democracy, and I hope that the country's political leaders will seize this opportunity to promote dialogue and compromise."

In the only good news, All Iraq News reports, "The Federal Court rejected the nomination of Falah Shanshal as the head of the Justice and Accountability Commission."  No offense to Shanshal, but the longer the Justice and Accountability Commission has no leader, the less chance of them excluding candidates from running in the races.  (In 2010, the Justice and Accountability Commission was used to weed out Nouri's political opponents.)


Finally, last Thursday, Abdullah Salem (Niqash) reported on the targeting of protesters in Mosul:



All eyes have been on Anbar. But a series of assassinations of Sunni Muslim tribal heads and clerics who have been leading demonstrations in Ninawa leads to worrying conclusions. Extremists from both Shiite and Sunni Muslim groups have the common goal of getting rid of this society’s leaders and causing havoc here too.


Earlier this week, assailants broke into the home of the Sunni Muslim cleric Radwan al-Hadidi. Al-Hadidi was one of the leaders of the Sunni Muslim anti-government protests in the area and several days earlier he had made a speech criticising extremist Sunni elements. He told media that it was easier to talk with a wall than it was to talk to Al Qaeda. Yet at the same time al-Hadidi was also firmly opposed to the policies of the Shiite Muslim-led government in Baghdad and had demanded that it be dissolved and that the Iraqi Constitution be re-written.
The men who broke into al-Hadidi’s house murdered him.
This was not an isolated case. Several of the leaders of the demonstrations in this area have been assassinated over the past year. The murders started after demonstrators started to carry guns - and they started to carry guns after the Iraqi army broke up a demonstration in Hawija, near the city of Kirkuk, in late April. In doing so, they killed around 40 demonstrators and injured hundreds of others.
“Rumours started circulating that there were now Shiite Muslim militias killing the protest leaders,” says Abdul-Salam Raouf, a local journalist. “Allegedly they were supported by Iran and they included the likes of the League of Righteous led by Qais Khazali and Hezbollah in Iraq led by Wathiq al-Battat.”
One of the first protest leaders to be murdered was Haitham al-Abadi who was attacked on August 19, 2013. The attack on al-Abad also saw another tribal leader, Ahmad al-Ramawi injured.
Later that month gunmen targeted Barzan al-Badrani, a prominent tribal leader who took part in the protests. He was murdered using a pistol with a silencer in central Mosul.
Another protest leader, Tharwi al-Kourz al-Shammari, was also killed in Mosul, next to his house by unidentified gunmen. Yet another protest leader Thaer Hazem Abed was killed by gunmen in September. 
Then on October 11, cleric Ali al-Shamma was murdered after he finished his Friday sermon in Mosul.
The governor of the province of Ninawa, Sunni Muslim politician, Atheel al-Nujaifi, has his own theories on why the men were assassinated. Al-Nujaifi supports the demonstrations and is also opposed to the current government headed by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. And he believes the protest leaders could have been targeted by one of two groups – either Sunni Muslim extremists affiliated with Al Qaeda, like the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, also known as ISIS, or one of the extremist Shiite Muslim militias like the League of the Righteous.  Neither of these groups likes the Sunni Muslim protestors and they have their own reasons for wanting them dead.



































UK War Crimes (and US and Australia should be added to the docket)

$
0
0

At WSWS, Jean Shaoul reports:
 
Britain has been referred to the International Criminal Court (ICC) at The Hague over allegations of war crimes committed during the occupation of Iraq. There was a call for an ICC investigation under Article 15 of the Rome Statute into the actions of senior British officials during the conflict.
The submission specifically names the former chief of staff General Sir Peter Wall and two ministers in Tony Blair’s Labour government, former defence secretary Geoff Hoon and former defence minister Adam Ingram, as officials who should have to answer claims about the systematic use of torture and cruelty.
The secretary general of the European Centre for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), Wolfgang Kaleck, said, “With the current communication to the ICC we want to move forward the criminal prosecution against those political and military leaders in the UK who bear the most responsibility for systematic torture in Iraq.”
The formal complaint, The Responsibility of UK Officials for War Crimes Involving Systematic Detainee Abuse in Iraq from 2003-2008, was lodged by Public Interest Lawyers (PIL) and the ECCHR with the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor. It says that its 250-page submission, the result of years of work by both organisations, “is the most detailed ever submitted to the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor on war crimes allegedly committed by British forces in Iraq.”
The ECCHR said that given the scope and scale of the crimes carried out between 2003 and 2008, the responsibility and blame lay at the feet of “individuals at the highest levels” of the British Army and political system. UK military commanders “knew or should have known” that forces under their control “were committing or about to commit war crimes,” but failed to act. “Civilian superiors knew or consciously disregarded information at their disposal, which clearly indicated that UK services personnel were committing war crimes in Iraq.”



This is a developing and ongoing story.  Last week, Felicity Arbuthnot (Dissident Voice) reported:



The document, lodged with the International Criminal Court at the Hague on Saturday (11th January 2013), “calls for an investigation into the alleged war crimes, under Article 15 of the Rome Statute” and is the result of some years of work by Birmingham-based Public Interest Lawyers and the European Centre for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR.). The submission “is the most detailed ever submitted to the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor on war crimes allegedly committed by British forces in Iraq.”
In 2006 the ICC opined that “there was a reasonable basis to believe that crimes within the jurisdiction of the court had been committed, namely willful killing and inhuman treatment.” However, since the claims were less than twenty cases, prosecutors declined to mount an investigation.
Subsequently “hundreds of other claims have come to light, prompting consideration of the complaint now. It is the start of a process which could result in British politicians and generals being put in the dock on war-crimes charges.” The “pattern of abusive treatment by UK services personnel in Iraq continued over almost six years of military operations.” When is a crime not a crime, one wonders, when it is “only” in double figures?
Evidence is presented of “systematic use of brutal violence, that at times resulted in the death of detainees, while in the custody of UK Services Personnel.”


A worthy War Crimes Tribunal on Iraq would feature Blair, Bully Boy Bush, John Howard (Australia's prime minister before and at the start of the illegal war), Gordon Brown (who  replaced Blair) and Barack on trial.  And especially, it would feature Nouri al-Maliki on trial for his War Crimes.  The US-installed puppet is a menace to the Iraqi people.  Currently, he's assaulting the residents of Anbar.  Terrorizing them with Hellfire missiles the US provided him with. 

The US needs to stop supplying the tyrant with weapons.

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


Tuesday, January 21, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, one 'analyst' spews hatred at Sunnis while another forgets 2007, US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel meets with Iraq's Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi, Nouri finally arrests a Shi'ite militia leader, the arrested has a cell phone in jail and calls Reuters to threaten Nouri, the assault on Anbar continues, bad news for Nouri in a new Human Rights Watch report and a new UN human rights report, and more.

Talk Radio News reports US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel met in DC with Iraq's Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi:

During the meeting, Hagel provided al-Nujaifi with an update on a U.S. plan to accelerate the delivery of “critical defense equipment” to those Iraqi Security Forces conducting missions in the country’s Anbar Province. In August, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Iraq of a $339 million Mobile Troposcatter Radio System and a $2.4 billion Integrated Air Defense System. The proposed air defense system is expected to provide Iraqi Air Defense Command with situational awareness of the country’s airspace.

The Pentagon issued the following regarding the meeting today:

Release No: NR-041-14
January 21, 2014

Readout of Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel's Meeting with Iraqi Council of Representatives Speaker Osama al-Nujaifi



Pentagon Press Secretary Rear Admiral John Kirby provided the following readout:

Secretary of Defense Hagel met with Iraqi Council of Representatives Speaker Osama al-Nujaifi today at the Pentagon. 
The secretary lauded the Government of Iraq's continued outreach to local Sunni tribal leaders and officials to evict terrorist fighters from Fallujah and other parts of western Iraq. 
Secretary Hagel provided an update on U.S. efforts to accelerate delivery of critical defense equipment to resupply the Iraqi Security Forces conducting missions in Anbar Province.  The secretary also underscored the importance of proceeding with federal Iraqi elections as scheduled, and encouraged the Government of Iraq's efforts to implement local and national political initiatives.  
The secretary concluded the meeting by reaffirming the steadfastness of the U.S-Iraq bilateral relationship and the U.S. commitment to helping the Iraqi government ensure the safety and security of all Iraqi people.


UPI reports, "Iraq was the only member of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries to post a decline in oil production last month, the IEA said Tuesday." Nouri al-Maliki's Iraq stands out -- just never in a good way.  Today the prime minister and chief thug of Iraq wanted to take bows again.  AP notes that Nouri's government issued a declaration, "The justice ministry carried out the executions of 26 (men) convicted of crimes related to terrorism on Sunday." CNN adds, "One of those executed was Adel al-Mashhadani, a militia leader in Baghdad who was "famous for sectarian crimes," the statement said. He was a member of the Awakening, the Sunni tribal fighting force who fought alongside the United States against al Qaeda militants." The announcement of the executions come one day after UNAMI issued their [PDF format warning] latest human rights report on Iraq which included:


16. Declare a moratorium on the use of the death penalty in accordance with UN General Assembly resolutions 62/149 (2007), 63/168 (2008), 65/206 (2010) and 67/176( 2012) ; revie w the criminal code and the criminal procedure code with a view to abolishing the death penalty; and consider acceding to the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR aimed at abolishing the death penalty; 
17. Implement international standards that provide safeg uards of the rights of those facing the death penalty , as set out in the annex to Economic and Social Council resolution 1984/50 of 25 May 1984 , until the death penalty is abolished in Iraq.


Clearly, Nouri's not listening to the United Nations.


Today Human Rights Watch issued World Report 2014 which notes 2012 saw Nouri's government execute at least 129 people while 2013 saw the number increase to 151.  BBC News notes today's executions come after "m the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights for an immediate halt to executions in Iraq. A spokesman for Navi Pillay said in October large-scale killings were 'obscene and inhumane'."


Of course, that's not Nouri's fault.  Not in his mind anyway.  Nothing is never his fault, in his mind.

Dropping back to the January 16th snapshot:

Meanwhile, Iraq's budget has gone to Parliament.  National Iraqi News Agency reports that Kurdish MP Mahmoud Othman calls the forwarding of the budget -- which led the Kurds to walk out of the Cabinet -- "unwise." NINA also notes Kurdish MP Ashwaq al-Jaf notes the Kurds plan to use Constitutional steps in Parliament to address the issue.  Steve LeVine (Quartz) explains:


The Iraqi government has raised the stakes yet again in its brinksmanship with Kurdistan—unable so far to halt the Kurds’s headlong push as an independent oil exporter, Baghdad has prepared a 2014 budget that entirely cuts off the northern region.
Baghdad’s move on Jan. 15 is a response to Kurdish plans to sell their first piped oil at the end of this month at Turkey’s Mediterranean port of Ceyhan, the first stage in an apparent strategy for wholesale economic independence from Iraq proper. With it, Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki raises the temperature not only on the Kurds, but also the foreign oil companies on which Kurdistan is relying—ExxonMobil, Chevron, France’s Total, Gazprom and a group of wildcatters.
Maliki said there will be no restoration of the Kurds’s $12 billion-a-year budget allocation until they produce 400,000 barrels of oil a day—worth about $14.6 billion a year at today’s prices. But the oil companies’ current plans do not yield that scale of production until well into next year. So to stave off economic mayhem this year, the Kurds will be lobbying both Maliki to see reason and the oil companies to up their game. 

UPI notes, "Genel Energy, led by former BP boss Tony Hayward, said Wednesday it expects oil from a pipeline in the Kurdish north of Iraq to be exported from Turkey soon."


Nouri created that crisis.  On Sunday, a Kurdish delegation had to go to Baghdad. Aswat al-Iraq reported they were there to discuss the budget and the oil issue.  On the same day,Aswat al-Iraq quoted KRG President Massoud Barzani stating, "Kurds will not recede any of their rights any form." Rudaw reported:

Meetings led by Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani in Baghdad to resolve oil and budget rows ended inconclusively on Sunday, with a decision to continue the talks at a later date.
Following the closed-door meetings, Maliki softened his stance over threats to cut off the Kurdistan Region from the federal budget, unless there was agreement over revenues from the oil exports to Turkey.
"I have not said I would cut the KRG's share of the budget. I said there should be a language of understanding to solve the issues between Baghdad and Erbil," Maliki told Rudaw.

It wasn't, you understand, Nouri's fault.  It's his Cabinet, most Sunnis (all but Saleh al-Mutlaq) long ago began boycotting sessions.  He controls the Cabinet, he controls what gets forwarded to Parliament but it wasn't his fault.

It was some Phantom head of the Cabinet -- a head of it that no one knew existed or had ever heard of.

A sure sign of a failure in a leader is someone who can't admit mistakes and has to pretend he or she is perfect.

And Nouri is so far from perfect.  Rudaw reports on the conclusions of the British All Parliamentary Group:

The cat and mouse game between Erbil and Baghdad is as old as Iraq itself. The APPG agrees with Kurdish leaders that Baghdad should nurture and celebrate the social and economic achievements of the Region and see it as the future for the whole country. It seems possible that the autonomous region and the federal government can negotiate a revenue sharing law that accompanies the new pipelines between the Kurdistan Region and Turkey.
The rapprochement with Turkey has concerned some in Baghdad and in America who fear that economic independence will become political independence and that Iraq will disintegrate. Members of the APPG accept that a unified Iraq should work for all its component parts through what President Barzani described to us as "partnership and power-sharing."
The Kurds told the APPG that the current revenue-sharing agreement should give them 17% of the national budget but that they usually receive about 10% and not consistently. The crucial need is for a robust and reliable revenue-sharing law.


But Nouri will always have fools and tools who applaud him.  Jamie Tarabay has an idiotic article at Al Jazeera America entitled "Will daily bombings bring Iraq to a new tipping point?" I'm sorry, when did daily bombs not take place.  What world is Taraby living in where daily bombings are something recent to Iraq?  She writes like someone seeking a fatwa and if that seems harsh, read this 2013 piece by Tarabay -- especially this section:

De-Baathification, adopted in 2003 to weed out Saddam Hussein-era officials from positions of power, is still law. It has been employed by the Maliki government to isolate, arrest or oust political threats and opponents.
The security forces remain under the thumb of Shia politicians, including those from Maliki’s Dawa party, but also members of the Badr brigade — the former military wing of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, which ran against Maliki's Dawa Party in the last parliamentary election, in 2010. Despite repeated appeals by the U.S. to bring more Sunnis into the ranks, the Interior Ministry, which controls the country's security forces, remains a Shia bastion. Sunnis guarding the few remaining Sunni enclaves in Baghdad in makeshift units called the Sons of Iraq continue to be shut out of joining.
Maliki wants the U.S. to provide Iraq with Apache attack helicopters and drones and recently purchased Korean fighter jets. His critics claim he intends to use them against their communities.


That's just last month.  Now read her crap today, her anti-Sunni screed -- "long-suffering Shia majority,""many Sunnis consider them [Shi'ites] to be heretics and apostates,""narrative reinforces the calls by Shia religious leaders for calm and fortitude, but the goal of the Al-Qaeda elements is to provoke the Shia to abandon such restraint and plunge" and it just goes on and on. She calls the Sunnis everything but dogs and largely conflates all Sunnis as fighters and/or al Qaeda.  I don't understand how such hateful and ignorant writing can be produced to begin with.  But it's especially shocking when compared to her past articles -- recent, like last month, or her work at NPR (or AP before that) -- which had balance and didn't spew hate towards any sect.

As she vents her hate and stupidity, let's return to Human Rights Watch's new report World Report 2014 to note some reality:

The government responded to largely peaceful demonstrations with violence and to worsening security with draconian counterterrorism measures.  Borders controlled by Iraq's central government remained closed to Syrians fleeing civil war, while as of November, nearly 206,600 Syrians fled to the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG)-controlled area.  
In December 2012, thousands of Iraqis took part in demonstrations in mostly Sunni areas, demanding reform of the Anti-Terrorism Law and the release of illegaly held detainees. Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki announced in January 2013 that he had created special committees to oversee reforms, including freeing prisoners and limiting courts' use of secret informant testimony.  At time of writing, there was little indication that the government had implemented reforms.  Security forces instead used violence against protesters, culminating in an attack on a demonstration in Hawija in April, which killed 51 protesters.  Authorities failed to hold anyone accountable.  
The government responded to increasing unrest with mass arrest campaigns in Sunni regions, targeting ordinary civilians and prominent activists and politicians under the 2005 Anti-Terrorism Law.  Security forces and government supporters harassed journalists and media organizations critical of the authorities.  
Iraq's security forces abused detainees with impunity.  Throughout the year, detainees reported prolonged detentions without a judicial hearing and torture during interrogation.  In February, Deputy Prime Minister Hussein al-Shahristani told Human Rights Watch that security forces frequently carred out mass arrests without arrest warrants.  Courts continued to rely on secret informant testimony and coerced confessions to issue arrest warrants and convictions.  On May 11, villagers south of Mosul found the bodies of four men and a 15-year-old boy, which bore multiple gun shot wounds.  Witnesses had last seen them alive on May 3 in the custody of the federal police 3rd Division, but at time of writing, the government had not announced any investigation into the deaths.


Jamie Tarabay seems to have missed or forgotten all of that.  She and Kirk Sowell both need to hop on a pair of ponies.  As Cass Elliot, Denny Doherty, John and Michelle Phillips (the Mamas and the Papas) sing in "Too Late" (first appears on The Papas & the Mamas):

Get on your pony and ride
Get on your pony and ride
No one to catch up to you
If you try.
Get on your pony and ride
Get on your pony and ride
No one to catch up to you
If you try.
No one to catch up to you,
If you try -- 'cause I've tried.

'Cause when the mind that once was open shuts
And you knock on the door, nobody answers anymore
When the love and trust has turned to dust
When the mind that once was open shuts
When you knock on the door, nobody answers anymore
When the love and trust has turned to dust




Sunday, Kirk H. Sowell (Foreign Policy) tries his hand at analysis and he got this part right:

He [Nouri] wished Christians a Merry Christmas, extended to "all Muslims, who believe in Jesus the Messiah, messenger of humanity and peace." Holiday greetings out of the way, the prime minister moved on to what he really wanted to address. He spoke of ongoing counter-terrorist operations, and the need for tribal support. Maliki then talked about "what is referred to as the ‘sit-in protest,' which has become a base for the leaders of al Qaeda," repeating the phrase twice. This was a reference to the protest site near Ramadi, the symbolic center of the mainstream Sunni protest movement countrywide.
Maliki went on, saying "this we know because they have openly appeared on the podium, declaring we are al Qaeda, and we cut off heads. They have openly raised the banner of al Qaeda at the podium, and soon we will air the confessions" of terrorists admitting they are based at the site. "Our intelligence from aerial and human sources inside the site, confirm the presence of both Iraqi and foreign al Qaeda leaders. The provincial government has also confirmed that there are 36 al Qaeda leaders based there. So now there is a popular demand that the site be shut down."
With national elections set for April, Maliki's Christmas speech, a show trial-like airing of "confessions" by detainees on state television, and a wide-ranging media campaign in the days that followed were part of an effort to tie Ramadi protests to al Qaeda. The case was largely wrong, and to an extent made in bad faith. This and the December 30, 2013 bulldozing of the Ramadi encampment were among several actions that led to the total breakdown in security in Anbar province at year's end and exacerbated the security crisis there.


He was less sturdy on other points -- such as this:

The movement never had a serious chance of achieving its stated goals. It stated its demands absolutely, and was too sweeping, demanding a total abolition of de-Baathification and repeal of the death penalty for terrorism, which no Shiite prime minister would accept. 


de-Ba'athification is something no Shi'ite prime minister would accept?

I'm confused how he can argue "no Shi'ite prime minister would accept" that.  Did he do a survey of potential Shi'ite prime ministers?

I find it hard to believe Sowell did that.  I find it even harder to believe that Sowell's never seen this:

Reversal of de-Baathification laws. The Iraqi parliament passed the Justice and Accountability Law on January 12, 2008, clearing the way for an estimated thirty-thousand low-ranking ex-Baathists to return to public life. The law also allowed some party members to collect pensions. But some Sunnis argue the law has made matters worse for them by opening the door to federal prosecution, barring top-ranking officials from regaining jobs, and restricting former Saddam security forces from reintegration. The drive to rescind de-Baathification laws was part of a larger effort to make constitutional concessions to minority groups like Sunni Arabs.


That's what the Sunni protesters have been calling for since the ongoing protests kicked off on December 21st -- they've been calling for more than that, but with regards to de-Ba'athification, that's what they're calling for.


No Shi'ite prime minister would agree to that?

Is Nouri al-Maliki no longer Shi'ite and/or no longer prime minister?

He was prime minister in 2007 and he agreed to the quoted passage above which is part of the White House benchmarks.  Background, Democrats swept the 2006 mid-term elections in the US.  Prior to the elections, they controlled no house of Congress.  They promised if voters would put them in charge of one house of Congress, they'd end the Iraq War.  The voters did better than that, they voted them in charge of both houses of Congress.  As the new Congress was sworn in back in January of 2007, Bully Boy Bush knew he had to make immediate changes.  Gone was Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld (Robert Gates replaced him in January of 2007) and a series of White House benchmarks was created to demonstrate success -- in order to continue Congressional funding.

The Council on Foreign Relations has the benchmarks here.  Nouri agreed to these benchmarks.  It's a failure on the part of the Obama administration that they've given billions to Iraq (and continue to) and tons of weapons and have not demanded that Nouri implement these benchmarks he agreed to and signed off on.

In June of 2007, Fred Kaplan noted at Slate:

At his press conference this morning, President Bush, seeing the glass half full, pronounced the report "a cause for optimism"—and for staying on course.
Yet a close look at the 25-page report reveals a far more dismal picture and a deliberately distorted assessment. The eight instances of "satisfactory" progress are not at all satisfactory by any reasonable measure—or, in some cases, they indicate a purely procedural advance. The eight "unsatisfactory" categories concern the central issues of Iraqi politics—the disputes that must be resolved if Iraq is to be a viable state and if the U.S. mission is to have the slightest chance of success.
Here are the benchmarks at which, even the White House acknowledges, the Iraqi government has not made satisfactory progress:

  • Legislation on de-Baathification reform
  • Legislation to ensure equitable distribution of oil revenue without regard to sect or ethnicity
  • Setting up provincial elections
  • Establishing a strong militia-disarmament program
  • Allowing Iraqi commanders to pursue militias without political interference
  • Ensuring that the Iraqi army and police enforce the law evenhandedly
  • Increasing the number of Iraqi security forces capable of operating independently (here, the number has actually gone down)
  • Ensuring that Iraq's political authorities are not undermining or making false accusations against members of Iraqi security forces

The status of former Baathists, distribution of oil revenue, local elections, disarming militias, sectarianism within the police, the legitimacy of the national army—these are the main issues grinding the parliament to a standstill, aggravating ethnic conflict, and forcing millions of Iraqis to flee the country. These are the issues that the Iraqi political leaders are supposed to be resolving while American troops fight and die to make Baghdad secure.


Sowell claims no Shi'ite prime minister would ever agree to what . . . Nouri al-Maliki promised he'd do in 2007.

When you realize that even the Bully Boy Bush administration knew de-Ba'athifcation -- which they started -- had to end for Iraq to come together as a country, the demand of the protesters -- for the same thing -- becomes much less 'out there' than Sowell attempted to play it in his Sunday episode.

Monday last week, United Nations Security-General Ban Ki-moon visit Baghdad.  Yesterday, the United Nations News Centre reported:


Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today called on Iraq’s political leaders to enter inclusive talks in the face of rising conflict and warned that failure to make progress in Israeli-Palestinian peace talks could spark a new outbreak of violence.
“Today, I reiterate my message to Iraqi political leaders to fulfil their responsibilities to ensure inclusive dialogue, social cohesion, and concrete political progress,” he told the United Nations Security Council at the start of the body’s regular debate on the situation in the Middle East following his return from a visit to the region.
“The country is again facing serious threats to its stability,” he said. Mr. Ban, who visited Iraq ahead of a stop in Kuwait were he chaired a humanitarian donors’ conference for Syria, which generated some $2.4 billion in pledges, said he discussed his concerns with many Iraqi leaders and urged all sides to remain committed to political dialogue and uphold respect for the rule of law and human rights.
“I was reassured by their pledge to hold parliamentary elections as scheduled on 30 April,” he added. “Today, I reiterate my message to Iraqi political leaders to fulfil their responsibilities to ensure inclusive dialogue, social cohesion, and concrete political progress.”


The assault on Anbar continues.  Kareem Fahim and Yasir Ghazi (New York Times) report, "Thousands of residents have fled Falluja in recent days, fearing worsening violence after the failure of negotiations between local leaders and jihadist militants to end a standoff that has lasted weeks, leaders from the city said Monday."AFP reports 22,000 families have been forced to flee their homes due to the Anbar operations and they note, "The UN said the actual figure was likely to be higher, as not all those who fled had registered. It said of those who had left, most had found refuge elsewhere in Anbar, but some had gone as far afield as the northern Kurdish region."  UPI adds, "Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is having a tough time trying to dislodge al-Qaida forces who hold much of the western cities of Fallujah and Ramadi because his army doesn't seem to be up to the task, despite emergency shipments of U.S. arms."

NINA reports today:


Security source announced on Tuesday the continuation of the displacement of hundreds of families in several neighborhoods of Fallujah as a result of the shelling of the city by the army.
A security source in Anbar, told / NINA / that hundreds of families fled the city of Fallujah, because of the artillery intense shelling that led to the killing and wounding of many civilians. 


And they note that among the Falluja shelling targets today was a school.  Steve Inskeep (NPR's Morning Edition -- link is audio and text) spoke with AFP's Prashant Rao this morning about the violence.


RAO: In terms of how the government is responding though, it varies depending on the area. In Baghdad, they have locked out a lot of areas. They've sort of increased checkpoints and they've sort of tighten those checkpoints. But in Anbar, the response have been a combination of the deploying of U.S.- supplied Hellfire missiles and also clashes in some towns in between Ramadi and Fallujah, where the Iraqi army and Iraqi police, allied tribal fighters are all looking to take back territory that the government lost about three weeks ago.


INSKEEP: Let's remember here Anbar. Of course, that's the Sunni-dominated province west of Baghdad. You're saying that's where some of the heaviest fighting is taking place. So is this sectarian violence Sunni versus Shia?



RAO: Well, it might be slightly over-generalizing it to say it's sectarian. But there is a perception of sectarianism, in that the Iraqis security forces are perceived in Sunni areas to be a Shia force, especially some of the more elite fighting units. And, of course, Anbar, as you say, is a predominantly Sunni province - so it takes on that color. That is certainly part of the perception.



Some of today's violence?   National Iraqi News Agency reports security forces killed 6 fighters in Ramadi,  3 police members were shot dead in Mosul, Sheikh Ismail Brayse ("director of Information of the Sunni Endomen in the province of Diyala" and "Iman of Abuk Bakr mosque") was shot dead in Diyala Province,  a southeast Baghdad (Diyala Bridge area) sticky bombing left 1 person dead and another injured,  1 person was shot dead and another left injured in a southwest Baghdad (Bayaa area) attack, a Mosul attack left "a member of Nineveh intelligence" dead and two more injured, a central Baghdad car bombing (Alnahdhah area) left eleven people injured, 2 police officers were shot dead at a Mosul wedding ceremony, and Mahmoud al-Issawi ("adviser of Anbar governor for security affairs") was kidnapped to the "east of Fallujah today."

Suadad al-Salhy (Reuters) reports Nouri finally arrested a Shi'ite militia leader and he's from Iran.  Strange, the show confessions last Friday were about Saudi Arabia -- the country Nouri denounced on Sunday.  Again, this one is Shi'ite and he's from Iran.  And he got a cellphone and jail and dialed Reuters:

A Shi’ite militia leader arrested in Iraq as said leaders of Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki’s political bloc will be killed unless he is released within 24 hours.
Wathiq Al-Battat, speaking to Reuters on a mobile phone he said had been given him by a sympathetic prison guard, said he was being held without charge in solitary confinement in a small, cold cell, with no access to lawyers or his family.
Battat was detained in Baghdad on Jan. 2, six weeks after his Iranian-backed Al-Mukhtar Army fired six mortar bombs from southern Iraq into a neighboring country, causing no casualties.



Yesterday's snapshot noted the attempted citizen's arrest of War Criminal and former UK Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.  George Monbiot (Guardian) explains today:

Nothing changes without talk; nothing changes through talk alone. Petitions and debates and social media campaigns and even, sometimes, articles in newspapers are essential campaigning tools but, without action, they seldom amount to anything but catharsis. Without risk, there is no inspiration. Without demonstrations of what change looks like, the public imagination fails.
This is why I set up the Arrest Blair website. Everywhere I went, I met people who were furious that Tony Blair should have got away with what, under international law, appears to be clearly defined as mass murder. The crime of aggression ("planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression) was described by the Nuremberg Tribunal as "the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole".
[. . .]
Arrest Blair collects donations and uses them to build a bounty pot. We pay out a quarter of the money that's in the pot when a successful claim is made. Four people have received the bounty so far, in each case amid a blaze of publicity for an issue that is otherwise largely forgotten.
Twiggy Garcia's attempt last Friday was performed with a certain panache. While Garcia held his shoulder, Blair attempted his long-polished trick of changing the subject: "Shouldn't you be worried about Syria?" Garcia responded that he could "only address things that are within my grasp at any one time". It'll take a day or two to formalise the decision, but his claim seems to meet the criteria.
Once more, what Blair did in Iraq is in the news, 11 years after the event, and the clamour to ensure that such crimes become unthinkable in future has risen again. That is a small but significant contribution to peace.









cnn







 




MSNBC's propaganda

$
0
0
Bruce A. Dixon (Black Agenda Report) offers a critique of MSNBC which opens:

Why are some stories “news” and not others? Why will New Jersey governor Chris Christie's antics make the top of MSNBC news broadcasts for weeks to come, while the poisoning of 300,000 people by corporate greed and government abandonment on a scale not seen since Katrina dips below the radar as soon as corrupt officials declare there's nothing to see here, nothing at all? Why do Chris Christie's follies get more air time than drone murders, the revocation of network neutrality,
The answer is that some news stories make it easy to poke fun at racist, homophobic Republicans... the venal Chris Christies, the militantly ignorant Sarah Palins, and Michelle Bachmans, the craven Eric Cantors of the world, while others point inconveniently at the systemic evils of capitalism for which gender and ethnically diverse liberal Democrats are just as eager to front as Republicans.
The death toll for government abandonment of people in West Virginia isn't nearly as high as that in Katrina, partly because pollutants and carcinogens kill and cripple slowly, but the principle is the same. Like New Orleans residents left to get out of town the best way they could, West Virginians were left to their own devices to do what their government was supposed to do for them – to figure out where, when, whether and how badly corporations were poisoning them. Nobody in government on any level lifted a finger to protect those people till hundreds of households simultaneously complained to local officials that their tap water stank of hydrocarbons. When government officials finally swung into action, they still held back full accounts of which chemicals they detected, in an apparent effort to safeguard the rights of “customers” as EPA likes to call the corporations it supposedly regulates.
The problem is that Democrats run West Virginia from top to bottom. Like Katrina, the evil forces on display in West Virginia implicate the core system of capitalism itself, not just the table manners of one out of the two capitalist parties. That makes the mass poisoning of West Virginia barely newsworthy, whether the carrier is Fox News, or CNN or MSNBC. All the news and cable networks, just like both the capitalist parties have to drink from that trough.


And that is so true.

MSNBC is nothing but Fox -- though Fox will allow outside opinions to be expressed -- so that the hosts can then scream and rage against them.  But Fox exists to get people to vote Republican and MSNBC exists to get people to vote Democrat.

It's not about news.

So little is about news these days.

MSNBC is not the answer and never was going to be.

C.I.'s pointed that out many times and, often, when she does, I'm reminded of Barbra Streisand's character in Up The Sandbox confronting a character who is supposed to be like Fidel Castro and telling him that, no, the answer is not for American women to become more like them, it's for American women to become more like themselves.

And that really is true.

When we red-rover-red-rover-let-David-Brock-come-over at the end of the 90s, that was not a miracle time. We treated it as such because we wanted to pick his brains to learn how to do GOP dirty tricks.  And we tried to become like them.

Big mistake.

In the early 90s, if we had had MSNBC or Air America Radio, I like to think we would have used them to get the truthout, to awaken the people.

But I also think we probably would have screwed that up to.

MSNBC is nothing but a propaganda outlet.  I have as little use for it as I do Fox News.



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


Wednesday, June 22, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, Nouri's assault on Anbar continues, more families are displaced in Anbar, the use of collective punishment, we look at the silence on Anbar, we note how Alice Walker managed to leave the Cult of St. Barack and regain her voice, and more.



Nouri al-Maliki, prime minister and chief thug of Iraq, continues his assault on Anbar Province.  And where are the people around the world objecting?  Falluja's electrical grid has been destroyed (by the Iraqi military), this week has seen a school bombed (by the Iraqi military),  Iraq Times notes that Nouri's assault on Anbar has displaced over 22,000 families.

And this is treated as a misfortune and how sad but . . . No, not a misfortune.  The Anbar residents are victims of War Crimes.  Monday, Aswat al-Iraq quoted MP Mohammed Iqbal Omar (he's with Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi's Mutahidoun bloc) noting the military was responsible for the deaths, that the mission remains "vague" and he called for this "tragic" assualt to cease and for a political solution to be worked out.

Applause to him.  But I'm not talking about Iraqis right now.  I'm not talking about the cowardly and cowed press (I'm sorry AFP but when you had journalist arrested just months ago, you should have made a news report and not buried it -- you risk your own lives and everyone else's when you respond to Nouri's thuggery with silence). I'm not talking about the disappointing and lying US government.

I'm talking about the people of this world.  This site started in November 2004.  The second assault of Falluja began shortly after.  We called it out.  Like we call out this one.

But in 2004, we weren't the only ones calling out the terrorizing of the Iraqi people.

Where are those voices today?

Leslie Cagan, was United for Peace and Justice nothing but an ego trip for you?  Noam Chosky, you know this is wrong and you've given one trivial and useless interview after another in recent weeks but never stopped to call out what's happening in Anbar.  CODEPINK, I call you "CODESTINK" and you get mad and your itty bitty feelings are all hurt.  You tell me repeatedly when Medea Benjamin embarrasses herself and your organization that I'm "not being helpful" when I note it here.  I'm sorry, when are you helpful?  My role is the role of the critic.  It is clearly defined and I serve that purpose.  Your role is supposedly advocating for peace.  How do you do that when Medea rails against The Drone War but can't call out the person who oversees and continues it?  (That would be US President Barack Obama.)

Without Iraq, CODEPINK would never have been a media event.  They were a momentary joke with their FCC actions before the start of the illegal war.  It was about self-interest for them, their little media stunts.  That's how most people saw it, a bunch of bored people dressing in pink for attention.  And CODEPINK realized that which is why they basically dropped domestic issues.  (Illegal spying, et al, has to have an international aspect to appeal to CODEPINK today.)  They'd be nothing today without Iraq.  Protesting it gave them meaning, gave them stature, made them appear to be a serious organization.

Yet today they can't mention Iraq.  They refused to note it when, in the fall of 2012, Tim Aragno (New York Times) reported that Barack had sent "a unit of Army Special Operations soldiers [. . .] to Iraq to advise on contuerterrorism and help with intelligence." That was shameful and disgusting but it was on the eve of the 2012 presidential elections and CODEPINK are Cult of St. Barack.  That's why they never 'bird-dogged' then-Senator Barack Obama in their faux action.  It's why co-founder Jodie Evans was a bundler for Barack's 2008 campaign -- a detail she should have made public by CODEPINK in 2007.  They just finished two days of 'action' in Switzerland but couldn't stand up for the Iraqi people.

Cult of St. Barack is not fatal.  You can shake it and re-emerge as someone committed to peace.  March 9th of last year, Lyse Doucet (Newshour, BBC World Service) interviewed Alice Walker.  Excerpt.

Alice Walker: And you know, he charmed me, he held out this wonderful vision of a different way.  But we cannot have the different with with the same people and the same programs and the same destructiveness.  It's impossible. So I smile at my naivete in a way but I love it too.  I love that I have such a youthful hopefulness about the possibility of change. 

Lyse Doucet:  Well you wrote a letter to Obama when he came to power and you gave him some advice about how to work with the enemy.  And, of course, it was about that time that he got his Nobel Peace Prize.  Did he listen --

Alice Walker:  No.

Lyse Doucet:  -- to you advice?

Alice Walker:  No.  No.  I don't think he listens, really, to people like me.  I don't think he is the kind of person who pays that much attention to the masses actually.  I say that because I have a friend who actually ended up as part of his team but was soon kicked out because he was probably too truthful and too radical.  And one of the things he came back to tell us was that in the inner circle in the White House they don't think that they get into positions of power because people, you know, masses of people protest and demonstrate and, you know, vote.  They think they get there because people pay a lot of money to get them there. And so that's who they listen to. So, I think we've been, you know, naive in our desperate desire to have leadership that will change things.

Lyse Doucet:  But now he has several more years.  Do you have any hope that in his second term he could pursue the kind of changes that you and others like you believe should happen?

Alice Walker:  I don't think he's powerful enough.  I don't think one person can do all of that and I also think that he's more like a CEO rather than like the person who actually has the power to make decisions that will change things very much. 

Lyse Doucet:  Do you see him as someone who came to change the system and then the system changed him?

Alice Walker:  I don't know if he actually came into power to change the system.  He said he was going to make changes but I think he listens much more to bankers and to people that are not us, not the masses of the people and the poets.  And I must say, I think it's fatal not to listen to women, children and poets.  

Lyse Doucet:  He seems -- He says he listens to poets, poets like you, poets like Maya Angelou, he invites them to his great moments.

Alice Walker:  Well he invites them.  He doesn't invite me.  I have never been invited.  And I understand why he would think twice about doing that because I probably wouldn't go because I see the use of drone warfare as criminal and so I think it is a criminal act.  I think that the presidents before him were criminals.  And I think that they've made war on-on humanity and on the planet and they should be actually brought to justice for these things.

Lyse Doucet:  You may remember that ten years ago this week, you were arrested outside the White House where you were protesting against the war in Iraq.  And yet at that moment, you and Barack Obama, before he came to power, agreed more or less on the war in Iraq.

Alice Walker:  Well he said he was on our side but he didn't stop the war.  And even though they have withdrawn some troops, there are still tons of Americans there and their job now seems to be what the plan was all along which was to administer the oil fields.  And I came from people in the south who struggled very hard for decency and goodness and who believed in justice and who worked very hard to change an evil system of apartheid in the United States so there's no way that I can feel that this is good and what he, as the head of this country, seems to be about. 


Alice Walker survived the Cult of St. Barack and re-emerged with her own voice intact.  Others could do the same if they so desired.

In the interview, Alice notes, "We cannot sanction the destruction of people anywhere."

And she's right.  So why are so many today silent as Anbar is terrorized?

This is not about justice or even about terrorism.

The Boston Marathon Bombing took place April 15, 2013.  The US government didn't respond by shelling Cambridge and bombing Watertown.  Since when do you respond to act of crime by sending in the military to attack the people and their homes, schools, cities and towns?

You don't do that.

A good leader, as opposed despot like Nouri, does everything he or she can to ensure the safety of the people.  But Nouri is not a legitimate leader.  First the Bully Boy Bush administration insisted he be made prime minister in 2006 and then, despite the votes of the Iraqi people, the Barack Obama administration insisted that he have a second term in 2010.

Mustafa al-Kadhimi (Al-Monitor) speaks with Shi'ite politician Adil Abdul-Mahdi who was Vice President of Iraq.  In 2006, he and Tareq al-Hashemi were Iraq's two vice presidents; in 2010 he and al-Hashemi were again named Vice Presidents and, in 2011, Khondair al-Khozaei was named a third vice president, weeks later Abdul-Mahdi resigned his post in protest of the ongoing corruption and other issues.  He is a member of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (led by Ammar al-Hakim) and he has often been mentioned as potential prime minister -- most often in 2005 and 2006.

Al-Monitor:  What is a decision taken by Maliki that you wished he had not taken or thought it wiser that he postponed taking?


Abdul-Mahdi:  His candidacy for a second term. I hoped that the principles of power rotation be better promoted, particularly considering that Mr. Maliki and the State of Law Coalition failed to receive the preponderance of votes and never had a parliamentary majority, even after they formed an alliance with the Supreme Council, the Sadrist movement and the remaining National Coalition forces that formed the National Alliance. He did not garner the majority of votes until after the Kurdistan Alliance and the Iraqiya bloc endorsed him following long months of complications and secret deals that were detrimental to him and the state during his second term, causing it to become more complex than it was during the first term. For, to rule during his second term, he had to disrupt the legislative and oversight role played by parliament. … And he reneged on the Erbil Agreement, leading to a period of complex conflicts that even reached the ranks of the National Alliance. The country then entered a period when it was ruled through a cult of personality, militarization, a system of quotas and the manufacture of new crises without solving older ones first. … The post and office cannot be of utmost importance. If each of us always claimed that others were wrong and we were always right, and never realized that right and wrong are subjective and not an objective reality, we would disrupt any possibility for change and the opportunity to discover the potential of others. This makes the battle for the premiership a complex one, akin to facing a military coup every time [elections are held]. … But in fact, it is a natural and simple process predicated on the majority that will be formed in parliament. In his capacity as a leader who gained his mandate and legitimacy through free and direct elections, I would have hoped that Mr. Maliki would have become a role model in this regard. Doing so would not have only benefited the country, it would have also been beneficial for his legacy, in accordance with the popular saying that states, “Look at the actions of others and realize how good mine are.” The halo of quarrelsome personalities and leaders would thus fade, to be replaced by agendas and actions, the goodness and usefulness of which could be clearly seen by the people, who would fight to maintain them through democratic means.


He's an artificial 'leader.' He was never chosen by the people.  He remains an illegitimate leader and illegitimate leaders will always use violence against the people to maintain a hold on power.

A real leader would have listened.  A real leader would have honored power-sharing agreements (like The Erbil Agreement).  A real leader would have listened to the protesters in 2011 instead of lying that if they'd leave the streets, he'd end corruption in 100 days!  He didn't end it.  He doesn't even care about it anymore.  The protests started back up December 21, 2012 and they continue.

He doesn't want to meet the protesters demands.  He doesn't want to inspire or lead.  He just wants to destroy.

Abdulaziz al-Mahmoud (Peninsula) explains:


After about a year of peaceful protests in Al Anbar province, the Prime Minister of Iraq, Nouri Al Maliki, has sent army troops to end the sit-in by force.
The troops, as always, were holding sectarian flags and shouting chants of revenge for Al Hussein ibn Ali’s death by Yazid bin Muawiya and his allies, so they killed, burned and captured a large number of people.
Consequently, as an already known spontaneous reaction, residents of Al Anbar wielded weapons to defend their lives, homes and dignity. As a result, Iran immediately declared that it supported Al Maliki in his war against terrorism and that it was ready to send him necessary support.
The US declared the same thing; it even rushed weapons Al Maliki had asked for. The United Nations Security Council, the UN Secretary-General and the Arab League adopted the same stance.
What is this nonsense?
Is it possible that all these parties do not know that Sunnis in Iraq are suffering under a savage and sectarian regime, which works its fingers to the bone to humiliate, marginalise, displace, impoverish and exclude them, using every villainous way created by a sadistic and ruthless mind? Has Iran begun reaping the fruits of its long stand-off with the US?


And the office of the European Union's Struan Stevenson issued the following:

“Iraq is plummeting rapidly towards civil war and genocide,” according to a senior EU lawmaker Struan Stevenson, a Conservative Euro MP from Scotland who chairs the European Parliament’s important Delegation for Relations with Iraq. Stevenson says that an onslaught against supposed Al Qaeda terrorists in 6 Iraqi Provinces is no more than a cover for the “annihilation of Sunnis opposed to the increasingly sectarian Shia policies of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.”

Speaking from Scotland Struan Stevenson said:


“When I visited Iraq in November I met with many of the leading Sunnis who had organised protests and demonstrations against Maliki in Anbar and Kirkuk and other Sunni Provinces. I also met with the Grand Mufti, one of only 2 religious leaders of the Sunnis in Iraq. All of them told me in detail how they were under constant attack by Maliki’s forces and how often these forces would be infiltrated by highly-trained assassins from Iran, who could be identified easily because they spoke Farsi rather than Arabic. They told me how thousands of Sunnis have been killed in these attacks and how Sunni Imams and mosques were being ruthlessly targeted.
“Maliki’s determined efforts to eradicate all leading Sunnis from the Iraqi government, including trumped-up charges of terrorism against the leading humanitarian, Vice President of Iraq Tariq al-Hashemi, has led to an upsurge of protests which have continued for more almost two years. The last straw was the violent arrest of the senior Sunni MP and Chair of the Iraqi Parliament’s Economics committee – Dr Ahmad Alwani – on 28th December, when an assault force of 50 armoured vehicles, helicopter gunships and hundreds of heavily armed troops massacred 9 members of his family and arrested him and over 150 of his staff on baseless charges of terrorism. Dr Alwani has been a key critic of Maliki and of Iranian meddling in Iraq.
“Just as I was told in November, Maliki’s ploy, aided and abetted by the mullahs in Iran, is to label all of the Sunnis as terrorists, claiming that they are active members of Al Qaeda. In fact I have been assured that there are no foreigners involved in the uprisings in the 6 SunniProvinces. Although some Al Qaeda jihadists had infiltrated Ramadi in al-Anbar Province, near the Syrian border, they were quickly driven out by the locals. The people who have now taken up arms against Maliki’s forces are ordinary Iraqi citizens, forced to defend themselves against a ruthless dictator. Shamefully, the Obama administration has fallen for this ploy and supplied Maliki with, 75 Hellfire air-to-ground missiles which are now raining down on his own people in Ramadi and other Sunni cities. 10 reconnaissance drones are expected to follow in March, with a further 48 drones and the first of a batch of F-16 fighter jets later in the year.
“The Americans seem unable to accept the fact that their blundering intervention in Iraq has so far led to over 1 million Iraqi deaths, changed that oil-rich nation into a virtual basket-case and simply replaced the brutal Saddam Hussein with another corrupt and bloody dictator in Nouri al-Maliki. Providing him with US arms to wage outright war on the Sunni minority in Iraq, as the Iranian mullahs cheer from the side-lines, will solve nothing and will certainly lead to civil conflict. The only solution is to remove Maliki from office and replace him with a non-sectarian government of all the people, which respects freedom, democracy, human rights, women’s rights and the rule of law and stops the growing interference from Tehran. Even senior Shias whom I met in Iraq have voiced their concern over Maliki’s malign regime.
For the Americans to hide behind Maliki’s lies and fabrications that Al Qaeda terrorists have taken over Ramadi and Fallujah and other Sunni cities will pave the way to the genocide of Iraq’s Sunni population.”
On behalf of Mr Struan Stevenson MEP


Where are the Americans speaking out for the residents of Anbar?  

John Feffer writes another ridiculous piece (click here for Foreign Policy In Focus -- we're not linking to The Nation).  He never condemns the assault on Anbar.  This is a heavily populated province and Nouri's launching US-provided Hellfire missiles, it's bombing cities and towns, it's launching mortar attacks on cities and towns, it's prevented aid from reaching the province and so much more.  Feffer manages to mention Anbar -- but only in relation to 'al Qaeda.'

The reason that so many on the pathetic left could not call out the assault on Afghanistan was because toss out the words 'al Qaeda' and suddenly they lose their spine.  But the attack on Afghanistan destroyed lives -- and continues to do so.

If 10% of the population of Anbar was established to be al Qaead or al Qaeda linked, that still wouldn't justify the attacks.  There is no justification.  There is never a justification for collective punishment which is why it's classified as a War Crime.

The Latin American Herald Tribune reports, "Security forces killed more than 60 suspected terrorists in a 24-hour period, Iraqi authorities said Wednesday." Suspected terrorists?  Well, the killers never tell the truth, do they?  Look at all of Barack Obama's claims that his Drone War only kills 'terrorists.'

Feffer writes another ignorant and ill-informed commentary.  At one point, he writes:

“From 2006 to 2008, tribesmen were able to beat Al Qaeda with the cooperation of American forces and the support of the Iraqi government,” Sunni politician Osama al-Nujaifi toldThe New York Times. “After gaining victory over Al Qaeda, those tribesmen were rewarded with the cutting of their salaries, with assassination and displacement.” Many Iraqis complain that the United States has not done enough to pressure the al-Maliki government to heal the rift with the country’s Sunni minority.


Do you see a problem?

In 2008, was Nancy Pelosi billed as "a Democrat politician" by the press?  No, she was billed with her title: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.  Today, she's billed as House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.

Osama al-Nujaifi is a Sunni politician.  He's also Speaker of Parliament.  So if you're only going to reference him once in your article, you go with, "Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi."




Nouri's assault on Anbar continues with NINA noting military helicopters continue to bomb Falluja and Ramadi.  Wael Grace (Al Mada) reports that Anbar MPs say Nouri is attempting to extend the assault on Anbar up through the April 30th parliamentary elections.  MP Hamid al-Mutlaq notes a government acting wisely would have avoided a military campaign by listening to the cries of the protesters and granting concessions, would have avoided bombing cities by being in talks with the police and people of the city.  Nouri al-Ali al-Kilani (Kitbat) offers a column on how Nouri al-Maliki, and his double standards, endorse and breed sectarianism in Iraq.  He notes the thug and prime minister goes before the Iraqi people sullen and issues threats.

And the war's spreading to the airwaves and social media.  Al-Shorfa reports, "The local government in Iraq's Anbar province on Wednesday (January 22nd) announced the launch of a counter-terrorism radio station to raise awareness about threats posed by al-Qaeda and extremist groups." And Omar al-Jaffal (Al-Monitor) reports:

The administrator of the Facebook page for Rayat Ahl al-Sunnah Fil-Iraq (Flag of the Sunnis in Iraq), which views the army as occupying Anbari cities to harass and oppress the population there, pleaded with the media to support the “battle of the people of Anbar against the army.” In an interview with Al-Monitor, he asserted, “The media has not dealt fairly with our cause. We established a page on Facebook so that we could tell the world what is happening in Anbar.”
The group's page has attracted a large number of supporters from among Sunni youths, who share the page’s view that Anbar's “cities are being brought to ruin by the army.”
On the other side of the online battle, the Facebook page for the Iraqi Electronic Army seeks to close down pages that call for fighting the army by informing Facebook administrators of abuses aimed at Iraqi national figures on them. The page administrator, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told Al-Monitor, “Our page wages war against all the terrorist pages, from every sect and religion in Iraq.” He denied that his page had received “material support from any political faction in Iraq.” He said that it “communicates with all the soldiers of Anbar to relay word of what is happening on the ground there.”


And the signs of Nouri's leadership failure are all around.  Xinhua reports:


Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al- Maliki on Wednesday said that the time has come to end al-Qaida presence in the city of Fallujah in the volatile province of Anbar, while four people were killed and nine wounded in violent attacks across the country.
"The time has come to settle this subject and end the presence of this gang in this city (Fallujah) to save its residents from their evil," Maliki said in his weekly televised speech to the nation.

"I ask the sons of this province, its tribes and notables and all who live there to be ready to take serious stands against those dirty people without casualties and without sacrifices," Maliki said without specifying a time for any action.


He didn't ask for his help when he started the assault, didn't even think about them.  But now that he's created yet another mess he can't clean up, he's dependent upon others to accomplish what he couldn't.

Again, Iraq Times notes that Nouri's assault on Anbar has displaced over 22,000 families.  Loveday Morris (Washington Post) reports from Karbala:

The plush accommodation halls on the outskirts of this southern Iraqi city, normally reserved for visiting Shiite pilgrims, now teem with displaced Sunnis fleeing violence in the Western province of Anbar.
There and elsewhere, sectarian tensions are brewing as Iraq spirals into the worst cycle of violence it has experienced in years. But here, in one of the holiest cities for Shiite Muslims, Sunni children play on brightly painted swings as families gather in the waning winter light beside clipped magnolia-lined lawns.

The refugees Nouri's assault has created should be seen as shocking and disgusting.  Iraq can't afford more displaced people and to ask the citizens of Anbar to live through Nouri's assault on the province is to ask a great deal of a province that's already suffered more than enough.  Hamza Mustafa (Ashraq Al-Awsat) reports:

The Anbar Provincial Council has formed a crisis unit ahead of a possible military raid on Fallujah in the hopes of resolving the conflict in the city peacefully.
Council head Sabah Karhout issued a statement Tuesday, saying: “Anbar has formed a crisis cell led by Governor Ahmad Al-Dulaimi,” adding: “The military solution will be the last resort if the ongoing negotiations between officials and tribal leaders fail.”


National Iraqi News Agency reports:

The Political Council in Kirkuk called on those who are described as the owners of the decision not to invade Fallujah to spare the blood of Iraqis and not to aggravate things.
Head of the Council , Sheikh Abdul Rahman Munshid al- Assi told / NINA / that "We appeal to the Prime Minister and the acting ministers of defense, interior and chief of staff , intelligence and the national security, that the responsibility is great in taking such decision to invade Fallujah and areas of the rest of Anbar .



Through yesterday, Iraq Body Count counts 791 violent deaths for the month so far.  Today, Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) notes, "Armed confrontations and roadside bombs made for a bloody day in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul on Wednesday, claiming the lives of at least 16 people -- including militants who died in a battle with the Iraqi army, police in Mosul said." National Iraqi News Agency reports 2 fighters were shot dead in Tikrit, Nouri's federal police boasted they killed 10 suspects "in the area of Aljazeerah south of Mosul,"indiscriminate military artillery shelling at Falluja left 1 person dead and two more injured, an Alaaskari bombing left three police officers injured, an Ein al-Jahesh Village roadside bombing left 1 Iraqi soldier dead and three more injured, a Mosul armed attack left 1 police officer dead and two more injured, a Baghdad shooting (Camp Sara area) left 1 person dead, a Baghdad shooting (Tarmiyah area) left one person injured, a southwest Baghdad mortar attack (Radwaniyah area) killed 1 person and left two people injured, 2 fighters were shot dead in Mousl, a Kirkuk shooting left SWAT officer Mohamed Kamel injured, and 1 corpse was discovered in Kirkuk (38-year-old male with "signs of torture and gunshot wounds"). All Iraq News notes 1 "Iraqi Army officer with a Major rank was kidnapped to the west of Ramadi city." 1  Alsumaria notes that late last night, 1 farmer was kidnapped in Tikrit with assailants then setting a house bomb which killed 1 woman and left five people injured.



We noted the death of Iraqi journalist Firas Mohammed Attiyah in Monday's snapshot.  Today the Guardian's Greenslade Blog noted the death and these details:

The bomb exploded as Attiyah accompanied a government patrol to a ceremony in the city of Khalidiya. Muayad Ibrahim, a journalist for Anbar TV, was also wounded in the incident.

They're wrong.  We were as well.  Despite early reports claiming the journalist was 'embedded' with the military at the time of his death, that is not correct.  Kitabat reports today that his news outlet has confirmed that Firas Mohammed Attiyah was not with the military when he died, he was enroute to Ramadi to meet with displaced families.

Yesterday, we noted the pretty spin AP put on Nouri's decision to carve up areas of Iraq (where he polls especially poorly and where the judiciary does not bend to his will) to create new provinces out of the city of Falluja, Tuz Khurmato and the Valley of Nineveh.

Alsumaria reports an emergency session was called today by Anbar's provincial council and that, yesterday, Kurdish MP Khalid Shwani called Nouri's efforts a flagrant violation of the Iraqi Constitution.  National Iraqi News Agency adds:

The head of the provincial council in Anbar, Sabah Karhut rhot confirmed that: "Fallujah is part of Anbar province, and cannot be a governorate at this time ."
He told the National Iraqi News Agency / NINA / : "Anbar provincial council held an urgent meeting to discuss the government's decision to make the city of Fallujah a governorate without informing the local government officials in Anbar ."
He added : "The local government in Anbar have not contacted the central government to make Fallujah a province by itself, and this raised signs of surprise among officials in the province, in light of the security situation ."


Iraq Times also notes the surprise and quotes council member Suhaib al-Rawi stating that the proposal is strange and raises many questions. Strange that it raises so many questions and objections but AP missed all that and presented it as normal.

Not only is not normal, it's leading others to make requests.  NINA reports:

Hundreds of Khanaqin district of Diyala province , demanded the central government to transfer their district to a province in accordance with the law and the Constitution.
The head of the municipal council in Khanaqin said to NINA reporter ,that citizens believed that their demand is a legal and a constitutional entitlement.



The following community sites -- plus Dissident Voice, Cindy Sheehan,



























Ed Snowden

$
0
0
Thomas Gaist and Joseph Kishore (WSWS) report on the attacks on NSA whistle-blower Ed Snowden:


In the wake of President Barack Obama’s speech last Friday defending NSA spying programs, the US political and media establishment is escalating its campaign of threats and slander against whistleblower Edward Snowden.
Snowden, who has performed an immense public service by exposing the police state surveillance programs of the US government and its allies, faces charges filed by the Obama administration under the Espionage Act and calls for his execution or extra-judicial murder. Those who are guilty of treason against the US Constitution are screaming “treason” against the man who has exposed their crimes.
On Thursday, US Attorney General Eric Holder for the first time explicitly rejected proposals to grant Snowden clemency, saying that this would be “going too far.” He echoed Obama’s own insistence in his remarks last week that Snowden was guilty of betraying state secrets and must return to the US to face charges, placing himself in the hands of a “justice system” that tortured Bradley Manning and locked him up for 35 years.
Holder’s remarks came the same day as a report from the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB), whose members are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate, which acknowledged the illegality of the programs in question. One of the principle programs exposed by Snowden, the bulk collection of telephone records, “lacks a viable legal foundation,” the board concluded, and “implicates constitutional concerns under the First and Fourth Amendment.”





Ed Snowden shouldn't be charged with any thing.

His actions were a public service.

He is a whistle-blower by every definition.

And anyone who values freedom and liberty should be applauding his actions.

We have to have sunlight and our government is clearly unable to provide it without 'prompting.'

So we need Ed, we need a lot more Eds.






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



Thursday, January 23, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue,  Iraq's Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi speaks in DC, Martha Raddatz goes back to Iraq, the assault on Anbar continues, Barack's allegedly gotten the US Congress to cave and he'll be able to give despot Nouri al-Maliki additional weapons, and more.


Iraq's Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi is currently in the United States.  With Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi currently in exile, al-Nujaifi is the highest ranking Sunni in the Iraqi government.  This morning, he spoke at the Brookings Institution.


Speaker Osama al-Nujaifi:  We first got rid of an oppressive regime and it was followed by a military occupation then a Constitution that was written in unfavorable conditions and circumstances.  There was also a road map that was set.  The Iraqis were not able to contribute to this road map because we were in a rush.  And we wanted Iraq to be an exemplary democracy.  
The Constitution in Iraq was written under very difficult circumstances and in a very sensitive period in the country  and on the hand of politicians who suffered a lot in the past -- arrested or condemned to execution, exiled or in prison.  So the psychological environment was very hard and there were mutual fears between the Iraqi components.  This was the reason why the Constitution has some problems.  And some Articles in the Constitution can be interpreted in different ways. 
We also set up mechanisms to build institutions.  But the orientation of the Constitution was not as it should have been because of the political tension and divisions.  And the institution stipulated in the Constitution was not built as it should because of the problems.  
For instance, the Federal Supreme Court which is the highest judicial body and it rules on the conflicts between different parts of the country.  
So far, we were not able to implement it because this law needs two-thirds of the votes in the Parliament and all the political parties do not agree.  So far it is tribunal.  
Now we have courts that do exist so it is not does not have the Constitutional prerogatives to be able to rule on interpreting the Constitution or deciding if the laws are Constitutional.  That's why there are Constitutional differences between the provinces, between the provinces and Baghdad or between the legislative and the executive powers. 
All this made political life more complicated in Iraq.  And our path towards being the democratic process that we seek was not smooth. There are bad implementation of the law and selective implementation. Parliament adopted some 215 laws.  Some are very important for the stability of Iraq and for providing services to the people and for building the state as it should be built.  But some of these laws were not implemented.  They were adopted, published in the journal -- official journal -- and theoretically should have been implemented but so far they are not because there are unilateral political decisions not to implement them.  
For instance, the law on the provinces that give important prerogatives to the provinces and enough funds and means to implement the essentialization of the state.  But this law was not implemented because some in the country believe that it should not be.  
Also the law about customs, it was adopted two years ago but it is paralyzed on purpose.  
So we are facing many obstacles when it comes to building institutions and building the state of Iraq.  There is selectivity in implementing the laws.  Sometimes the law is implemented on some Iraqi parties and not on some other Iraqi parties. Hence a lack of confidence by the citizens in the political process, in the state institutions and also in the participation in the political process.  
Iraq is now facing a terrorist threat as we've seen since the beginning of the year when the change has started.  And now we need to know how to defeat terrorism at the security and at the ideological level.  
We do know that in 2007 with the surge of the American forces sectarian violence ended in the country.  And we set a plan to fight al Qaeda and the terrorist groups with the support of the Sunni clans -- most especially in Anbar -- they were armed, financed and promises that they will be part of the armed forces.  And the clans were able to defeat al Qaeda and security was restored in Anbar that represents 31% of the surface of Iraq.  So we were able to bring security back and the world is witness.  
But after this victory, there was no follow up on the promises that were given to them and they did not get their rights as, for instance, to integrate into the armed forces, to get the salaries that they need to protect them from being targeted by the terrorists.  Very few of them got salaries, those who did get salaries got salaries that were very, very low, many of them were arrested because of systematic targeting by sectarian politicians or even by al Qaeda because they wanted to undermine the rule of the tribes.  
From 2009 until a few months ago, these forces were almost completely destroyed and then al Qaeda came back stronger than before.  al Qaeda was able to paralyze the tribes and the central state did not follow up on its moral and verbal promises. 
So al Qaeda is back and it is exploiting political differences and the general feeling of frustration among the Iraqi people.  It also is exploiting the systematic corruption at the political and economic level, finding the support, finances and means in some provinces in Iraq.  And in 2013, more than 9,000 Iraqis were killed and more than 25,000 were wounded and this is the highest figure in recent years. 
So the political components in Iraq were not able to build the Iraqi political system or to implement the Constitution and to reach a genuine partnership and a genuine reconciliation.  They were not able to implement the laws as it should be and get rid of corruption and abuses and they did not respect all the Iraqi components as to represent them  in a fair manner in the armed forces.  According to the Constitution, they did not provide the provinces with enough funds. Also we did not adopt the law on hydrocarbons oil and gas which is very important to set a balanced relation between the provinces and the center for the production and exportation of oil.  
So some parties are implementing the Constitution based on their own perspective and this is hindering the building of the state, the national cohesion and is leading to more division.  And more and more people are being disappointed and do not trust the political process at this point as we have seen by the very low turnout in the last general elections [2013 provincial elections] and the ones before [2010 parliamentary elections]. We believe that Iraq is, at this point, at a crossroad.  The key to situation is clear and we can find a solution.  What we need though is a strong determination and the political will for everyone to agree on the Constitution and to forget the past, to move beyond the fears and to stop punishing the Iraqi people and move to reconciliation and prevent Iraq from sliding into even greater troubles.  
In the Kurdish provinces [Kurdistan Regional Government, three semi-autonomous provinces in northern Iraq] there was a law adopted to amnesty every one who committed a crime against the Kurdish people and worked with the previous regime.  Some of them were accused of violent crimes but they decided to amnesty everyone.  And the situation in the Kurdish provinces is stable and everyone is part of the political process.  The Kurdish provinces are now an example of security and successful investment and  wise politics.  
But in central Iraq, we are still arresting people and we are also still implementing the law on the Justice and Accountability in a partial sectarian way.  We are still banishing some of the Iraqi people who were not part of the previous regime and doing so for political reasons.  That is unfair. 
So we have failed in implementing this law.  
The political process is now in jeopardy.  
We need to act clearly and swiftly.  
The next elections are very important and could solve many problems. 
The situation should be stable and calm.  
We should put an end to the violence and the  killings and we should avoid any political measures that are provocative and the day before yesterday a decision to [create three new provinces] which led to lots of reactions.  
Also the issue of what is happening in Anbar Province. Of course, al Qaeda is there and we should fight al Qaeda and we believe so.  The tribes are fighting terrorism at this point.  But not everyone in Al Anbar Province is a terrorist.  [Some residents have been taking part in protests.] There are political demands and rights and problems that need political solutions and not military answers.  
So I am ready to answer your questions now but let me state again that Iraq is at a crossroad -- either it will move towards success and democracy and provide a successful example of a democratic country in a difficult region or, God forbid, we will move into something similar to what's taking place in Syria today.  The second option is to be expected if we do not confront the existing problems in the correct manner. 
Today, Iraq needs national reconciliation and partnership instead of the marginalization 



Okay, on the above.  This is the second week where inadequate translators were provided at a DC Iraq event.  Last week, it was Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq at the US Institute of Peace.   Brookings' translator -- a woman -- was better than the man translating at the US Institute of Peace.  He was awful.  It took him so long -- lengthy pauses -- to figure out what was being said that he would stop mid-sentence because a new person had begun to speak.

She wasn't that bad.  But "[Some residents have been taking part in protests.]"?  I have no idea what he said because she rushed through a bad translation.  She did this also with the section where I have "[create three new provinces"] which instead found her stating that the military launched campaigns in four provinces on Tuesday.

Until the end of the speech, she repeatedly used the term "confessional" when the English word for the term al-Nujaifi was using was "sectarian." I do realize that context is a great deal.  I really think if you're translating on current events, you should know current events.  The woman did better than the man who stumbled and fumbled and left whole sections untranslated.  But this really shouldn't be considered acceptable.  As I've noted before I have a friend who runs a translation firm.  I told her about this experience and asked if it's considered acceptable?  She said it wasn't.  And I don't see how it could be.  Two people were hired to do jobs which were translating the remarks of visiting politicians.  If you're not translating the remarks, if you're not translating them correctly, you're not doing your job.

On the above, I also broke it up into paragraph form.  Normally, we don't do that.  But that's such a large section of words.  And they had to be included because if Saleh al-Mutlaq and the MPs last week got very little US media coverage, Osama al-Nujaifi is getting even less coverage.

Gus Taylor (Washington Times) is one of the few covering this morning's event.

With fears growing that the situation could trigger an all-out civil war between Iraq’s Shiites and Sunnis, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has yielded to pressure from the Obama administration to delay using the Iraqi military, which is dominated by Shiites, to mount full-scale assault on Anbar.
Mr. al-Maliki has also begun paying more secular Sunni tribesmen to fight back against the extremists in Fallujah.
But Mr. al-Nujayfi on Wednesday suggested the move may be too little too late — or that it must be expanded upon significantly and quickly if the Maliki government has any hope of forging a sustainable alliance with secular Sunni tribal leaders going forward.
He also said the rise of al Qaeda-linked groups in Anbar could most accurately be blamed on the Maliki government’s abandonment of previous alliances that U.S. military forces once nourished with those tribal leaders.
Karen DeYoung and Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) report on the Brookings event and on the visit to the US:

The amount of face time that Nujaifi got with top U.S. officials — including Secretary of State John F. Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel — suggested that Washington realizes that mobilizing Iraq’s beleaguered Sunni community will be key to restoring order in Anbar. A State Department official said Washington is hopeful that the ongoing crisis might deliver a larger breakthrough in Iraq’s stagnant politics.
“A big part of what Nujaifi and we are trying to do is move this beyond the military front,” said the official, who was not authorized to speak publicly about the situation. “Even if you can quell the al-Qaeda advances long-term, you won’t be able to make any progress without political reform as well.”
Yesterday, Iraq's Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi met with US President Barack Obama.







And yesterday, the White House issued the following:
The White House
Office of the Vice President

Readout of Vice President Biden's Meeting with Iraqi Council of Representatives Speaker Osama al-Nujaifi


This afternoon, President Obama joined Vice President Joe Biden’s meeting with Iraqi Council of Representatives Speaker Osama al-Nujaifi and a delegation of Iraqi parliamentarians. Both sides reaffirmed the importance of the strategic partnership between the United States and Iraq.   The President encouraged Iraq’s leaders to continue dialogue to address the legitimate grievances of all communities through the political process. Both sides agreed on the need for both security and political measures to combat terrorism, and discussed efforts to formally integrate local and tribal forces into the state security structures consistent with the Government of Iraq’s public commitments in recent days.  President Obama and Vice President Biden also expressed the United States’ strong support for continued cooperation between local and tribal leaders and the Iraqi Government against al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI)/the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).  The President and Vice President underscored that the United States stands with Iraq and its people in the fight against AQI/ISIL and other extremist groups.


Osama al-Nujaifi's visit was also noted in today's US State Dept press briefing conducted by spokesperson Marie Harf.



QUESTION: There’s been a number – two of the highest-ranking Sunni political – elected political leaders from Iraq have been through town in the last week.

MS. HARF: Mm-hmm. Yep.

QUESTION: The speaker of --

MS. HARF: Nujayfi.

QUESTION: Yeah. Nujayfi is here now. I was wondering if you could, first, just kind of give us a sense of whether or not he’s having any official meetings in this building --

MS. HARF: Mm-hmm. Yeah.

QUESTION: -- and who’s he going to be meeting with and what are they going to talk about?

MS. HARF: Yeah. So I have a couple updates on Speaker Nujayfi’s travel to the States. On Monday, so four days ago, Secretary Kerry met with the Speaker of the Iraqi Council of Representatives, Usama al-Nujayfi, to discuss bilateral issues, including the ongoing situation in Anbar province. They discussed our shared commitment toward a long-term partnership under the Strategic Framework Agreement.
The Secretary noted the importance of cooperation between Anbari local and tribal leaders, the Iraqi security forces, and national leaders in the fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant in Anbar province. In that light, the Secretary welcomed the stated commitment by the Government of Iraq to incorporate Iraqi citizens in Anbar who stand up to fight ISIL and other extremist groups into the formal security structure of the state.
The Secretary further praised Speaker Nujayfi’s commitment to support efforts to enlist tribes to control their local areas, in coordination with provincial councils and the Government of Iraq. The two also discussed the importance of Iraq’s national election in April. And Secretary Kerry assured Speaker Nujayfi that the United States will continue to work with United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq to ensure that the election occurs on time, is transparent, and reflects the will of the Iraqi people.
And the Vice President also met with Speaker Nujayfi. This was yesterday, I believe. President Obama joined Vice President Joe Biden’s meeting with Iraqi Council of Representatives Speaker Usama al-Nujayfi and a delegation of Iraqi parliamentarians. Both sides reaffirmed the importance of the strategic partnership between the United States and Iraq. The President encouraged Iraq’s leaders to continue dialogue to address the legitimate grievances of all communities through the political process.
Both sides agreed on the need for both security and political measures to combat terrorism and discuss efforts to formally integrate local and tribal forces into the state security structures. Both the President and Vice President expressed the United States strong support for continued cooperation between local and tribal leaders and the Iraqi Government against al-Qaida in Iraq and the Islamic State of Iraq in the Levant, and of course, underscored that the United States stands with Iraq and its people in this fight against extremist groups.
And I can check on the timing of that meeting. So those are just a couple of his meetings he’s had.

QUESTION: Just one more. Could you just speak to the challenges associated with – of managing these meetings with opposition figures from a political situation that’s fairly tense with sectarian divisions right now? I mean, has the Maliki government or the prime minister had anything to say about the fact that these guys are coming, and is there – have you followed up with him within the context of these meetings?


MS. HARF: Not to my knowledge. I mean, we’ve made very clear to the Iraqi Government that we will talk to the different political leaders from all sides as part of our engagement. The Vice President has spoken a number of times to Prime Minister Maliki in the recent weeks. The Secretary has made calls. A lot of people have made calls. Brett McGurk, who folks know knows Iraq very well, was just there for an extended trip where he met with political leaders from across the board. So this has certainly been our practice. I haven’t heard anyone suggest that it should be otherwise.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Change of subject?

MS. HARF: Yes. What, on Iraq?

QUESTION: On Iraq, yeah. I’m just – there’s been a proposal in recent days, I believe by the Maliki government, to break off three new pretty much Sunni-dominated provinces in Iraq. They would be in mostly western and northern Iraq, but it would be two provinces in Anbar around Fallujah and Tuz Khormato, and then up north in Ninawa near Tal Afar. I’m just wondering if this came up in the discussions with the Secretary or to your extent of knowledge with the Vice President, and what the Administration feels about this. I know there’s been a strong sense of keeping one country of Iraq --

MS. HARF: Absolutely.

QUESTION: -- but I don’t know how that would equate with breaking off into new provinces within Iraq.


MS. HARF: Right. It’s a good question and I actually – I’m sorry to do this to you twice today – don’t know the answer. So let me check with our folks. I’m not aware of the details of the proposal, but I can see if it came up in discussions and see what our take is on what that might mean. You’re absolutely right that we’ve long said Iraq needed to remain a unified country, certainly, but I’m happy to check on that.


Still on the topic of the US and Iraq, this evening on ABC World News, Martha Raddatz reported from Iraq.

Martha Raddatz:  When the sun goes down in Baghdad, this is what happens: The American military moves in.  ABC News obtained these images -- a massive American cargo jet delivering weapons to Iraqi partners.  2400 rockets to arm Iraqi helicopters [. . .]


Bradley Klapper (AP) reported this morning, based on unnamed sources, that US senators -- such as Senator Bob Menendez -- have been persuaded to drop their objections regarding Apache helicopters among other weapons Barack wants to provide to Iraq's prime minister and chief thug Nouri al-Maliki.


Mustafa al-Kadhimi (Al-Monitor) conducted a major interview with Shi'ite politician Adil Abdul-Mahdi who was Vice President of Iraq.  In 2006, he and Tareq al-Hashemi were Iraq's two vice presidents; in 2010 he and al-Hashemi were again named Vice Presidents and, in 2011, Khondair al-Khozaei was named a third vice president, weeks later Abdul-Mahdi resigned his post in protest of the ongoing corruption and other issues.  He is a member of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (led by Ammar al-Hakim) and he has often been mentioned as potential prime minister -- most often in 2005 and 2006. He shared that he thought Nouri made a mistake in seeking a second term and all of the crises which followed that.

We noted that section yesterday.  In light of today's AP news, we're noting a different section.


Al-Monitor:  You served as vice president of Iraq for a number of years and then resigned from the post this term. Do you think that the presidency carried out its role on the constitutional level, and how do you view the presidency in the absence of President Jalal Talabani?

Abdul-Mahdi:  First, I hope that President Talabani regains his health and well-being, so that he can regain his role as a balanced figure whom everyone turns to in times of crisis. But to answer your question, I would say: No, it did not play a role on the political and constitutional levels. The presidency is not, as they say, an honorary institution. Rather, according to the Constitution, it is a supervisory institution, and its task is to monitor the correct implementation of the Constitution. It has a lot of tools to do this. But it failed to carry out this role and in turn contributed to negative developments. However, it cannot be denied that, in some way, they [presidency officials] served as a safety valve, as political leaders at least gathered to ensure calm in periods of crisis.




Jalal Talabani is the President of Iraq.  Or he's supposed to be.  The question continues to be: Can you be the president of a country you're not in?   December 2012,  Iraqi President Jalal Talabani suffered a stroke.   The incident took place late on December 17, 2012 (see the December 18, 2012 snapshot) and resulted in Jalal being admitted to Baghdad's Medical Center Hospital.    Thursday, December 20, 2012, he was moved to Germany.  He remains in Germany currently.  Over a year and one month later, he remains in Germany.  He's been posed for three sets of photos starting in May of 2012.  They don't want you to see his left side.  They also don't want anyone to try to speak to him -- not reporters, not Iraq's prime minister, not members of Talabani's political party and not Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi.

Barack wants to send more weapons to Nouri who doesn't have a check on him anymore.

As Abdul-Mahdi pointed out, it is not a ceremonial position.  The presidency acts as a check, a balance.


Dropping back to Tuesday's snapshot:


UPI reports, "Iraq was the only member of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries to post a decline in oil production last month, the IEA said Tuesday." Nouri al-Maliki's Iraq stands out -- just never in a good way.  Today the prime minister and chief thug of Iraq wanted to take bows again.  AP notes that Nouri's government issued a declaration, "The justice ministry carried out the executions of 26 (men) convicted of crimes related to terrorism on Sunday." CNN adds, "One of those executed was Adel al-Mashhadani, a militia leader in Baghdad who was "famous for sectarian crimes," the statement said. He was a member of the Awakening, the Sunni tribal fighting force who fought alongside the United States against al Qaeda militants." The announcement of the executions come one day after UNAMI issued their [PDF format warning] latest human rights report on Iraq which included:



16. Declare a moratorium on the use of the death penalty in accordance with UN General Assembly resolutions 62/149 (2007), 63/168 (2008), 65/206 (2010) and 67/176( 2012) ; revie w the criminal code and the criminal procedure code with a view to abolishing the death penalty; and consider acceding to the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR aimed at abolishing the death penalty; 
17. Implement international standards that provide safeg uards of the rights of those facing the death penalty , as set out in the annex to Economic and Social Council resolution 1984/50 of 25 May 1984 , until the death penalty is abolished in Iraq.



Clearly, Nouri's not listening to the United Nations.
Today Human Rights Watch issued World Report 2014 which notes 2012 saw Nouri's government execute at least 129 people while 2013 saw the number increase to 151.  BBC News notes today's executions come after "m the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights for an immediate halt to executions in Iraq. A spokesman for Navi Pillay said in October large-scale killings were 'obscene and inhumane'."



On Sunday, Nouri authorized 26 executions.  Today?  Raheem Salman, Isabel Coles and Robin Pomeroy (Reuters) report 11 executions were carried out today. AFP observes, "UN chief Ban Ki-moon urged Iraq to halt executions on a visit to Baghdad this month, but was publicly rebuked by Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki who said the country does not 'believe that the rights of someone who kills people must be respected'."


On security, National Iraqi News Agency reports a Qabri-Laabid home invasion left 1 police member and 2 other people dead, 1 corpse was discovered dumped in Basra (gun shot wounds), an armed attack in Alsinaiyah left two Iraqi soldiers injured, an Aini-Lbeidhah roadside bombing left 1 soldier dead and four more injured, a Hit city roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 police member and left three more injured, the Iraqi military's shelling of Falluja left 2 civilians dead and ten more injured ("including women and children"), an Abu Ghraib armed clash left 1 Iraqi soldier dead and three more injured,  and 1 contractor shot dead in Badush, a Muqdadiyah bombing left two Iraqi soldiers injured.  All Iraq News adds, "Two terrorists of what is so called the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria were killed nearby the Iraqi-Syrian borders." Alsumaria reports an eastern Baghdad attack by assailants on motorcycles who shot dead 1 shop owner and left a worker injured, and the corpse of 1 child was discovered hanging in a Zammar market.


Again, this evening on ABC World News, Martha Raddatz reported from Iraq and spoke with US Ambassador to Iraq Robert Stephen Beecroft.

Martha Raddatz: [. . .]  America's Ambassador tells us Falluja has fallen to an al Qaeda that is now rising across this country. 

Robert Beecroft:  We're in a very precarious situation.  They're capable of-of serious assaults.

Martha Raddatz:  Do you know what -- approximately how many number of al Qaeda are there in Ramadi?

Robert Beecroft:  A lot of people saying these days you've got around 2,000 in the country hard core.

Martha Raddatz:  An astonishing number.  Falluja is really not far from Baghdad.  We wanted to see how far we could get.  It would not be far. Iraqi forces are ringing the city with checkpoints and armored vehicles.  About five miles out of Falluja, the roads became far more desolate and Iraqi security forces warned us we should not go any further.

It's a two minute report, there's not time for a lot.  So let's note Ann:



This is happening because Nouri wouldn't listen to the peaceful protesters who have been protesting now for over a year and because he is terrorizing Anbar Province.

Violence breeds more violence -- especially when the violence is carried out by the government.

I want you to look around your neighborhood the next time you are out.  Figure out how many streets make up your neighborhood.

And then picture that your neighborhood was being bombed and shelled and Hellfire missiles fired on it by the government.

Why?

Because they insisted 'terrorists' were in the neighborhood.

Maybe they were, maybe they weren't.

But you know your not a terrorist.  And you should know your neighbors next door and across your street.

Looking around, you should see a lot of innocent people.

And realize that they are all suffering.

Why?

Because the inept government either doesn't know how to combat terrorism or just wants an excuse to destroy you and your family and your neighbors.

This is collective punishment.

Wikipedia notes:


Collective punishment is the punishment of a group of people as a result of the behavior of one or more other individuals or groups. The punished group may often have no direct association with the other individuals or groups, or direct control over their actions. In times of war and armed conflict, collective punishment has resulted in atrocities, and is a violation of the laws of war and the Geneva Conventions. Historically, occupying powers have used collective punishment to retaliate against and deter attacks on their forces by Resistance movements (e.g. destroying entire towns and villages where such attacks have occurred).



It is illegal and it is a War Crime.

Yet instead of the White House demanding Nouri cease and desist immediately, Barack rushes to arm Nouri with more weapons he continues to use on the Iraqi people.

War Crimes.





Twitter exchange on Iraq today:

    1. When I reach Twitter marks and think I'm a big shot I remember 's phone autocorrects my name to 'trashcan'
    2. Mine doesn't autocorrect your name! Always know it's you! LOL!
    3. Haha I appreciate it. Mercifully, most phones autocorrect my name to 'peasant', rather than the alternative.
    4. LOL! That is MUCH better than Liz's! Hope you're well today!
    5. Can't complain at all. Baghdad has been quiet (touch wood) today. Thanks for asking, hope you're well too.
    6. Very concerned about things are going there and in Anbar. Stay safe!!






  • Finally, Christopher A. Preble notes a CATO Institute event on Iraq to be held next month:



    Just over two years after the last U.S. combat troops were withdrawn from Iraq, an insurgency is raging throughout the country. The black flags of ISIS – the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham – now fly over Fallujah, the site of some of the bloodiest battles of the U.S war in Iraq. These recent gains by extremists, and the apparent inability of the Iraqi government to exercise control over its territory, have many in U.S. foreign policy circles worried.
    Many blame Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki for the uptick in violence, arguing that his heavy-handed policies toward the Sunni minority laid the groundwork for the current insurgency. (e.g. here) Others blame the Obama administration for failing to successfully negotiate a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), which would have allowed a small residual U.S. force to remain in the country to help train the Iraqi army and conduct counterterrorist operations. The claim that such forces would have been able to exert great leverage over the Iraqi political class, and that Obama himself bears some blame for the violence because he withdrew U.S. troops rather than leave them in Iraq without a SOFA, ignores that our forces were unable to fix Iraq’s shattered political system even when they were in Iraq in large numbers. (More on this here.)
    Iraqi politics, Iranian influence, and a spillover of violence from the Syrian civil war make the situation far more complex than most want to admit. It’s one thing to assign blame, it’s quite another to find solutions.
    At an upcoming Cato policy forum, “Understanding the Continuing Violence in Iraq,” experts will provide context for the current situation, outline obstacles facing the Iraqi government, and debate what role, if any, the United States should play. Speakers include Douglas Ollivant of the New American Foundation, who wrote on this subject earlier this month, and Harith Hasan who, with Emma Skye, commented on Iraqi politics here last year, and has also written a book on the subject.
    The event begins at Noon, on Tuesday, February 12th. To learn more, and to register, click here.













     
     

    the associated press







    Vegetarian Split Pea Soup in the Kitchen.

    $
    0
    0
    Rhonda e-mailed asking if I knew of a "vegetarian" recipe for split pea soup?

    Yes, I do.

    You'll need two bags of split peas, one large onion, a 6 ounce bag of small carrots or 5 to 8 large carrots you chop yourself and that's it for cooking.  If you like garlic (I do), I would recommend peeling at least two cloves.

    You want to empty the split peas into a dutch oven or large pot.  Add onions and carrots (and garlic, if you're using it).  Cover with water.  Water should come to at least an inch below the edge of the pot.

    On the stove, bring the water to a boil, then reduce heat, add a dash of black pepper, maybe a dash of red pepper if you have it on hand and a dash of salt if you use salt (or salt substitute).   If you like spices, add a teaspoon of dried thyme.  Cover the pan to allow the ingredients to cook. 


    Cook for approximately two hours.  Check on it regularly.  If needed, add more water as it cooks.

    In the last 30 minutes of that two hours, you can chop up some celery and add it to cook for the last thirty minutes.    Bell peppers chopped up are another option (you can add both, if you'd like). 

    Now the soup should be done.  Stir it.  You can ladle it into bowls or cups.

    Two most important ingredients come now.

    Crackers and red sauce (tabasco sauce to some). 

    This is a good soup for crackers.  Crackers will also keep the costs down for this inexpensive soup while filling everyone up a little quicker.  The red sauce?  I add three drops to every bowl of split pea soup I eat and I won't eat it without the red sauce.  It takes the sweetness and it gives it just a hint of sharpness. 

    You may note that this is the split pea recipe, basic, minus the ham and hambone.

    I didn't just pull that out for Rhonda.  I have eight kids.  When they lived at home, we had to make a meal stretch and unless it was after Christmas or Thanksgiving, I didn't usually have a hambone on hand, sorry.  So we basically always had 'vegetarian' split pea soup.

    You can soak the dried peas beforehand, if you'd like.  I usually soak mine overnight.  I have friends who never soak their peas and it turns out fine.  You can use a blender to make the soup smoother (after you've cooked it -- and let it cool before using the blender  if you have a plastic container for the blender and not a glass one).



    On Pacifica Evening News, KPFK's John Matthews reported on the closing of Career Colleges of America:

    Career Colleges of America, a for-profit school with three campuses schools in the Los Angeles area, abruptly closed its doors this month leading both students and faculty angry and confused.  The school lost its accreditation due to financial issues and could therefore no longer offer financial aid to students.  The for-profit school which opened in 1988 provided training in such fields as searchable technology, medical assistance and alcohol and drug counseling.


    My point in noting this is that these students are going to be expected to pay back loans.

    I don't think that's right or fair.

    The school has shut down.

    That means no one's there to pass on transcripts.  That means their money went down the drain.

    It also means, pay attention job seekers, you can now claim to have any certificate in the world from the Career Colleges of America since it no longer exists and no one can check out your claim.  Just be smart enough to have graduated by December 2013 on your resume.

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


    Friday, January 24, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, Nouri continues to terrorize Anbar, Iraqis continue to protest Nouri, Iraq's Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi has no "Red Notice" with INTERPOL (though the press 'forgot' to tell us that), and much more.


    This month, Larry Everest (Revolution Newspaper) asked, "How is the U.S. imperialist media dealing with the ongoing carnage in Iraq?"

    And he answered, "One example was the January 10 New York Times front-page story titled, “Fallujah’s Fall Stuns Marines Who Fought There.” Thisarticle is an exposure of the bankruptcy and illegitimacy of the U.S. imperialist media. People need to reject this drumbeat to think like Americans, and see the world through the lens of the American empire, and start thinking about humanity!"

    And that is one answer.  But the reality is that you can count on a handful the number of outlets outside of Iraq treating Nouri's assault on Anbar Province with any reality.  Most either ignore what's taking place or else they carry the party line of 'bad terrorists are here and must be killed!' Say the word "terrorist" and everyone loses their voice apparently.

    That's why it's been so effective in killing liberties in the US, this so-called War on 'Terror.' It's a mental stop sign in the same way "Communist" was for so many in the US at the middle of the 20th century. For some, the term terrifies them.  For others, they're just terrified someone will call them "terrorist." But not many want to say,"Hold on a second, let's get serious." So if you holler "terrorism!" or "terrorist!," you can usually dominate the conversation and the narrative.  No one asks you for proof, no one questions.


    And that's how Nouri al-Maliki, Iraq's chief thug and prime minister, has gotten away with a series of War Crimes over the last weeks.   The Geneva International Centre for Justice notes the continued assault on Anbar Province:

    In the wake of the 1st of January 2014, the 600.000 residents of Fallujah, one of the main cities in al-Anbar, found themselves encircled by the government forces. The residential areas were under the military attack. This time it was claimed that al-Qaeda and ISIL (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) had taken over the city. Indeed some fighters wearing such signs were seen to have set police stations and government buildings on fire; however these people encountered strong resistance from the local residents.
    Furthermore, the witnesses mentioned that these acclaimed terrorist fighters appeared as soon as the government’s army arrived and took positions in the surroundings of the city. Many of the contacts of GICJ in Fallujah and Baghdad therefore believe that disguised militia groups affiliated with the al-Maliki’s party were channelled into the city in order to provide the necessary pretext for an attack and gain the military support from the Western countries.
    As of January 6, the main eastern, northern and southern checkpoints were closed and the army refuses to allow people, medicine or food items to enter or leave the city.  Even the Iraqi Red Crescent could not enter anymore. Families who wanted to flee could only leave under extreme difficulties. These sanctions were imposed even though the residents of Fallujah publicly affirmed numerous times that the city had not been taken over by any terrorist.
    Al Maliki’s official portrayal of terrorists brought him the immediate support from the USA as well as from Iran. Also, Russia announced its support. Other voices however, such as the senior EU lawmaker Struan Stevenson, a member of the European parliament, warned in an open letter published on 7 January 2014 that “Iraq is plummeting rapidly towards civil war and genocide”. In a second letter published on 20 Januaray 2014 Stevenson’s further warned that claims by al-Maliki were “utter nonsense”. Still, he had “convinced his American allies that he is fighting a war on terror and they are pouring in rockets, drones and other military hardware which Maliki is using to bomb and kill civilian targets”.
    Al-Maliki insists once again to demolish all demonstrations and to use force against all the cities that witness resistance against his policies. The continuing use of the army against densely populated cities can only lead to another huge humanitarian disaster. Many residents are fleeing, not in fear of terrorists but in fear of the government forces and over hundred people have already lost their lives during the attacks by tanks and by air that mainly targeted the residential areas in the outskirts of the city.


    National Iraqi News Agency reports that the Iraqi military's mortar shelling last night left 4 people dead and 32 more injured "including women and children" and today's military shelling of Falluja left 5 people dead and 14 more injured -- "most of them women and children."  Collective punishment is what Nouri's pursuing.  If you doubt that:  Iraqi Spring MC notes that Nouri's army shelled Falluja General Hospital.


    Attacking hospitals is an international no-no.  Nouri al-Maliki is a War Criminal and collective punishment is a War Crime.  Daoud Kuttab (Crimes Of War) explains:
    Under the 1949 Geneva Conventions, collective punishments are a war crime. Article 33 of the Fourth Convention states: “No protected person may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed,” and “collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.” Israel, however, does not accept that the Fourth Geneva Convention or the Additional Protocols apply to the West Bank de jure, but says it abides by the humanitarian provisions without specifying what the humanitarian provisions are.
    By collective punishment, the drafters of the Geneva Conventions had in mind the reprisal killings of World Wars I and II. In the First World War, Germans executed Belgian villagers in mass retribution for resistance activity. In World War II, Nazis carried out a form of collective punishment to suppress resistance. Entire villages or towns or districts were held responsible for any resistance activity that took place there. The conventions, to counter this, reiterated the principle of individual responsibility. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Commentary to the conventions states that parties to a conflict often would resxort to “intimidatory measures to terrorize the population” in hopes of preventing hostile acts, but such practices “strike at guilty and innocent alike. They are opposed to all principles based on humanity and justice.”
    The law of armed conflict applies similar protections to an internal conflict. Common Article 3 of the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 requires fair trials for all individuals before punishments; and Additional Protocol II of 1977 explicitly forbids collective punishment.



    This week UNAMI issued their [PDF format warning] latest human rights report on Iraq which included, "The deliberate or indiscriminate targeting of civilians constitutes a gross violation of international humanitarian and human rights law and of Iraqi law."

    So why is the assault on Anbar allowed to take place -- let alone continue -- without a huge outcry from all over?

    It's accomplished nothing.

    All Iraq News reports 2 Tikrit bombings left 1 Iraqi soldier dead and four more injured, an armed clash in Ramadi left 13 fighters dead and that a home invasion late last night in Basra left 2 women dead (mother and daughter).  NINA also notes a Hamrin home bombing which left two police injured, Joint Special Operations Command declared they killed 2 suspects in Mosul, 1 Sahwa was shot dead outside of Kirkuk, and an armed clash in Falluja left 2 Iraqi soldiers dead and four more injured.  Through Thursday, Iraq Body Count counts 839 violent deaths this month.

     Wael Grace (Al Mada) reports it is thought 75% of the residents of Falluja have fled.  The United Nations Refugee Agency issued the following today:

    GENEVA, January 24 (UNHCR) The UN refugee agency on Friday reported that more than 65,000 people had over the past week fled the conflict in the cities of Fallujah and Ramadi in central Iraq's Anbar province. Since fighting broke out at the end of last year, more than 140,000 people have been made homeless by fighting according to Iraq's Ministry of Displacement and Migration.
    This is the largest displacement Iraq has witnessed since the sectarian violence of 2006-2008. This number comes on top of the 1.13 million people already internally displaced in Iraq and who are mostly residing in Baghdad, Diyala and Ninewa provinces.
    UNHCR spokesman Adrian Edwards told journalists in Geneva that people in Anbar, including UNHCR staff, had reported that many civilians were unable to leave conflict-affected areas where food and fuel were now in short supply.
    "Most of the recently displaced remain outside Fallujah city, accommodated by relatives or staying in schools, mosques and hospitals where resources are running low. Host families are having difficulties sustaining the burden of caring for the displaced," he said.
    The spokesman added that UNHCR and its humanitarian aid partners had managed to distribute tarpaulins, blankets, sleeping mats, food, and hygiene supplies. On Thursday, UNHCR delivered 2,400 core relief kits. The Ministry of Displacement and Migration and the Iraqi parliament have also sent aid.
    "Many of the displaced, nonetheless, are still in desperate need of food, medical care, and other aid. As the insecurity has spread, many families who fled several weeks ago have been displaced again," Edwards said.
    The UN in Iraq has asked the government to facilitate the opening of a humanitarian corridor to reach displaced and stranded families in Anbar province. In recent weeks, several bridges leading into the conflict area and communities hosting displaced people have been destroyed, making access difficult. Currently, it is impossible to reach the area from Baghdad and relief agencies are using roads coming from northern Iraq.
    Meanwhile, other areas of Iraq including Baghdad, Erbil, Kerbala, Salah-al-Din and Ninewa have witnessed the arrival of thousands of displaced people. People are reportedly without money for food and lack suitable clothing for the rainy conditions. Children are not in school and sanitary conditions, particularly for women, are inadequate.
    "Establishing camps for the newly displaced is not our preferred option and may prolong displacement. But, if the government of Iraq opts to establish sites, UNHCR is ready to provide tents and core relief items as well as provide support to camp management," Edwards said in Geneva,
    In northern Iraq, at the request of the Erbil government, UNHCR has refurbished the Baharka temporary site to host people arriving from Anbar. Tents, electricity and sanitation facilities have been installed and the facility is ready to accommodate up to 300 families should the government decide to open the site. In Suleymaniya, some sections of Arbat camp, originally built for Syrian refugees, have been made available to accommodate internally displaced Iraqis. There are some 300 displaced families in Suleymaniya.
    Planning is under way to field additional mobile teams to strengthen capacity in Anbar and teams could also be dispatched to other provinces hosting the displaced.


    F. Brinley Bruton (NBC News) quotes Peter Kessler, UNHCR spokesperson, stating, "“People are still fighting and mortars are still landing. People don’t have access to food." Yang Yi (Xinhua) quotes UNHCR spokesperson Adrian Edwards stating, "Most of the recently displaced remain outside Fallujah city, accommodated by relatives or staying in schools, mosques and hospitals where resources are running low. Host families are having difficulties sustaining the burden of caring for the displaced." And on the topic of mosques,  Kitabat reports that 'acting defense minister' Saadoun al-Dulaimi (he's not the Minister of Defense -- only Parliament can make someone that -- so he's something else, maybe Nouri's little sex toy?) declared that they (the Iraqi government) will bomb and target any home or mosque they think might contain a terrorist.  Any home or mosque.

    Are we really so sick, twisted and fearful as a people that we're going to allow ourselves to be scared into silence by the calculated use of the term "terrorist"?


    To me this looks a lot like genuine terrorism.



    11h

    قوات المالكي تقوم باعدام مواطن في بعقوبة وتمثل بجثته.
    .





     Via Iraqi Spring MC, some of the dead in Baquba that Nouri's forces murdered.  Notice the Iraqi soldiers in the background.  No effort is made to remove the three dead people.  Or to cover them.  they're displayed.  Why?
    Because they're "kills" and the Iraqi military is displaying their "kills" in order to frighten the nearby residents.
    The attack isn't just the bullets, the mortars and the bombs.  Nouri's attack on Anbar is also psychological.  


    Again from UNAMI  [PDF format warning] latest human rights report on Iraq:


    The impact of violence on ordinary Iraqi women, men, boy and girls cannot be underestimated. Apart from the increasing risk of becoming a direct victim of violence, the fear of violence severely limits their ability to enjoy fundamental human rights and freedoms, including freedom of movement, as many people start to confie their activities outside their homes to essential tasks, which in turn impacts on their ability to access basic services, such as education and health care. Furthermore, there are an increasing number of civilians who are the secondary victims of violence -- particularly those whose family members have been killed or wounded . Besides the psychological and emotional suffering, the death or injury of family members sometimes deprives households of breadwinners or those who are contributing financially to their households. Families of injured and disabled people have to bear significant costs (both financial and physical ) involved in ensuring adequate medical care and support.



    The attacks from Nouri's forces are acts of terrorism.

    But if anyone confronted him, Nouri would probably blow them off.

    Earlier this month, Felicity Arbuthnot (Morning Star) pointed out, "Fallujah, Ramadi and much of western Iraq has been demonstrating for a year against the vicious, sectarian, US-imposed puppet government of Nouri al-Maliki." Since December 21, 2012, protests have been ongoing throughout Iraq over Nouri's corruption and criminality.  These protests continue.  Iraqi Spring MC notes protests continued in Anbar, Samarra, Rawa, Jalawla and Tikrit (pictured below) and also protests continued in Falluja, Baiji, and Baquba.





    1. الجمعة الموحدة في مدينة سامراء بمحافظة صلاح الدين:
      .

    2. الجمعة الموحدة في مدينة تكريت بمحافظة صلاح الدين:
      .

    Nouri has repeatedly attempted to end the protests.  He's threatened them, he's labeled them terrorists, his forces have attacked them, have followed them from the protests to their homes, his forces have killed them, and so much more.  But of a year and a month, they've protested non-stop.  
    Last week, Abdullah Salem (Niqash) reported:


    All eyes have been on Anbar. But a series of assassinations of Sunni Muslim tribal heads and clerics who have been leading demonstrations in Ninawa leads to worrying conclusions. Extremists from both Shiite and Sunni Muslim groups have the common goal of getting rid of this society’s leaders and causing havoc here too.

    Earlier this week, assailants broke into the home of the Sunni Muslim cleric Radwan al-Hadidi. Al-Hadidi was one of the leaders of the Sunni Muslim anti-government protests in the area and several days earlier he had made a speech criticising extremist Sunni elements. He told media that it was easier to talk with a wall than it was to talk to Al Qaeda. Yet at the same time al-Hadidi was also firmly opposed to the policies of the Shiite Muslim-led government in Baghdad and had demanded that it be dissolved and that the Iraqi Constitution be re-written.

    The men who broke into al-Hadidi’s house murdered him.

    This was not an isolated case. Several of the leaders of the demonstrations in this area have been assassinated over the past year. The murders started after demonstrators started to carry guns - and they started to carry guns after the Iraqi army broke up a demonstration in Hawija, near the city of Kirkuk, in late April. In doing so, they killed around 40 demonstrators and injured hundreds of others.
    “Rumours started circulating that there were now Shiite Muslim militias killing the protest leaders,” says Abdul-Salam Raouf, a local journalist. “Allegedly they were supported by Iran and they included the likes of the League of Righteous led by Qais Khazali and Hezbollah in Iraq led by Wathiq al-Battat.”

    One of the first protest leaders to be murdered was Haitham al-Abadi who was attacked on August 19, 2013. The attack on al-Abad also saw another tribal leader, Ahmad al-Ramawi injured.

    Later that month gunmen targeted Barzan al-Badrani, a prominent tribal leader who took part in the protests. He was murdered using a pistol with a silencer in central Mosul.

    Another protest leader, Tharwi al-Kourz al-Shammari, was also killed in Mosul, next to his house by unidentified gunmen. Yet another protest leader Thaer Hazem Abed was killed by gunmen in September. 
    Then on October 11, cleric Ali al-Shamma was murdered after he finished his Friday sermon in Mosul.




    Tuesday, Nouri's government announced the executions of 26 people.  Thursday, the announcement was 11 more people were hanged.  Tuesday, Human Rights Watch issued World Report 2014 which noted 2012 saw Nouri's government execute at least 129 people while 2013 saw the number increase to 151.  Today another human rights organization attempts raises the issue.  Amnesty International notes:

    Saudi Arabian national Abdullah Al Qahtani is at imminent risk of execution in Iraq. He is one of six men who were reportedly tortured into “confessing” to being members of terrorist organization al-Qaeda.
    Four of Abdullah's six co-defendants were already executed. Abdullah is next.
    Thanks in part to the calls of Amnesty supporters, Abdullah’s execution had been temporarily delayed. However, Abdullah's time is once again running out.

    Please help stop the imminent execution of Abdullah al-Qahtani.

    If you use the link, they have a contact form you can use. Meanwhile Iraqi Spring MC reports Nouri's forces carried out a campaign of arrests in Adhamiya (Baghdad neighborhood that has been protesting Nouri for over a year) focusing on the youth -- the protesters have been predominately young adults.  NINA reports:

    Army troops closed on Friday evening al- Adhamiya district and the roads leading to it and prevented citizens from entering or leaving it after the arrest of Sheikh Mahmoud Abdel-Aziz al-Ani, head of the Council of Scholars of Iraq , and Abdul Sattar Abdul-Jabbar Imam and preacher of al-Imam al-Aadham Mosque .Eyewitnesses in al- Adhamiya district said in a telephone contact with / NINA / that the security forces deployed their military vehicles in different districts in al-Adhamiya especially near its entrances and main streets as a proactive step on the invitations to hold a sit-in in front of Abu Hanifa mosque in protest at the arrest of the two sheikhs .
    The eyewitnesses confirmed that the security forces have forced the owners of the shops and restaurants to close their shops for fear of the evolution of the situation.

    Kitabat notes the rising calls for the two to be released.  Iraq's Sunni Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi remains in Turkey.  May 8, 2012, INTERPOL stupidly issued a "Red Notice" for Tareq.

    interpol

    We noted then that they were breaking their own rules.  The lazy, western media loved it and repeated it -- not reported because they don't know enough to know the basic facts to report.

    Guess who no longer has a "Red Notice"?  Did you guess Tareq?  If so, you're correct.

    There are 41 people still wanted by Iraq with INTERPOL "Red Notices." Tareq is no longer one of them.

    The press that made such a big deal of it last year is no where to be found.  The idiots can always be counted on to scream, "FIRE!" They just can't be counted to ever actually report.

    The Red Notice was cancelled last week.

    Where has the press been?

    Again, they couldn't shut up about the "Red Notice" -- in terms of being a parrot and repeating what they were told.  They couldn't offer any real facts and certainly no analysis.  As the saying goes, there's no app for critical thinking.


    NINA notes that Iraq's Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi met today with US General Ray Odierno and KRG President Massoud Barzani spoke with US Senator John McCain about the Iraq crisis while both were in Davos Switzerland today.  Yesterday's snapshot noted the speech Osama al-Nujaifi gave at the Brookings Institution in DC.  Today Brookings'Fred Dews blogs about the event and ends with  "Get the full event audio." Martin Chulov (Guardian) reports, "Nujaifi, the most senior Sunni Arab in the Iraqi government, said Barack Obama and vice-president Joe Biden had agreed to send direct support to the Sunni tribes, whose leaders had led the Awakening movement that stabilised the province throughout 2007."

    At today's US State Dept press briefing moderated by spokesperson Marie Harf:


    QUESTION: Iraq?

    MS. HARF: Yeah.


    QUESTION: Yeah. Yesterday --


    MS. HARF: And then I think I’m a little tight on time, so we’ll do a few more and then – yeah.


    QUESTION: Okay. Very quickly. Yesterday, the speaker of the house – the speaker of the Iraqi parliament Usama al-Nujayfi gave a speech at Brookings. He gave a very bleak picture of what’s going on in Iraq, and he said that we are at a turning point, at the fork of the road, so to speak, alluding to the next elections, suggesting that Maliki should not run for a third term. Would you advise the current prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, that if he runs for a third term, that would be more decisive to the country?


    MS. HARF: Again, Said, this is – got to your question on General al-Sisi – we don’t take a – well, don’t be frustrated. It’s our position. (Laughter.)


    QUESTION: Okay, I’m – okay, that is your position that --


    MS. HARF: We don’t take a position on who should lead countries.


    QUESTION: Right.


    MS. HARF: I don’t have more details about our discussions with the prime minister about the upcoming elections. We’ve said that the upcoming elections are an important step in Iraq’s future – that we will work with whoever the leader is of Iraq.


    QUESTION: But also, the U.S. was really instrumental and sort of crafting the constitution. And he specifically addressed Article 142, which remains to be a very decisive article among all Iraqis. Would the U.S. also provide technical and legal advice on how to amend that article?


    MS. HARF: I don’t think we need to tell the Iraqis what to do with their own constitution. Obviously, we provide a range of diplomatic and political, military advice to the Iraqis, but I just don’t have anything more on that.



    al-Nujaifi also touched on elections today.  Missy Ryan (Reuters) reports:

    Usama al-Nujaifi, a Sunni, said in an interview during a visit to Washington that he feared attempts to discourage voting or "provoke the situation" in Sunni areas, or to sideline certain would-be candidates, were designed "to weaken Sunni representation in parliament."
    He also warned that poor security could pose problems for the parliamentary polls, scheduled for April 30.
    "If the security conditions worsen, the elections could be postponed (or) if they are held, they will take place under inappropriate conditions," he said.























    First they destroy Detroit

    $
    0
    0
    The Destruction of Detroit is manmade and created by neoliberals.  Detroit is step one.  They will try to replicate this across the United States.  Nancy Hanover (WSWS) reports:

     

    To some, it may come as a surprise that the bankrupt City of Detroit and the hard-hit State of Michigan are subsidizing the Big Three automakers, the pharmaceutical industry, energy companies and virtually every large Michigan business. But a massive giveaway—“corporate welfare,” both locally and nationally—is bankrupting municipalities everywhere as shown by reports from Demos (“The Detroit Bankrupcty”), the New York Times (“United States of Subsidies”) and Good Jobs First (“Megadeals”).

    While making the political decision to use the bankruptcy court to destroy pensions, jobs, city services and public institutions like the Detroit Institute of Arts, the government has been nothing but generous to Fortune 500 CEOs asking for a handout.

    In a city where citizens routinely wait for up to three hours for public transportation and tens of thousands suffer from utility shutoffs in the dead of winter, more than $20 million a year has been awarded to companies including Comerica Bank, Rock Ventures/Garbsman, the Farbman Group, Quicken Loans, the Detroit Medical Center and multibillion-dollar conglomerate DTE Energy.

    Wallace C. Turbeville’s report on the bankruptcy for Demos calls these “extensive subsidies” and suggests the emergency manager “reclaim tax subsidies and other expenditures to incentivize investment in the downtown area” and treat them similarly to the rest of the city’s debt. Of course Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr, a Democrat, has been placed into his dictatorial position not to penalize his corporate masters but to ensure their interests and lay the basis for their dramatic increase in profit-taking.

    Tax boondoggles in the city include a whopping $285 million to billionaire Mike Ilitch for a 45-block entertainment district and $100 million in tax abatements for Compuware, also a billion-dollar company.


    I'm sure my city's on the list (Boston) and your cities and towns probably are as well.

    Detroit is only the first step.

    And when that realization sets in, I hope people still have time to object.  I have been amazed and depressed over the silence that has greeted the wrecking of Detroit.


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


    Monday, January 27, 2014. Chaos and violence continue, Nouri's assault on Anbbar continue, the US government moves to send the thug more weapons, Nouri trash talks Saudi Arabia, talk continues that some provinces may not be allowed to vote in April elections, and much more.



    US Senator Bob Menendez has ended his block on selling Iraq Apache helicopters.  Missy Ryan (Reuters) euters reports the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which Menendez chairs, has agreed to lease and sale Nouri's government approximately 4.8  billion dollars in weapons.  John Hudson (Foreign Policy) offers a higher price tag,  "The move clears the way for Baghdad to lease six Apache attack helicopters and buy 24 more, and includes training, logistical support and equipment. The total price tag is estimated at more than $6.2 billion." Kitabat observes that many Iraqi MPs have also objected to the proposed deal.  Kitabat also notes that Iraq's Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi, when he met with US President Barack Obama in DC last week, expressed the need for conditions on the weapons to ensure they were not used against the Iraqi people.

    The biggest cost will be in blood should illegitimate leader Nouri al-Maliki manage to hold onto the post of prime minister.  While it's true that he is hugely unpopular and, as the 2013 provincial elections demonstrate, so is his State of Law coalition, it's also true that Nouri's never gotten the post of prime minister due to popular support.

    In 2006, the US government nixed the Iraqi Parliament's decision to name Ibrahim al-Jaafari to a second term and insisted instead on their puppet Nouri.  In the 2010 parliamentary elections, Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya beat Nouri's State of Law meaning that Ayad Allawi should have been named prime minister-designate.  But those March election results were not honored by Nouri who refused to step down and his refusal brought the country to an eight month stand still (the political stalemate).  He was only able to accomplish that via the support of the US White House.  Ned Parker (POLITICO) explained earlier this month:


    It was the April 2010 national election and its tortured aftermath that sewed the seeds of today’s crisis in Iraq. Beforehand, U.S. state and military officials had prepared for any scenario, including the possibility that Maliki might refuse to leave office for another Shiite Islamist candidate. No one imagined that the secular Iraqiya list, backed by Sunni Arabs, would win the largest number of seats in parliament. Suddenly the Sunnis’ candidate, secular Shiite Ayad Allawi, was poised to be prime minister. But Maliki refused and dug in. 
    And it is here where America found its standing wounded. Anxious about midterm elections in November and worried about the status of U.S. forces slated to be drawn down to 50,000 by August, the White House decided to pick winners. According to multiple officials in Baghdad at time, Vice President Joseph Biden and then-Ambassador Chris Hill decided in July 2010 to support Maliki for prime minister, but Maliki had to bring the Sunnis and Allawi onboard. Hill and his staff then made America’s support for Maliki clear in meetings with Iraqi political figures. 
    The stalemate would drag on for months, and in the end both the United States and its arch-foe Iran proved would take credit for forming the government. But Washington would be damaged in the process. It would be forever linked with endorsing Maliki. One U.S. Embassy official I spoke with just months before the government was formed privately expressed regret at how the Americans had played kingmaker.



    The US-brokered Erbil Agreement was a legal contract.  To get the heads of the various political blocs to sign the contract, it had to offer them something.  In exchange for giving Nouri the second term he didn't earn, the contract called for him to do certain things (name Ayad Allawi to head an independent national security council, implement Article 140 of the Constitution -- census and referendum on Kirkuk, etc.).  The White House swore the contract had the full backing and support of the US government.  But Nouri used it to get his second term and then refused to honor any of the promises he had made in the contract.  Michael Brenner (Huffington Post) observes, "In the end, al-Maliki's reneging on those pledges to the sunnis generated growing disaffection."

    With that history, the notion that votes matter is a quaint one in Iraq and the highly unpopular Nouri al-Maliki may be able to steal a third term.  In 2013, he called off provincial elections in Anbar and Nineveh.  Only US government pressure forced him to allow the two provinces to vote (months later in June).


    ic of elections, Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi was in DC this week meeting with various officials, doing interviews and speaking.  Thursday's snapshot contained his speech at the Brookings Institution and he noted elections in his speech including in this section:

    So the political components in Iraq were not able to build the Iraqi political system or to implement the Constitution and to reach a genuine partnership and a genuine reconciliation.  They were not able to implement the laws as it should be and get rid of corruption and abuses and they did not respect all the Iraqi components as to represent them  in a fair manner in the armed forces.  According to the Constitution, they did not provide the provinces with enough funds. Also we did not adopt the law on hydrocarbons oil and gas which is very important to set a balanced relation between the provinces and the center for the production and exportation of oil.  
    So some parties are implementing the Constitution based on their own perspective and this is hindering the building of the state, the national cohesion and is leading to more division.  And more and more people are being disappointed and do not trust the political process at this point as we have seen by the very low turnout in the last general elections [2013 provincial elections] and the ones before [2010 parliamentary elections]. We believe that Iraq is, at this point, at a crossroad.  The key to situation is clear and we can find a solution.  What we need though is a strong determination and the political will for everyone to agree on the Constitution and to forget the past, to move beyond the fears and to stop punishing the Iraqi people and move to reconciliation and prevent Iraq from sliding into even greater troubles.  


    Friday, Missy Ryan (Reuters) reported:

    Usama al-Nujaifi, a Sunni, said in an interview during a visit to Washington that he feared attempts to discourage voting or "provoke the situation" in Sunni areas, or to sideline certain would-be candidates, were designed "to weaken Sunni representation in parliament."
    He also warned that poor security could pose problems for the parliamentary polls, scheduled for April 30.
    "If the security conditions worsen, the elections could be postponed (or) if they are held, they will take place under inappropriate conditions," he said.

    There have been charges that Nouri launched the attack on Anbar in order to improve his low polling.  There have been charges that he launched the attack to stop the parliamentary elections planned for April 30th.

    Duriad Salman and Ammar al-Ani (Alsumaria) report al-Nujaifi gave two interviews Saturday, the first to Sky News and the second to Alsumaria.  Osama al-Nujaifi noted Nouri cannot continue to act unilaterally, that there are checks and balances in the system and he was concerned that Nouri thinks he's "singular" when it comes to decision making and that this could lead Nouri to attempt to postpone the upcoming election citing "poor security." Nouri did just that last year.  And he wasn't supposed to.  He ruled that Anbar and Nineveh could not vote.  Under pressure from the US, specifically Secretary of State John Kerry, Nouri relented and, months later, allowed the two provinces to vote.

    He never should have been allowed to postpone them.  He doesn't have that power.  The Independent High Electoral Commission is the only one that does and, as their name notes, they are supposed to be "independent."

    If Nouri tries to keep provinces from voting, it will be worse than last time and it will be worse then cancelling the election all out.  It will be corrupt.

    In another report, Duriad Salman and Ammar al-Ani report that the 'independent' commission is now saying that one or more provinces could be prevented from voting in the parliamentary elections.

    Again, this would make any elections illegitimate.

    This is a way to manipulate the vote and it should not be allowed to happen.

    During the US Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln didn't stop the federal elections.  People voted across the country.  That was during the deadly Civil War, 1864.  He was the sitting president (having been election in the 1860 elections).  The country was ripped in two and violently fighting.  Lincoln didn't say, "Stop! We must stop these elections!"

    And a cheap thug like Nouri shouldn't be allowed to stop any area from voting either.

    Last week in DC, Speaker Osama al-Nujaifi also met with US General Ray Odierno (photo below from the Iraqi Parliament's website).




    In 2010, Odierno wondered, ahead of the March 2010 elections, what happens if Nouri loses and refuses to step down.  The State Dept and the White House dismissed the possibility.  Odierno, of course, had made a solid prediction.


    In 2010, the French government attempted to get support going for a caretaker government in Iraq -- a temporary government that would ease the transition.  The US government worked overtime to torpedo the idead.  Mohamed Gomaa Hazal (Kitabat) notes two Constitutional methods in which a caretaker government can be created.  Article 6 would require a no confidence vote and the formation of a new Cabinet to begin 30 days later.  Article 64 required the Parliament to dissolve and, no more than 60 days later, for a new government to be built.  Hazal is floating that in an apparent effort to prevent another political stalemate -- the ideas appear to be presented in an effort to implement them ahead of the parliamentary elections scheduled to take place April 30th.

    One key problem with the proposal would be that Iraq has no president.

    December 2012,  Iraqi President Jalal Talabani suffered a stroke.   The incident took place late on December 17, 2012 following his meeting with Nouri al-Maliki (see the December 18, 2012 snapshot) and resulted in Jalal being admitted to Baghdad's Medical Center Hospital.    Thursday, December 20, 2012, he was moved to Germany.  A year and one month later, he remains in Germany.

    Jalal remains the head of the Kurdish political party the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (which nose dived in the KRG's September provincial elections).  PUK Media notes:

    In the framework of his visitation to Amed in Turkey and his meetings with Kurdish politicians and officials, Malla Bakhtyar met with Selahattin Demirtash and Gultan Kishanak, BDB co-chairs, yesterday, January 26, 2014.
    In the length of the meeting, Demirtash first highlighted PUK`s role in promoting the notion of having one stance with other political parties of Kurdistan regarding peace and democracy for the Kurdish nation, eventually saying: “I hope that all other political parties would have the same stance as PUK to achieve peace and autonomy to our people.”

    Regarding the peace process in Turkey between Kurds and the Turkish government, Demirtash noted that the process has reached this day due to the efforts of President Jalal Talabani. Then Malla Bakhtyar, Chief of PUK executive body, added that in the past Turkey has been ruled by the military, but now, due to the pure politics of AKP party, a suitable ground for negotiations and discussions is available.


    Really?  Dropping back to May 14, 2013:


    May 8th,  the PKK began their withdrawal process from Turkey.  The Kurdish rebels and the Turkish government had been at war for decades but the two sides worked out a peace agreement.  Trend News Agency describes it this way,  "Imprisoned PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan previously called on members of the organization to lay down arms and leave the country. Turkish authorities promised to create the conditions for PKK militants who laid down their weapons to freely leave the country."
    The effort is a major one and a major one for the region.  It's amazing when you grasp how little commentary there's been on this in the west.  Maybe that's because the west wasn't involved?  Isn't that against the image of why so many dollars and pounds and francs, et al are used?  That area supposedly needs the west so much.  Some days, the talk all but insists that the Middle East can't go to the bathroom without a western escort.



    If Jalal Talabani was influential in the peace process, it was by having a stroke which prevented him from being invovled.  May 8, 2013, Jalal had been in a German hospital -- receiving no visitors other than his immediate family -- for five months.  PUK imploded in the September provincial elections and they're desperate to have something to boast of.  But pretending that Talabani was the leader (on the Kurdish side) is stretching it beyond belief.

    Still on Talabani, All Iraq News notes:

    The wife of the Iraqi President, Hero Ibraheem Ahmed, assured joining the majority opinions over holding the fourth conference of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan.The office of PUK reported in a statement received by AIN ''The Secretary and the members of the central council of PUK hosted the member of the political bureau, Hero Ibrahim Ahmed, at the building of the central council in Sulaimaniya city.''


    Kitabat reports that a group of Iraqi lawyers, the Iraqi Jurists, have written a letter to the UN's High Commissioner for Human Rights, to Human Rights Watch and to Amnesty International declaring that the assault on Anbar is a genocide targeting the Sunni people.   The letter is composed by Dr. Tareq Ali Saleh and notes Sunnis are the victims of genocide campaign carried out by the government, that the bombing and shellings are done randomly leaving civilians targeted resulting in the deaily deaths of women, children, the elderly and unarmed civilians in their home neighborhoods, schools, orphanages and hospitals.  Under the cloak of 'terrorism,' the letter explains, a brutal extermination on the orders of the government of Tehran is being carried out.  The letter calls for an international investigation committee to be formed.


    And Nouri's assault on Anbar Province is a War Crime.  Today, Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi declared, "What is happening in Anbar is close to the level of declaring a have state of emergency." UPI notes, "A monthlong battle in Iraq's Anbar province between anti-government forces and the army has killed 125 people and wounded 541 others, officials said Monday." Reuters adds, "More than 65,000 people have fled the fighting in Falluja and Ramadi during the past week alone, the United Nations said on Friday." NINA notes that "hundreds" continue to flee Falluja as military helicopters continue to bomb Falluja and Ramadi which today left 8 civilians dead and thirty-nine more injured.  Dar Addustour reports that multiple cities in Anbar have been placed under curfew.  Kitabat notes that religious and tribal leaders are in fear of an imminent attack.


    In other violence, NINA reports a mortar attack on Qesayba Village left a father and son injured, Maj. Gen. Mohammed al-Dulaimi ("commander of the 12th division") announced they had killed 2 suspects outside of Kirkuk, an armed attack in western Mosul left 2 Iraqi soldiers dead, an armed attack in eastern Baghdad left a captain in the Ministry of the Interior dead, an armed attack in western Baghdad left 1 army major dead and two Iraqi soldiers injured, 1 civilian was shot dead in Baghdad (Hurriah area), security forces announce they killed 1 suspect in Mosul, and "Unidentified gunmen stormed Alglam police station southeast of Tikrit, killing four policemen and a member of Sahwa force and cut off their heads." Alsumaria adds that a tent shop owner was killed in Mosul and an armed clash in eastern Mosul left 2 police members dead.  PUK Media notes, "Head of the Elections Commission Office in Kirkuk Farhad Talabani escaped an assassination attempt by a bomb explosion which targeted his convoy south of Kirkuk, a police source told PUKmedia." Through Sunday, Iraq Body Countnotes 955 violent deaths in Iraq so far this month.  Sunday, Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) counted 45 dead and 82 injured.   Kirkuk Now reports Sunday saw 3 car bombings in Kirkuk and they have a photo essay of the aftermath here.



    Meanwhile mad dog Nouri picks a fight with everyone.  Press TV quotes Nouri declaring, "The current terrorism originates from Saudi Arabia." This despite the fact, as Press TV, that:  "The clashes in Anbar broke out on December 30, 2013, when the army removed an anti-government protest camp in Ramadi." And that would be the Iraqi military, commanded by Nouri al-Maliki, not Saudi Arabia.

    From the south, Saudi Arabia borders a huge section of Iraq.  It would have been beneficial for Nouri to have ceased the war of words and made peace with the country's government at any time during the nearly 8 years of his awful reign as prime minister.  Instead, he's attacked them publicly almost as much as he's attacked the government of Turkey (which borders Iraq from the north).  PUK Media explains:
    After provoking the issue of Peshmarga with Kurds, the Iraqi PM Nouri al-Maliki wants to proceed to the next level.
    This time, the Iraqi PM accuses Kingdom Saudi Arabia of supporting terrorism, saying: “Saudi denies its support for terrorism because the country is ruled with a sectarian knot.”
    Furthermore, Maliki highlights that he reason why the terrorist groups in Syria feel they are close to victory is because they are supported by a number of countries such as Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia, with the latter being the original source of terrorism.”


    World Bulletin notes:

    Accusing the Prime Minister of enforcing Shiite Muslim domination over the government, a number of tribes in the predominantly Sunni Muslim region of Anbar have revolted against Maliki’s government. Maliki has blamed the revolt on armed Al-Qaeda linked rebels and has ordered his troops to pound the region.
    However, it seems that anyone who opposes Maliki’s new regime is automatically labeled as a ‘terrorist’ and runs the risk of being executed. Last year, around 1,200 men and women were on death row in Iraq after admitting to committing crimes, in many cases signing confessions under torture. Last week, 26 people were executed in Baghdad for committing acts of ‘terrorism.’



    We noted the Kitabat article about the Iraqi Jurists earlier.  Their letter also objects to Nouri's announcement last week that he was going to form three new provinces -- from existing and occupied land.  The letter objects to Nouri's announcement, to his refusal to consult first with the heads of the provinces.  Rudaw reports today:


    Nineveh Governor Atheel Nujafi accuses Iraq’s Shiite-led government in Baghdad of planning to turn Tal Afar and the Nineveh Plain into provinces in order to facilitate a shorter route for Iranian aid to the Syrian regime.
    "Reviewing the maps show that the two provinces proposed are located on the shortest route between Iran and Syria in Mosul," Nujafi said in a statement seen by Rudaw.

    Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki’s government has been accused by the West of allowing Iranian lethal and non-lethal aid to pass through Iraqi land and air routes en route to Assad’s regime, which Tehran backs.
    According to Nujaifi, there has been a systematic plan by the government in Baghdad to divide and cut off Nineveh in order to fuel sectarianism in the province.
    Last week, Iraq's Council of Ministers decided to turn Tuz Khurmatu in Saladin province and Talafar in Nineveh into provinces and recommended a study to turn the Nineveh Plain and Fallujah into additional Iraqi provinces.The decision raised the ire of Iraqi Kurds, because Tuz Khurmatu and Tal Afar are both within the so-called “disputed territories” claimed by both the autonomous Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in the north and the Arab government in Baghdad.


    It amazes me that Nouri's proposal has not been universally condemned.  It should be condemned.

    These are occupied areas.

    When you consider all the time the left spends today on the issue of the Palestinians, the thought that they would now stay silent as it is proposed to hand occupied lands over is appalling.  Should Nouri's plan succeed, is today's left leaving it to the grandchildren of tomorrow to fight the battle that should be fought today?

    Sunday, Nouri's Council of Ministers issued the following:

    Council of Ministers approved a draft law to develop Tal Afar district to be a province in the Republic of Iraq and referred it to House of Representatives, according to provisions of articles (61 / first item and 80 / second item) from the constitution.
    This was stated to Governmental Media and Communication Office by a source at Council of Ministers Affairs Dep. at General Secretariat of the Council of Ministers, which assured also that resolution came at request of Tall Afar Council ,according to  request and support of people of the district.
    It is worth mentioning ,that draft law to develop Halabja province,  has presented to Council of Ministers at its 54th regular session in 31/12/2013 .At this session a new resolution, No. (568) for 2013, has issued, which assigned Office of Minister of State for Provinces Affairs to study reality of districts that, submitted a request to develop into new provinces, and present it to CoMsec to discuss by  council at its sessions.

    The draft law of Tal- Afar has been prepared, including the following four items:

    developing the province, which its centre is Tall- Afar district, and including the following districts with its full administrative borders:
    (Center of Tal Afar – Zammar commune – Rabia   commune - Alaiadi commune). 
    The resolution stipulated that Zammar, Rabia and Alaiadip communes will be districts, belonging to province of Tal Afar and the villages (Aionat - Abu Maria - Tel Moss - Palace Sbrigg - Brglah)  will be communes , belonging to the districts.
    This resolution has been taken because Tal-Afer is one of the largest districts, according to the population and it suffered a lot of deprivation under the former regime and it targeted by terrorist groups from outside border, that killed thousands of its sons when they approached the Center of AL- Mosul to complete their administrative papers 


    Nouri's talk of partitioning has had the effect of leading other provinces to announce that they would like to use their Constitutionally granted powers to move towards semi-autonomy -- similar to what the Kurdistan Regional Government exercises now.  But those three northern provinces want fully autonomy and are moving towards it.   Rudaw reports:

    Within five years the autonomous Kurdistan Region in northern Iraq will have declared independence, according to a senior energy advisor at the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG)."Kurdistan is going to be rid of its status as a region within Iraq,” said Ali Balu,former head of Iraqi parliament's oil and gas committee. “A plan is underway for Kurdistan to be an independent state in the near future," he said.
    Balu believes that plans and preparations are being made on the international stage aimed at declaring independence, which he says will be driven by Kurdistan’s geostrategic position and rich energy reserves.
    He said that Kurdistan President Massoud Barzani’s participation at the World Economic Forum in Davos paves the way for international recognition of Kurdistan as an independent state.

    Dropping back to the January 16th snapshot:

    On the topic of visits, Missy Ryan (Reuters) reports Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi is scheduled to visit DC next week.   Amjad Salah (Alsumaria) reports KRG President Massoud Barazani is off to Europe where he will participate in the World Economic Forum (Davos, Switzerland, January 22-25th).  He's leading a delegation from Erbil -- a KRG delegation.  Bad news for Nouri, he's not apparently going to be heading a delegation out of Baghdad.  Well, it's a World Economic Forum and Nouri's a joke on the international stage, better he stay home in his kennel and let Barzani represent Iraq.

    That was a prestige moment.  Nouri wasn't able to attend.  He was too busy terrorizing Anbar Province.  No doubt they were relieved in Davos to see Barzani, rumors swirl that Nouri blows his nose on the drapes.

    Turning to the issue of the US war on Syria, Yossef Bodansky (World Tribune) offers:

    There is a multi-faceted war going on in the territories of Syria, as well as Iraq and Lebanon. Since the dawn of history, wars ended with winners and losers. In this war in Syria, the Assad Administration has already won and the opposition was defeated. Hence, what U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is telling Bashar Assad in Montreux is essentially something like: “Since our protégés have failed to defeat you and overthrow your government, you should now surrender at the negotiating table.”
    Meanwhile, on the ground, the Bashar Assad administration won the war because it enjoys the support of 70 to 75 percent of the Syrian population. About half of all Syrians — virtually all of them Sunni Arabs — now prefer the Assad Administration to prevail because they are exhausted of war and suffering, they dread the jihadists, and they hate and mistrust the exiled opposition (the one Jabra leads and Obama supports). No verbal magic in Montreux will change this reality.

    Fighting, however, continue to spread. The now fully integrated wars in Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon would have ended long ago with significantly less casualties and suffering had it not been for the “leading from behind” by the U.S. Barack Obama administration. The Obama White House profoundly misunderstood the unfolding conflict and mishandled the local and regional reaction. Alas, the high price has been, and still is being, paid by the innocent civilians.




    Finally, David Bacon's last book, Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press), won the CLR James Award. He has a new book, The Right to Stay Home: How US Policy Drives Mexican Migration.  We'll close with this from Bacon's "THE WORKERS' SCORECARD ON NAFTA" (Truth Out):

    In 1986, a provision of the Immigration Reform and Control Act created a commission to investigate the causes of Mexican migration to the U.S.  When it made its report to Congress in 1992 it found, unsurprisingly, that the biggest was poverty.  It recommended the negotiation of a free trade agreement, modeled on the one that had been implemented a few years before between the U.S. and Canada.  The commission argued that opening the border to the flow of goods and capital (but not people) would, in the long run, produce jobs and rising income in Mexico, even if, in the short run, it led to some job loss and displacement.
    The negotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement began within months.  When completed, it was sold to the public by its promoters on both sides of the border as a migration-preventing device.  During the debate executives of companies belonging to USAÑNAFTA, the agreement's corporate lobbyist, walked the halls of Congress, wearing red, white and blue neckties.  They made extravagant claims that U.S. exports to Mexico would account for 100,000 jobs in its first year alone.
    Some skeptics warned that the agreement would put downward pressure on wages and encourage attacks on unions, because its purpose was to create an environment encouraging investment and free markets. Their warnings were met with another promise -- that a parallel labor side agreement would establish a mechanism for protecting workers' rights.
    Twenty years later, workers have a scorecard.  The promises of profits from increased investment and freer markets were kept.   But the promises of jobs and benefits for working people were not.   As the commission predicted, NAFTA did lead to increasing unemployment, displacement and poverty.  Workers in all three countries are still living with these devastating consequences, while the predicted long-range benefits never materialized.









    missy ryan
    reuters












    kitabat




    Angry Birds and the Red Army

    $
    0
    0





    Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts"Angry Birds" went up Tuesday morning.  If you missed the latest revelations, Barack's illegal spying now includes gathering data on those who play Angry Birds.  If you missed that revelation, you're probably thinking, "Trina's gone nuts!"

    I wouldn't blame you for thinking that because when I heard the news, my reaction was, "What!"

    BBC News reports:

    US and British spy agencies routinely try to gain access to personal data from Angry Birds and other mobile applications, a report says.
    A National Security Agency (NSA) document shows location, websites visited and contacts are among the data targeted from mobile applications.


    Okay, let's note the following from Workers World -- historical information:




    Red Army broke siege of Leningrad 70 years ago


    By on January 27, 2014

    Red Army snipers, Leningrad 1944: Snipers Faina Yakimova, Roza Shanina and Lidia Volodina
    Red Army snipers, Leningrad 1944: Faina Yakimova, Roza Shanina and Lidia Volodina
     
    Editor’s note: The imperialist ruling class puts its plentiful resources into making humanity forget the enormous contribution of the Soviet Union toward defeating Nazi-led German imperialism in World War II. The people of Leningrad made historic sacrifices in that effort that should be commemorated by all supporters of socialism.


    Jan. 27 — Seventy years ago today, the Soviet Union’s Red Army broke through the ring of German imperialist troops that had surrounded  Leningrad — now called St. Petersburg — for 900 days. During the siege, 1 million people trapped in the city died from disease, starvation and enemy action. The city’s liberation came less than a year after Soviet troops stopped Nazi-led Germany’s advance in Stalingrad and forced the retreat that would end with their surrender in Berlin.

    It was the longest siege ever endured by a modern city. It was a time of trial, suffering and heroism that reached peaks of tragedy and bravery that are almost incomprehensible.

    For two centuries Petrograd (St. Petersburg) had been the capital of the Russian Czarist empire, the site of the Czar’s Winter Palace, the seat of the Admiralty, the embankments on the Neva River, St. Isaacs’s Cathedral, the Bronze Horseman and the Summer Gardens. It was the center of Russian industrial development in the early 1900s and thus the greatest concentration of the working class, which made it the logical center of both the February-March 1917 revolution that overthrew the Czarist monarchy and the October-November 1917 revolution that for the first time in history handed state power to the working class.

    German dictator Adolph Hitler ordered the German Army to invade the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941. Some 15,000 Leningrad residents showed up at The Great Kirov Works to volunteer for the “Opolicheniye” Brigades to fight them. Starting on July 10, with only two or three days training, three divisions were rushed to the front.

    The situation was grim. Voroshilov, the commander in chief of the Northern Armies, and Zhdanov, head of the Leningrad Party organization, were in a truly desperate situation. A “Call To Action and Bravery” went out to all Red Army units in the area beginning: “Comrades Red Army men, officers and political workers!  A direct threat of an enemy invasion is now suspended over Leningrad, the cradle of the Proletarian Revolution.”

    In the middle of July, the Leningrad Party organization decided to mobilize hundreds of thousands of men and women to build fortifications. Many defensive rings  were built around the city in depth. By August, nearly a million people were engaged in the building of defenses; people of the most different trades and professions labored shoulder to shoulder — workers, employees, school children, housewives, scientists, teachers, artists, actors, students, etc., worked with their picks and shovels from morning until night, often under enemy fire.

    These defenses, combined with the bravery and determination of the residents and the Red Army, proved essential and sufficient to keep the German invaders from entering the city for 900 days. By withstanding and repulsing the attempt by the Nazis to seize Moscow, Leningrad and Stalingrad, the multinational working class of the Soviet Union saved humanity from extended Nazi rule.

    Articles copyright 1995-2014 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.

    Again, that's an important historical moment.

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


    Tursday, January 28, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, the assault on Anbar continues, Barack Obama wants to arm Nouri al-Maliki in spite of this, Barack offers a brief mention of Iraq in tonight's State of the Union address and can't even get the facts right on that, and more.

    Tonight, US President Barack Obama again wasted everyone's time with a dopey speech that meandered and challenged the listener to remain awake.  The State of the Union Address was carried live on ABC, CBS, NBC and PBS -- no doubt creating a windfall for The CW's Supernatural -- a show Ava and I once described as "like really bad gay porn where the leads forget to take their clothes off."

    What Barack forgot in his marathon speech was foreign policy.  As Jason Ditz (Antiwar.com) observes, "A rambling, 80+ minute State of the Union Address tonight gave President Obama an opportunity to lay out his foreign policy positions, but 60 minutes into the talk he hadn’t touched the matter at all."

    Here's his full remarks on Iraq:


    When I took office, nearly 180,000 Americans were serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. Today, all our troops are out of Iraq.


    Two sentences.

    Two sentences and Baby Barack -- so coddled and fawned over -- couldn't even tell the truth.


    And I think what we have to do is continue to work with the Iraqi Army and others to insure they understand the basic techniques of counterinsurgency. And so I think we continue to do that. We have a very small element on the ground that works in the embassy that has some expertise that can continue to help in these areas. And I think it’s important that we do that.

    "And I think . . ." That's US General Ray Odierno speaking January 7th at the National Press Club.  "A very small element on the ground that works in the embassy . . ."

    All are out?

    No, they're not.  And there's two children in the last 14 days who've noted on Twitter that their fathers are going to Iraq.  To serve in Iraq.  Not sure whether those children are refer to openly serving in Iraq or to Special-Ops, we haven't included them in the snapshots. What we have noted (repeatedly) from a September 2012 report by Tim Arango (New York Times) is this:


     
    Iraq and the United States are negotiating an agreement that could result in the return of small units of American soldiers to Iraq on training missions. At the request of the Iraqi government, according to  [US] General [Robert L.] Caslen, a unit of Army Special Operations soldiers was recently deployed to Iraq to advise on counterterrorism and help with intelligence.        


    Yet Barack declared what?


    US President Barack Obama:  When I took office, nearly 180,000 Americans were serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. Today, all our troops are out of Iraq.


    Is he that stupid or just lying?

    He's the commander in chief of the military.

    Let's hope he's lying and not so stupid that he doesn't know troops are in Iraq.

    Another speech, another lie.  Richard Nixon lives on in the body of Barack Obama.  In fact, the Democratic Party might want to consider staging an exorcism.


    Defense World explains, "Iraq has requested a sale of AH-64E APACHE LONGBOW Attack Helicopters and associated equipment, parts, training and logistical support for an estimated cost of $6.2 billion.  The proposed sale is divided into two separate contracts, valued at $4.8 billion and $1.37 billion, respectively."Jeremy Binnie (Janes) adds, "Iraq has requested another 500 AGM-114 Hellfire laser-guided air-to-surface missiles at an estimated cost of USD82 million, the US Defense and Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) announced on 23 January 2014." Cheryl K. Chumley (Washington Times) notes:

    Congress has 15 days to object to the sale — which wouldn’t be the first U.S.-Iraqi arms deal, AFP said. Earlier this month, the United States announced a plan to ship thousands of M-16 and M-4 assault rifles and accompanying ammunition to help Iraq’s government withstand a militant uprising in the west of the country. U.S. officials have also suggested American forces could help train Iraq’s military, perhaps in a third country.
    Some on Capitol Hill oppose the sale of weapons to Baghdad, worrying that the country might let Iran cross into its airspace to help the Syrian regime — and funnel weapons and supplies to President Bashar Assad’s forces.

    Where's the objection in the US?  Where's the bravery?  Does, for example, the Institute for Policy Study exist today as anything other than an obituary forum for famous dead people?  I don't see how you can be "a community of public scholars and organizers linking peace, justice and the environment in the U.S. and globally" and stay silent on this potential weapons sale.

    Their silence makes Nate Rawlins (Time magazine) and his parroting (as opposed to reporting) look at least timely.

    Jason Ditz (Antiwar.com) notes, "There’s still objection [to the sale] though, and it comes from Iraq’s political opposition. Iraqiya’s top Sunni politician, Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq, has hired a DC lobbyist to specific fight against selling arms to his government." Ditz' link goes to Rosie Gray of BuzzFeed who notes:


    With his country descending deeper into sectarian violence, Iraqi deputy prime minister Saleh al-Mutlaq, the second highest-ranking Sunni politician in Iraq, hired independent consultant Sam Patten for “political consulting services related to the client’s electoral program in the Republic of Iraq,” according to documents filed with the Department of Justice under the Foreign Agent Registration Act on January 18. According to the contract, Patten intends to work for Mutlaq until May (after the parliamentary elections at the end of April) at a rate of $20,000 per month. Patten previously worked for former Georgian prime minister Bidzina Ivanishvili. The contract shows that Patten will be working not just for Mutlaq himself but for the al-Arabiya Movement, a political coalition led by Mutlaq that will be running candidates in the elections in April. The contract allows for a “win bonus” of $100,000 if “expectations are exceeded” at the end of the contract. 



    Arming Nouri with more weapons?  When we know what he's done in the past and we don't even have to go to long ago past, just last year is proof enough.

    The Iraqi Constitution notes that protesting is a right and freedom that all Iraqis can exercise if they so choose.  That's found in Article 38.

    But Nouri doesn't follow the law.  So when the current wave of protests started over a year ago on December 21, 2012, his response was his usual response: call protesters "terrorists" and refuse to listen to the outcry of the Iraqi people.  And, of course, use the security forces to attack the people.


     January 7th, Nouri's forces assaulted four protesters in Mosul,  January 24th,  Nouri's forces sent two protesters (and one reporter) to the hospital,  and March 8th, Nouri's force fired on protesters in Mosul killing three.  All of which were just rehearsals for  the April 23rd massacre of a peaceful sit-in in Hawija which resulted from  Nouri's federal forces storming in.  Alsumaria noted Kirkuk's Department of Health (Hawija is in Kirkuk)  announced 50 activists have died and 110 were injured in the assault.   AFP reported the death toll rose to 53 dead.  UNICEF noted that the dead included 8 children (twelve more were injured).

    Eight children are dead because of Nouri al-Maliki and Barack Obama.  And no one wants to talk about that.  Not in the US, anyway.  Not supposed peace organization, not alleged think tanks.

    Not everyone was slient though.  Thamer Hussein Mousa wasn't silent.  He was there.  He was one of the many peaceful protesters wounded.  His son was among those killed. The BRussells Tribunal carried his eye witness account of what went down:



    I am Thamer Hussein Mousa from the village of Mansuriya in the district of Hawija. I am disabled. My left arm was amputated from the shoulder and my left leg amputated from the hip, my right leg is paralyzed due to a sciatic nerve injury, and I have lost sight in my left eye.
    I have five daughters and one son. My son’s name is Mohammed Thamer. I am no different to any other Iraqi citizen. I love what is good for my people and would like to see an end to the injustice in my country.

    When we heard about the peaceful protests in Al-Hawija, taking place at ‘dignity and honor square’, I began attending with my son to reclaim our usurped rights. We attended the protests every day, but last Friday the area of protest was besieged before my son and I could leave; just like all the other protestors there.

    Food and drink were forbidden to be brought into the area….

    On the day of the massacre (Tuesday 23 April 2013) we were caught by surprise when Al-Maliki forces started to raid the area. They began by spraying boiling water on the protestors, followed by heavy helicopter shelling. My little son stood beside me. We were both injured due to the shelling.

    My son, who stood next to my wheelchair, refused to leave me alone. He told me that he was afraid and that we needed to get out of the area. We tried to leave. My son pushed my wheelchair and all around us, people were falling to the ground.

    Shortly after that, two men dressed in military uniforms approached us. One of them spoke to us in Persian; therefore we didn't understand what he said. His partner then translated. It was nothing but insults and curses. He then asked me “Handicapped, what do you want?” I did not reply. Finally I said to him, “Kill me, but please spare my son”. My son interrupted me and said, “No, kill me but spare my father”. Again I told him “Please, spare my son. His mother is waiting for him and I am just a tired, disabled man. Kill me, but please leave my son”. The man replied “No, I will kill your son first and then you. This will serve you as a lesson.” He then took my son and killed him right in front of my eyes. He fired bullets into his chest and then fired more rounds. I can’t recall anything after that. I lost consciousness and only woke up in the hospital, where I underwent surgery as my intestines were hanging out of my body as a result of the shot.

    After all of what has happened to me and my little son – my only son, the son who I was waiting for to grow up so he could help me – after all that, I was surprised to hear Ali Ghaidan (Lieutenant General, Commander of all Iraqi Army Ground Forces) saying on television, “We killed terrorists” and displaying a list of names, among them my name: Thamer Hussein Mousa.

    I ask you by the name of God, I appeal to everyone who has a shred of humanity. Is it reasonable to label me a terrorist while I am in this situation, with this arm, and with this paralyzed leg and a blind eye?

    I ask you by the name of God, is it reasonable to label me a terrorist? I appeal to all civil society and human rights organizations, the League of Arab States and the Conference of Islamic States to consider my situation; all alone with my five baby daughters, with no one to support us but God. I was waiting for my son to grow up and he was killed in this horrifying way.
    I hold Obama responsible for this act because he is the one who gave them these weapons. The weapons and aircrafts they used and fired upon us were American weapons. I also hold the United States of America responsible for this criminal act, above all, Obama.





    "I hold Obama responsible for this act because he is the one who gave them these weapons."

    And yet Barack is preparing to further arm Nouri al-Maliki.

    Stephen Zunes (National Catholic Reporter) offers this history:


    At the end of December, Iraqi forces violently attacked a protest camp on the outskirts of Ramadi, killing 17 people. Human Rights Watch noted how the government's raid "seemed intended more to provoke violence than prevent it." Indeed, al-Qaida, despite lack of popular support even within the Sunni heartland, was able to take advantage of public anger at the crackdown to launch its unprecedented assaults on major urban centers in the Anbar province. The Obama administration responded by expediting additional military aid to the Baghdad regime.
    This was the fifth major incident during 2013 in which security forces fired upon and killed peaceful protesters. A recent Amnesty International report noted how during the past year thousands of Iraqis were detained without credible charges, hundreds were sentenced to death or long prison terms after unfair trials, and "torture and other ill-treatment of detainees remained rife and were committed with impunity." Even parliamentarians are not immune from imprisonment on dubious charges, and extrajudicial killings have made Iraq the second most deadly country in the world for journalists.

    And we don't even have to go back to the past to see how Nouri uses these weapons on the American people.  We can just look at what's taking place right now in Nouri's assault on Anbar.   World Bulletin notes, "Some 650 people have been killed or injured and 140,000 displaced by indiscriminate army shelling in Iraq's western city of Fallujah, Iraqi Parliament Speaker Osama Nujaifi said Monday."



    And what does the US government do?

    Largely hold Nouri's hand and engage in a little under the sweater groping.  The US Embassy in Baghdad notes the the State Dept's Brett McGurk wrapped up 'diplomacy' January 12th:


    Deputy Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs Brett McGurk completed a visit on Saturday to Baghdad where he met with national and local leaders from across the political spectrum to discuss the security situation in western Iraq. McGurk's itinerary included meetings with  Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, Speaker Osama Nujaifi, Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Deputy Prime Minister Saleh Mutlaq, Deputy Prime Minister Husayn Shahristani, head of the Supreme Iraqi Islamic Council, Ammar al-Hakim, and members of the Council of Representatives from the Iraqiyya and State of Law blocs. He also conferred with prominent leaders from Anbar province, including Governor Ahmed Khalaf, Sheikh Ahmed Abu Risha, and former Minister of Finance Rafa al-Issawi.


    And now?  Deputy Secretary of State William Burns is taking meeting.  Nouri's official government website announces his meeting with Burns today and declares the focus of the meeting was on combating terrorism. According to Nouri, he has the full backing of the US with Burns declaring that the assault Anbar has nothing to do with sectarianism.  NINA has an English language report on the statement (the statement's in Arabic). Burns also met with Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi.  NINA reports:

    A statement by the Office of the Speaker of the House , " Najafi said that during the meeting the importance of a political solution to the crisis in Anbar, and to stop the bombing and the return of displaced people to their homes .
    He stressed that " the tragic situation in Fallujah and exposed him innocent unarmed daily as a result of indiscriminate shelling represents a flagrant violation of human rights," according to the statement .
    The two sides also discussed the " parliamentary elections , and agreed on the need to hold them on schedule." 



    As Kitabat observes, Burns heard contradictory narratives in the two meetings. (They also note Burns met with Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari today but don't include any details of that meeting.)  Last week, Osama al-Nujaifi visited DC and met with many US officials.  Ali Abdelamir (Al-Monitor) reports:

    “US officials’ opinions and positions were much more intractable than I had expected before getting to Washington,” said Nujaifi to Al-Hayat. Several MPs from the delegation accompanying the Iraqi parliament speaker stated that they were surprised by US officials. The latter expressed, for the first time, angry opinions about Maliki's performance and specifically about the current crisis in Iraq and its flare-ups in Anbar. They told Al-Hayat that they heard Secretary of State John Kerry, Vice President Joe Biden and President Barack Obama clearly criticize Maliki, in front of Nujaifi and the accompanying delegation (which did not include Shiites), regarding the management of the current crisis. The MPs also indicated that the US officials were concerned that Maliki’s campaign in Anbar was a maneuver to postpone elections and impose new conditions that contradict democracy.
    US officials seemed concerned about the activities of armed groups in Anbar, the confrontation with the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) and the ensuing assistance to Iraq, including equipment, weapons and information. Yet, they also voiced their fear that the military campaign in Anbar would turn into a settling of political scores and a human tragedy, accompanied by tens of thousands of displaced persons and refugees, especially after the Iraqi army’s shelling of Fallujah and Ramadi that led to the death of civilians.
    Nujaifi clearly expressed his fears and concerns in a speech addressed to an exceptional political American and Iraqi audience in the Brookings Institution's Saban Center for Middle East Policy in Washington. “At this point, Iraq is at a crossroad and the United States must help it in its transition into a successful democratic state,” he said.

    al-Nujaifi's speech at the Brookings Institution is last Thursday's snapshot.  UPI offers:

    Given that Maliki needs AH-64s in the air now so he can mount all-out assaults on the jihadist-held areas of Fallujah and Ramadi, the capital of Anbar province, and that he needs major victories over al-Qaida before parliamentary elections scheduled for April 30, it's possible the leased Apaches may be sent into combat as soon as they're delivered, possibly flown by mercenaries.
    Dr. Bessma Momani is an associate  professor at the University of Waterloo, a member of the Centre for International Governance Innovation and the Brookings Institution.  Saturday, she addressed the arming of Nouri in a column for the Toronoto Star:

    Local tribes in Anbar province did not welcome Al Qaeda forces into their towns in the past weeks and months, but the Baghdad government run by Maliki will take advantage of long-standing local despair and reaffirm its power and control over this restless province.
    The Maliki government is up for re-election this spring and its support base in Baghdad has lived through an already horrific year of terrorist attacks. To shore up his base in the centre of the country, Maliki will want to flex his muscles both politically and militarily.
    Unfortunately, Maliki has been given an international green light to bomb and annihilate Al Qaeda forces in Anbar. The Iraqi leader wants to raise his credentials as a strongman who can control the vast countryside; we can expect him to take a scorched-earth approach to the pounding of Anbar province. The result will be a high rate of civilian death, destroyed infrastructure and resentful families and locals throughout the province.
    Fixing this situation by hammering Anbar province into submission will have enormous blowback. The Iraqi operations will further alienate communities and towns in Anbar from the centre. This will be a catastrophic mistake. The international community is misguided to think a military solution will fill a political vacuum.
    Momani is Canadian.  Where's the American opposition to arming Nouri?  To giving him more weapons to use against the people of Iraq?
    Al Arabiya Net quotes a Falluja resident who was fleeing with his family, "Now we're going to areas outside Falluja to save our children, families and women from the indiscriminate shelling." Saturday,  Alsumaria quoted medical sources who explain that the residential neighborhoods in Falluja are being targeted and that many citizens are being killed and injured.

    Mohammad Sabah (Al Mada) reports that the MPs stressed today in the Iraqi Parliament that there is no "military solution" to Anbar, there is only a "political solution." They noted that the use of the military had only increased tensions and inflamed the crisis   NINA reports security sources tell them seven civilians were wounded in the military bombing of Falluja today.
    Let's stay with violence.  All Iraq News notes a Babel bombing left two Iraqi soldiers injured.  National Iraqi News Agency reports 2 civilians were shot dead in Baquba, "the body of a man belonging to the police Intelligence" was discovered in the streets of Kirkuk (gunshot wounds), an Albu Alwan police station was blown up, a Shora roadside bombing left one police officer injured,  an armed clash in al-Qa'im between security members and rebels left 2 rebels dead, a Ratba roadside bombing left 1 Iraqi soldier dead and three more injured, a Baaj roadside bombing left 1 Iraqi soldier dead and two more injured, a Mosul armed attack left two Iraqi soldiers injured, security forces killed 3 suspects in Shura and Qayyarah,  and an Arab Jbour Village bombing claimed the lives of 5 Iraqi soldiers and 1 Sahwa.  Iraq Body Count counts 987 violent deaths so far this month through Monday.


    Turning to the topic of the Ashraf community,  Iraq's Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued the following today:


     The Cabinet approved today January 28, 2014 on Iraq's contribution with the amount of half a million dollars to a trust fund proposed by the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on October 23, 2014 to cover costs related to transporting the residents of Camp Liberty (formerly known as Ashraf) to a third country.
    Iraq fulfilled its international and humanitarian obligations to transport Ashraf residents to Camp Liberty, waiting for the implementation of international commitments to resettle the Camp Liberty residents outside Iraq.
    The government's decision reaffirms its position on the need to resettle the residents of Camp Liberty in third countries outside Iraq according to the commitments and understandings between Iraq and the United Nations.


    Many will doubt Nouri's word on providing money for this issue since he's repeatedly failed to provide security for the Ashraf community.  The Ashraf community?  As of September, Camp Ashraf in Iraq is empty.  All remaining members of the community have been moved to Camp Hurriya (also known as Camp Liberty).  Camp Ashraf housed a group of Iranian dissidents who were  welcomed to Iraq by Saddam Hussein in 1986 and he gave them Camp Ashraf and six other parcels that they could utilize. In 2003, the US invaded Iraq.The US government had the US military lead negotiations with the residents of Camp Ashraf. The US government wanted the residents to disarm and the US promised protections to the point that US actions turned the residents of Camp Ashraf into protected person under the Geneva Conventions. This is key and demands the US defend the Ashraf community in Iraq from attacks.  The Bully Boy Bush administration grasped that -- they were ignorant of every other law on the books but they grasped that one.  As 2008 drew to a close, the Bush administration was given assurances from the Iraqi government that they would protect the residents. Yet Nouri al-Maliki ordered the camp repeatedly attacked after Barack Obama was sworn in as US President. July 28, 2009 Nouri launched an attack (while then-US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was on the ground in Iraq). In a report released this summer entitled "Iraqi government must respect and protect rights of Camp Ashraf residents," Amnesty International described this assault, "Barely a month later, on 28-29 July 2009, Iraqi security forces stormed into the camp; at least nine residents were killed and many more were injured. Thirty-six residents who were detained were allegedly tortured and beaten. They were eventually released on 7 October 2009; by then they were in poor health after going on hunger strike."April 8, 2011, Nouri again ordered an assault on Camp Ashraf (then-US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was again on the ground in Iraq when the assault took place). Amnesty International described the assault this way, "Earlier this year, on 8 April, Iraqi troops took up positions within the camp using excessive, including lethal, force against residents who tried to resist them. Troops used live ammunition and by the end of the operation some 36 residents, including eight women, were dead and more than 300 others had been wounded. Following international and other protests, the Iraqi government announced that it had appointed a committee to investigate the attack and the killings; however, as on other occasions when the government has announced investigations into allegations of serious human rights violations by its forces, the authorities have yet to disclose the outcome, prompting questions whether any investigation was, in fact, carried out."  Those weren't the last attacks.  They were the last attacks while the residents were labeled as terrorists by the US State Dept.  (September 28, 2012, the designation was changed.)   In spite of this labeling, Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) observed that "since 2004, the United States has considered the residents of Camp Ashraf 'noncombatants' and 'protected persons' under the Geneva Conventions."  So the US has an obligation to protect the residents.  3,300 are no longer at Camp Ashraf.  They have moved to Camp Hurriyah for the most part.  A tiny number has received asylum in other countries. Approximately 100 were still at Camp Ashraf when it was attacked Sunday.   That was the second attack this year alone.   February 9th of this year, the Ashraf residents were again attacked, this time the ones who had been relocated to Camp Hurriyah.  Trend News Agency counted 10 dead and over one hundred injured.  Prensa Latina reported, " A rain of self-propelled Katyusha missiles hit a provisional camp of Iraqi opposition Mujahedin-e Khalk, an organization Tehran calls terrorists, causing seven fatalities plus 50 wounded, according to an Iraqi official release."  They were attacked again September 1st.   Adam Schreck (AP) reported that the United Nations was able to confirm the deaths of 52 Ashraf residents.  In addition, 7 Ashraf residents were taken in the assault.  Last November, in response to questions from US House Rep Sheila Jackson Lee, the  State Dept's Deputy Assistant Secretary for Iraq and Iran Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, Brett McGurk, stated, "The seven are not in Iraq." McGurk's sworn testimony wasn't taken seriously.  Once a liar and a cheater . . .
    The US Embassy in Baghdad issued the following on McGurk's January 11th visit to Camp Liberty:
    Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Brett McGurk visited Camp Hurriya in Baghdad on January 10, accompanied by Gyorgy Busztin, Deputy Special Representative of the Secretary General for the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) and officials from the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR). DAS McGurk met with senior representatives from the Mujahedine-e-Khalq (MEK) as well as survivors of the attack on Camp Ashraf and reiterated the importance the U.S. Government places on the safety and security of Camp Hurriya.  He noted that in meetings with senior Iraqi officials the U.S. will continue to press the Government of Iraq (GOI) to buttress security inside the camp, and welcomed the commitment to install additional t-walls following the next Camp Management meeting among camp residents, UNAMI and the GOI. DAS McGurk stressed the urgency of relocating the residents of Camp Hurriya to third countries as soon as possible and noted the full-time efforts of Jonathan Winer, Senior Advisor for MeK Resettlement, towards that objective. Given the special challenges involved in addressing these issues, DAS McGurk expressed deep appreciation to UNAMI and UNHCR for their work and ensured ongoing U.S. Government support of their efforts.


























    There's always money for killing

    $
    0
    0
    Andre Damon has an important article at WSWS on the efforts by both major parties to attack the people:


    US House and Senate negotiators announced a deal Monday to slash $8.7 billion from food stamps, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which provides food assistance to 48 million people in the United States.
    The cuts are part of the so-called farm bill, a five-year omnibus measure that deals with programs administered by the US Department of Agriculture. A vote on the bill is scheduled in the House on Wednesday, and the lead negotiators for both parties said it is likely to sail through both houses of congress and be quickly signed by President Obama.
    For the second time in two weeks, Congress will vote on a sweeping and draconian austerity bill that most of its members will not have had time to read, and of which the public will have even less understanding. Earlier this month, Congress voted on a budget deal that within days of its official release made permanent most of last year’s sequester cuts.
    The bill’s $8.7 billion in food stamp cuts will slash these benefits by $90 a month for 850,000 of the nation’s poorest families over the course of 10 years. Most of these cuts will be implemented by eliminating what the deal’s supporters call, in Orwellian language, a “loophole,” through which families eligible for home heating aid received extra food assistance.
    “They’re calling it a loophole, but it’s taking away real money from real families,” Joel Berg, executive director of the New York City Coalition Against Hunger, told CNN. He added, “They are gutting a program to provide food for hungry people.”
    Congressional Democrats could barely contain their enthusiasm in praising a bill that will throw almost a million poor families into destitution. “This bill proves that by working across party lines we can reform programs to save taxpayer money while strengthening efforts to grow our economy,” said Michigan Democrat Debbie Stabenow, who chairs the Senate Agriculture Committee.

    Is that not disgusting?

    We're giving weapons to Nouri al-Maliki (thug of Iraq) that he will use on his own people.  To do that, Barack's using our tax dollars.  And this will be billed as "aid."

    It's not aid, it's for killing.

    And if the US government would stop spending so much money on illegal activities like killing people, they could redistribute tax money in a fair and equitable manner which would actually promote growth and income.  They could do food stamps, they could do housing allowances, we could have free college education and so much more.

    Instead, the Democrats and Republicans will spend billions and trillions supporting the deaths of people around the world while failing to provide the needed basics for the American people.



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



    Wednesday, January 29, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, at least 99 reported dead or wounded from Iraqi violence, the weapons sales Barack wants to make to tyrant Nouri al-Maliki mean US boots on the ground in Iraq, Barack's State of the Union lies get called out, Nouri rebukes Barack, NSA whistle-blower Ed Snowden is nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize, KBR's in trouble again, and more.

    Starting with good news, Norwegian politicians Bard Vegar Solhjell and Snorre Valen (Socialist Left Party) have nominated NSA whistle-blower Ed Snowden for the Nobel Peace Prize.

    Ed Snowden is an American citizen and whistle-blower who had been employed by the CIA and by the NSA before leaving government employment for the more lucrative world of contracting.  At the time he blew the whistle, he was working for Booz Allen Hamilton doing NSA work.  Glenn Greenwald (Guardian) had the first scoop (and many that followed) on Snowden's revelations that the US government was spying on American citizens, keeping the data on every phone call made in the United States (and in Europe as well) while also spying on internet use via PRISM and Tempora.  US Senator Bernie Sanders decried the fact that a "secret court order" had been used to collect information on American citizens "whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing."  Sanders went on to say, "That is not what democracy is about.  That is not what freedom is about. [. . .] While we must aggressively pursue international terrorists and all of those who would do us harm, we must do it in a way that protects the Constitution and civil liberties which make us proud to be Americans."  The immediate response of the White House, as Dan Roberts and Spencer Ackerman (Guardian) reported,  was to insist that there was nothing unusual and to get creaky and compromised Senator Dianne Feinstein to insist, in her best Third Reich voice, "People want to keep the homeland safe."  The spin included statements from Barack himself.   Anita Kumar (McClatchy Newspapers) reports, "Obama described the uproar this week over the programs as “hype” and sought to ensure Americans that Big Brother is not watching their every move."  Josh Richman (San Jose Mercury News) quoted Barack insisting that "we have established a process and a procedure that the American people should feel comfortable about."  Apparently not feeling the gratitude, the New York Times editorial board weighed in on the White House efforts at spin, noting that "the Obama administration issued the same platitude it has offered every time President Obama has been caught overreaching in the use of his powers: Terrorists are a real menace and you should just trust us to deal with them because we have internal mechanisms (that we are not going to tell you about) to make sure we do not violate your rights."  Former US President Jimmy Carter told CNN, "I think that the secrecy that has been surrounding this invasion of privacy has been excessive, so I think that the bringing of it to the public notice has probably been, in the long term, beneficial." Since August, he has temporary asylum status in Russia.  Sunday, January 26th Ed gave a rare interview to German TV.  Bill Van Auken (WSWS) notes Ed declared there were "significant threats" against him and that American "officials want to kill me." Ed declared, "These people, and they are government officials, have said they would love to put a bullet in my head or poison me when I come out of the supermarket, and then watch as I die in the shower." Yet, Van Auken also noted that the revelations and the interview itself were "largely blacked out by the US media."

    Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009.  For approximately one month and one week as US president.  In the time since, he has become commander of The Drone War.  The Bureau of Investigative Journalism estimates that The Drone War has killed as many as 3,646 people in Pakistan (200 of those children) and 423 people in Yemen (6 of those children).


    The interview, broadcast by the German television network ARD, was largely blacked out by the US media. The New York Times carried not a word of what Snowden said, while the cable and broadcast news programs treated the interview with near total silence.

    The Nobel Peace Prize Committee gave an award to a War Hawk who is over illegal spying on the entire world.  They can right that wrong this year by giving the award to Ed.  On the illegal spying, Senator Ron Wyden's office noted these remarks Wyden made today during the Senate Intelligence Committee hearing:

    The men and women of America’s intelligence agencies are overwhelmingly dedicated professionals and they deserve to have leadership that is trusted by the American people. Unfortunately, that trust has been seriously undermined by senior officials’ reckless reliance on secret interpretations of the law and battered by years of misleading and deceptive statements that senior officials made to the American people. These statements did not protect sources and methods that were useful in fighting terror. Instead they hid bad policy choices and violations of the liberties of the American people.
    For example, the director of the NSA said publicly that the NSA doesn’t hold data on U.S. citizens. That was obviously untrue.  Justice Department officials testified that section 215 of the Patriot Act is analogous to grand jury subpoena authority. And that deceptive statement was made on multiple occasions. Officials also suggested that the NSA doesn’t have the authority to read Americans’ emails without a warrant but the FISA court opinions declassified last August showed that wasn’t true either. 

    Barack made his own remarks, of course, and did so last night in his State of the Union Address.  In yesterday's snapshot we noted his Iraq lies.  Tonight, we'll note four other voices on his speech.  First up,  Glen Ford (Black Agenda Report) observes:

    Barack Obama, who has presided over the sharpest increases in economic inequality in U.S. history, adopts the persona of public advocate, reciting wrongs inflicted by unseen and unknown forces that have “deepened” the gap between the rich and the rest of us and “stalled” upward mobility. Having spent half a decade stuffing tens of trillions of dollars into the accounts of an ever shrinking gaggle of financial capitalists, Obama declares this to be “a year of action” in the opposite direction. “Believe it.” And if you do believe it, then crown him the Most Effective Liar of the young century.
    Lies of omission are even more despicable than the overt variety, because they hide. The potentially most devastating Obama contribution to economic inequality is being crafted in secret by hundreds of corporate lobbyists and lawyers and their revolving-door counterparts in government. The Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal, described as “NAFTA on steroids,” would accelerate the global Race to the Bottom that has made a wasteland of American manufacturing, plunging the working class into levels of poverty and insecurity without parallel in most people’s lifetimes, and totally eviscerating the meager gains of three generations of African Americans.

    Also providing realities about Barack's economy, Joseph Kishore (WSWS) offered:

    Obama made as brief a reference as possible to the fact that at the end of last year, due to the actions of Democrats and Republicans, 1.6 million people were cut off of extended unemployment benefits. At the same time, he called for “reforming unemployment insurance so that it’s more effective in today’s economy,” which could only mean introducing greater restrictions on eligibility.
    The president was also silent on the Democrats and Republicans having just agreed to slash $8.7 billion from food stamps, only the second cut in the program since it was founded (the first coming just a few months ago). He touted a right-wing immigration reform and his health care overhaul, an opening shot against all the social programs introduced in the 1930s and 1960s.
    The headline proposal from Obama, intended as a sop to the trade unions and the administration’s liberal and pseudo-left supporters, was an executive order to require federal contractors to pay a minimum wage of $10.10. This requirement will only apply to new or renewed contracts, not existing ones.
    In the run-up to the speech, there was a concerted effort in the media to paint a picture of partisan gridlock, which Obama was proposing to overcome through executive actions. Given that Obama’s actual proposals amount to nothing, and that the parties are agreed on fundamentals, Obama’s repeated insistence that “I’m going to do” what is required has the distinct and ominous odor of a presidential dictatorship.
    It is notable that even though it is an election year, Obama made no call for voters to elect individuals pledged to implement his proposals. Rather the speech was an assertion, from an individual who more than any other has presided over the shredding of large sections of the Constitution, that the president has the power to act regardless of opposition. The target of these actions is the working class.
    There was almost no mention of the vast police-state spying apparatus that has been revealed over the past year. The president sits on top of a military-intelligence complex that monitors the communications of virtually the entire planet. The day before Obama’s remarks, the latest information from Edward Snowden revealed that the US and its UK partners collect data from cell phone applications in order to determine the “political alignments” of millions of users worldwide.

    Barack spoke for 80 minutes, so you'd think he'd be able to offer some basic facts; however, basic facts repeatedly escaped Barack.  Margaret Kimberley (Black Agenda Report) offers these facts that didn't make Barack's speech:

    Overall health care outcomes are no better, with the United States ranking at only 37 out of 191 countries. Cuba, which few Americans regard in any positive way, ranks just two steps behind at 39. Costa Ricans, Moroccans, Colombians, and Saudis all have access to better medical care. Most of the members of Congress sitting through the State of the Union address often brag that their constituents have the best health care in the world when those words are obvious lies.
    If America doesn’t take care of its children and can’t provide the best health care for anyone, does it lead in anything? It does in fact but none of these benchmarks are good for human beings. The United States still has the shameful distinction of incarcerating both a greater percentage of its population and the largest number of people than any other country on earth. The dictators we are taught to disdain and the leaders who are seen as enemies all keep fewer people in jail.
    Consider that the Obama administration boasted when the president commuted the sentences of eight people who languished in prison under the old draconian crack cocaine laws. That is good news for those eight persons, but the Obama Justice Department also went to court to oppose efforts to remedy the sentences of 5,000 other people, formally making the case against giving them the chance to be re-sentenced.

    The only other trend by which the United States bests every other nation is the amount spent on the military. The combined defense expenditures of the rest of the world total less than our military budget. Violence is the only arena in which America leads the way.


    Bruce A. Dixon (Black Agenda Report) also provides some facts Barack left out:

    Barack Obama campaigned in 2007 and 2008 saying he would pass legislation raising the minimum wage and making it easier to organize unions so people could stand up for their own rights in the workplace. The president apparently lied. Once in office with a thumping majority in both houses of Congress the president promptly froze the wages of federal workers, and made no move to protect union organizing or to raise the minimum wage. Four and five years later, with the House of Representatives safely under Republican control, the president has begun to make noises about how “America deserves a raise” and has finally declared that federal contract workers will soon have to be paid a minimum of $10.10 per hour.
    Although Barack Obama's career, and those of the entire black political class are founded on the notion that they and the Democratic party somehow “represent” the aspirations and political power of African Americans, the policy concerns of black America were nowhere to be found in last night's state of the union. The speech contained no mention of the persistent gap between black and white unemployment, or the widening gaps between black and white wealth, and reaffirmed his commitment to “Race To The Top” an initiative to privatize public education in poorer communities across the country.
    And of course, no cluster of issues impact black America more savagely and disproportionately than police practices, the drug war and the prison state. African Americans are one eighth the US population, but more than 40% of its prisons and jails. Together with Latinos, who are another eighth and make up nearly 30% of US prisoners, people of color are a quarter of the US population and more than 70% of the locked down. No cluster of issues would benefit more from a few presidential initiatives and well placed strokes of the pen than police practices, the drug war and the prison state.


    But possibly the strongest rebuke to Barack today came from outside the US.  Xinhua reports that the chief thug in and prime minister of Iraq, Nouri al-Maliki, declared today, "The international community must take the responsibility of supporting us and helping all those who stand against terrorism. Allowing weapons to reach terrorist organizations and extremists in Syria means supporting terrorism in Iraq." For those who need a translation, he's saying Barack's arming of the Syrian 'rebels' is providing weapons to rebels in Iraq.  He's calling out Barack's support of the Syrian 'rebels.' And yet Barack would do anything -- and does do anything -- for Nouri.

    Staying in the US, more bad news for war profiteer KBR, Douglas Ernst (Washington Times) reports:


    U.S. soldiers deployed to Iraq between 2003 and 2004 were fed ice that was shipped in unsanitized containers used as temporary morgues, if allegations by the Justice Department turn out to be true.
    The Justice Department is going after military contractor Kellogg, Brown and Root, as well as Kuwaiti companies La Nouvelle General Trading& Contracting Co. (La Nouvelle) and First Kuwaiti Trading Co., for defrauding the U.S. Army, the Military Times reported. The stomach-churning details of food containers is included in the suit.
     No doubt Stephanie Mencimer is working on an 'expose' to again prove KBR's innocence which, of course,  cheap Amanda Marcotte will rush to prop up.  (The two pieces of trash attacked rape victim Jamie Leigh Jones.  She was gang-raped -- like many women, she couldn't convince a court.  That's not uncommon in rape cases.  Nor is it uncommon for attacks on female victims to come from women who wish they were men and court the patriarchy like John Edwards 'booster' Marcotte and like trash Stephie Mencimer.) 

    From the vile to the simply stupid American.  John W. Thomas had a column at the Coloradoan which includes this passage many will agree with:

    Not having learned from Vietnam, along came Sept. 11 and Iraq. The Bush-Cheney administration either knew or should have known there were no weapons of mass destruction -- that was the false premise for sending troops to Iraq. We were told that we had to eliminate al-Qaida in Iraq. We then found out that until we invaded Iraq, al-Qaida was not in Iraq, at which point they came to Iraq in droves and are now there. Al-Qaida -- the ones who perpetrated 9/11 -- were definitely based in Afghanistan, and if we had not taken our eye off the ball there (e.g., killing bin Laden) by invading Iraq, we might have gotten out of Afghanistan a whole lot sooner.

    And most Americans would probably also agree with him that US forces should not be in Iraq (even those which currently are).  But if that's your opinion -- and it is mine -- it's very stupid of you not to object to the US government -- to Barack -- arming Nouri al-Maliki, prime minister and chief thug of Iraq, with more weapons to use against the Iraqi people.  In fact, if you can't object to that army then I guess you are what is ridiculed as a non-interventionist -- an extreme non-interventionist -- because you'll even support the arming of a despot, a tyrant, in order to avoid more US troops going into Iraq.

    It doesn't have to be either or.  But those calling for no (more) US troops being sent to Iraq (that would include me) should also be calling for no arms for Nouri.  Otherwise, they express no real concerns about the Iraq people.

    The Apache helicopter deal went through, despite the Leahy Amendment, why?  Your-Story argues, "One important aspect to consider is the intricate oil infrastructure that should definitely be protected, due to massive energy potential it carries." Yet again, it's all about oil.

    And so we move back to the topic of vile Americans: Michael O'Hanlon.  The Brookings Institution guy is very sensitive and doesn't like being called names.  But what do call someone -- at a worksafe site -- who feels civilian deaths are okay?  I think calling O'Hanlon merely "vile" is showing remarkable restraint on my part.  The Voice of Russia speaks with O'Hanlon about the 24 Apache helicopters Barack is supplying Iraq with:



    [Voice of Russia:] How high is the risk of American weapons and technology causing civilian deaths among Iraqis? Especially considering the fact that it would be inexperienced newly trained Iraqi pilots flying the helicopters.


    [Michael O'Hanlon:]  Well, I certainly think that risk is valid, but I also don’t want to overstate my concern. I mean Iraq is pretty violent even without Apache helicopters being part of the problem and I am not sure they would make it any worse. There is a chance they could make it better. A combination of the Apache helicopters and maybe a better strategy by Prime Minister Malaki could perhaps turn things around. I am not predicting a big success, but it could have partial improvement. And even if an Apache or two made an arial shot and tragically killed civilians, it still might have an overall net effect that was positive for the conflict. So I am not really against the Apache sale, I am just lowering the expectation on how much a difference it will make.




    He's lowering his expectations.

    Because he couldn't lower his ethics -- he's already gone as low as he can there.

    He has no ethical standing and should be rejected by all rational players.  He has just stated that the "risk is valid" for civilian deaths by supplying Nouri with Apache helicopters but he's okay with "tragically killed civilians" because it "might have an overall net effect." Might.

    Civilian deaths will be War Crimes.

    He disgraces himself and everyone else at Brookings with those comments.

    Mad Maddie Albright, asked by CBS News' Lesley Stahl in 1996 on 60 Minutes about how the sanctions against Iraq had killed a half million Iraqi children, replied,  "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price -- we think the price is worth it."

    She cannot live that down.  Seventeen years later and she can't live it down.  Confronted on it in July 2004 at the Democratic Party's convention in Boston, she declared:

    I have said 5,000 times that I regret it. It was a stupid statement. I never should have made it and if everybody else that has ever made a statement they regret, would stand up, there would be a lot of people standing. I have many, many times said it and I wish that people would report that I have said it. I wrote it in my book that it was a stupid statement.

    She cannot live it down.

    If that's just due to her gender will quickly see.  If Michael O'Hanlon's remarks are not strung around his ankle like a ball and chain for the next seventeen years, then the attacks on Mad Maddie were based on gender.  Mad Maddie voiced support for sanctions that led to deaths, Mad Mikey voiced support for civilians being killed instantly by attack helicopters.

    UK's The Platform notes:

    In the past few weeks, the U.S. administration has stepped up its delivery of surveillance drones and missiles to Iraq in response to the Fallujah stand-off, and is one rebellious senator short of selling Iraq dozens of Apache helicopters.
    U.S. foreign policy is at risk of propping up a bad leader and irresponsible government because of an irrational fear that al-Qaeda could take over Iraq.

    Al-Maliki’s administration is continuously emboldened by U.S. funding as Saddam Hussein once was.

    That "rebellious senator" was Senator Robert Menendez who joined with the rest to supply tyrant Nouri with weapons to use against the Iraqi people.  World Tribune reports, "Congress has until Feb. 10 to try to block the proposed sale, which included intensive lobbying by Boeing. Officials said the program would return hundreds of U.S. military personnel for a training program in Iraq." The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency posted two notices this week.  First:

    Media/Public Contact: 
    Lorna Jons (703) 604-6618
    Transmittal No: 
    13-29
    WASHINGTON, Jan 27, 2014-The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress today of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Iraq for support for APACHE lease and associated equipment, parts, training and logistical support for an estimated cost of $1.37 billion.
    The Government of Iraq has requested a possible sale of 8 AN/AAR-57 Common Missile Warning System, 3 T-700-GE-701D engines, 3 AN/ASQ-170 Modernized Target Acquisition and Designation Sight (MTADS), 3 AN/AAQ-11 Modernized Pilot Night Vision Sensors (PNVS), 152 AGM-114 K-A HELLFIRE Missiles, 14 HELLFIRE M299 Launchers, 6 AN/APR-39A(V)4 Radar Warning Systems with training Universal Data Modems (UDM), 2 Embedded Global Positioning System Inertial Navigation System (EGI), 6 AN/AVR-2A/B Laser Warning Detectors, 12 M261 2.75 inch Rocket Launchers, M206 Infrared Countermeasure flares, M211 and M212 Advanced Infrared Countermeasure Munitions (AIRCM) flares, Internal Auxiliary Fuel Systems (IAFS), Aviator’s Night Vision Goggles, Aviation Mission Planning System, training ammunition, helmets, transportation, spare and repair parts, support equipment, publications and technical data, personnel training and training equipment, site surveys, U.S. Government and contractor technical assistance, and other related elements of program and logistics support.  The estimated cost is $1.37 billion.
    The proposed sale will contribute to the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to improve the security of a strategic partner.  This proposed sale directly supports the Iraq government and serves the interests of the Iraqi people and the United States.
    The proposed sale supports the strategic interests of the United States by providing Iraq with a critical capability to protect itself from terrorist and conventional threats. This will allow Iraqi Security Forces to begin training on the operation and maintenance of six leased U.S. APACHE helicopters in preparation of their receipt of new-build aircraft.           
    This proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.
    The principal contractors will be The Boeing Company in Mesa, Arizona, Lockheed Martin Corporation in Orlando, Florida, General Electric Company in Cincinnati, Ohio, and Robertson Fuel Systems, LLC, Tempe, Arizona.  There are no known offset agreements proposed in connection with this potential sale.
    Implementation of this proposed sale will require the assignment of 1 U.S. Government and 67 contractor representatives to travel to Iraq on an as-needed basis provide support and technical reviews.
    There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.

    This notice of a potential sale is required by law and does not mean the sale has been concluded.
    -30-


    Second:

    Media/Public Contact: 
    Lorna Jons (703) 604-6618
    Transmittal No: 
    13-18
    WASHINGTON, Jan 27, 2014-The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress today of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Iraq for AH-64E APACHE LONGBOW Attack Helicopters  and associated equipment, parts, training and logistical support for an estimated cost of $4.8 billion.
    The Government of Iraq has requested a possible sale of 24 AH-64E APACHE LONGBOW Attack Helicopters, 56 T700-GE-701D Engines, 27 AN/ASQ-170 Modernized Target Acquisition and Designation Sight, 27 AN/AAR-11 Modernized Pilot Night Vision Sensors, 12 AN/APG-78 Fire Control Radars with Radar Electronics Unit (LONGBOW component),  28 AN/AAR-57(V)7 Common Missile Warning Systems, 28 AN/AVR-2B Laser Detecting Sets, 28 AN/APR-39A(V)4 or APR-39C(V)2 Radar Signal Detecting Sets, 28 AN/ALQ-136A(V)5 Radar Jammers, 52 AN/AVS-6, 90 Apache Aviator Integrated Helmets, 60 HELLFIRE Missile Launchers, and 480 AGM-114R HELLFIRE Missiles. Also included are AN/APR-48 Modernized Radar Frequency Interferometers,  AN/APX-117 Identification Friend-or-Foe Transponders, Embedded Global Positioning Systems with Inertial Navigation with Multi Mode Receiver, MXF-4027 UHF/VHF Radios, 30mm Automatic Chain Guns, Aircraft Ground Power Units, 2.75 in Hydra Rockets, 30mm rounds, M211 and M212 Advanced Infrared Countermeasure Munitions flares, spare and repair parts, support equipment, publications and technical data, personnel training and training equipment, site surveys, U.S. government and contractor engineering, technical, and logistics support services, design and construction, and other related elements of logistics support.  The estimated cost is $4.8 billion.
    This proposed sale will contribute to the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to improve the security of a strategic partner.  This proposed sale directly supports the Iraq government and serves the interests of the Iraqi people and the United States.  
    This proposed sale supports the strategic interests of the United States by providing Iraq with a critical capability to protect itself from terrorist and conventional threats, to enhance the protection of key oil infrastructure and platforms, and to reinforce Iraqi sovereignty.  This proposed sale of AH-64E APACHE helicopters will support Iraq’s efforts to establish a fleet of multi-mission attack helicopters capable of meeting its requirements for close air support, armed reconnaissance and anti-tank warfare missions.
    The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.
    The prime contractors will be The Boeing Company in Mesa, Arizona; Lockheed Martin Corporation in Orlando, Florida; General Electric Company in Cincinnati, Ohio; Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Sensors in Owego, New York; Longbow Limited Liability Corporation in Orlando, Florida; and Raytheon Corporation in Tucson, Arizona.  There are no known offset agreements proposed in connection with this potential sale.
    Implementation of this proposed sale will require the assignment of three U.S. Government and two hundred contractor representatives to Iraq to support delivery of the Apache helicopters and provide support and equipment familiarization.  In addition, Iraq has expressed an interest in a Technical Assistance Fielding Team for in-country pilot and maintenance training.  To support the requirement a team of 12 personnel (one military team leader and 11 contractors) would be deployed to Iraq for approximately three years. Also, this program will require multiple trips involving U.S. Government and contractor personnel to participate in program and technical reviews, training and installation.
    There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.
    This notice of a potential sale is required by law and does not mean the sale has been concluded.
    -30-

    Did you catch it?  From the first statement:  "Implementation of this proposed sale will require the assignment of 1 U.S. Government and 67 contractor representatives to travel to Iraq on an as-needed basis provide support and technical reviews." From the second statement:  "Implementation of this proposed sale will require the assignment of three U.S. Government and two hundred contractor representatives to Iraq to support delivery of the Apache helicopters and provide support and equipment familiarization.  In addition, Iraq has expressed an interest in a Technical Assistance Fielding Team for in-country pilot and maintenance training.  To support the requirement a team of 12 personnel (one military team leader and 11 contractors) would be deployed to Iraq for approximately three years. Also, this program will require multiple trips involving U.S. Government and contractor personnel to participate in program and technical reviews, training and installation."

    Again -- as we said earlier when talking about John W. Thomas' column -- you can't draw a line between the two.  If you don't want more US troops sent into Iraq then you don't favor sending attack helicopters to Nouri al-Maliki.


    Violence continues in Iraq.  Continues?  It thrives.  Through yesterday, Iraq Body Count counts 998 violent deaths in the month of January so far.  That's 2008 levels of violence, early 2008.  Nouri al-Maliki's managed to increase violence in the last years.   US Navy Captain Bradley Russell (Oregonian) offers this take:


    Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki ultimately bears responsibility for the situation at hand, namely because of his failure to ensure that his government was inclusive for all Iraqi citizens.
    The day after the last U.S. soldier left Iraq, al-Maliki, a Shia, sent his security forces to arrest one of his vice presidents, Tariq al-Hashemi, a Sunni, accusing him of running a death squad and assassinating police officers and public officials. Al-Hashemi escaped but was convicted in absentia and sentenced to death. Al-Maliki then used the very institutions that the U.S. spent millions of dollars to develop, the courts, police, and Iraqi army, to persecute his political rivals and oppress the Sunnis in Anbar.  The government of Iraq’s heavy-handed persecution of their political rivals and two year oppression of Sunnis have given al-Qaeda in Iraq an opportunity to gain a foothold, make a comeback, and provided potent propaganda in their quest to set up a new Islamic state in the territory of Anbar and eastern Syria.

    It is truly a travesty that al-Maliki gave away the opportunity presented him by the U.S.  At the aforementioned cost to the U.S., by 2011 violence had fallen to a point where it was possible for the government of Iraq to expand on hard-fought gains and build another rule-of-law based democracy in the Middle East.  But al-Maliki squandered that option by governing using the criteria of “what’s best for me“ rather than “what’s best for Iraq.”



    How did he squander it?  In part by ignoring the Constitution which required a full Cabinet to be formed in by December 2010 after he was named prime minister-designate in November 2010.  Per the Constitution, the prime minister-designate does not become prime minister until he names a Cabinet.  Because Nouri's State of Law lost the 2010 parliamentary elections to Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya, the White House brokered a legal contract (The Erbil Agreement) to give Nouri a second term and that contract that circumvented the Iraqi Constitution apparently circumvented the Constitutional issue of forming the Cabinet.  Back in July, 2012,  Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) observed, "Shiite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has struggled to forge a lasting power-sharing agreement and has yet to fill key Cabinet positions, including the ministers of defense, interior and national security, while his backers have also shown signs of wobbling support."

    That was true then and it's still true.

    You think maybe those three security posts being left vacant for years might also explain the increase in violence?

    More to the point, Nouri wants a third term.  Can you think of any leader who is more of a failure than one who goes their entire term without having people to head the security ministries?  And this as violence increases?


    Today, there were at least 41 reported deaths and 58 reported injured.


    National Iraqi News Agency reports a Mosul attack left 1 police member and 1 civilian dead,  an attack on a Mosul checkpoint left 1 Iraqi soldier dead and another injured, a Baghdad roadside bombing (Nairiyah area) left 1 person dead and five injured, a Tikrit car bombing left 4 police members dead and five civilians injured, an Arab Jabour Village roadside bombing left 1 Sahwa dead and two of his companions injured,  1 "civil servant working Muqdadiyah General Hospital" was shot dead in Muqdadiyah, 2 people were shot dead and four left injured in a Baghdad shooting (area of Camp Sara), and attack on the home of the "Imman and Preacher of Ali Ibn Abi Taleb mosque" left the Imman injured, a Baghdad car bombing (al-Talibiya area) left 2 people dead and eight more injured, another Baghdad car bombing (al-Jawadain area) left 1 person dead and six more injured, another Baghdad car bombing (al-Jadeeda area) claimed 1 life and left four other people injured, a battle north of Ramadi between security forces and rebels left 10 rebels dead, the military shot dead 3 suspects in Abu Ghraib, and 2 al-Shi'la car bombings left 4 people dead and fifteen injured.  Mu Xuequan (Xinhua) updates the death toll of the al-Talbea bombing by 1 to three dead and the injured by two to ten injured and updates the al-Shi'la car bombings: 4 more deaths (total of eight) and five more injured (total of fifteen).   All Iraq News adds, "An employee of the General Vehicles Company was assassinated to the north of Babel province." And they note 1 Christian was shot dead in Mosul, and 1 "employee of the General Vehicles Company was assassinate to the north ov Babel province."


    AFP offers, "Security forces have been locked in deadly battles in Ramadi, where militants hold several neighborhoods, and have carried out operations in rural areas of Anbar province.  Anti-government fighters also hold all of Fallujah, right on Baghdad’s doorstep." Reuters quotes Iraq's Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi stating, "I'm not optimistic about the future . . .. I think this spark in Anbar will spread to other provinces.  Al-Maliki is targeting Arab Sunnis (in Iraq) in different provinces, with the use of army forces, or handing them death sentences in a way that has never been seen before in Iraq's modern history, and therefore it’s the right of these individuals to defend themselves in every way possible." Al Mada adds that Iraq's Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi spoke with US CENTCOM commander General Lloyd Austin today and that Austin agreed there was no military solution to the Anbar Crisis.  So when will Barack, rebuked by Nouri on the world stage today, take the time to tell Nouri his assault on Anbar Province needs to stop?







    the voice of russia



    mohammed tawfeeq









    The attack on food stamps

    $
    0
    0
    Let's pick back up on food stamps.  Andre Damon (WSWS) reports the latest:
     

    The US House of Representatives voted Wednesday to slash the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, or food stamps) by $8.7 billion over ten years, cutting food benefits by an average of $90 per month for 850,000 of the country’s most vulnerable people.
    The vote, 251-166, came only two days after bipartisan negotiators released the bill Monday, and the vote passed after only one hour of debate on the House floor.
    The Senate is expected to take up the bill Thursday, and to approve it by Friday. White House press secretary Jay Carney told reporters Wednesday that when the bill reaches Obama’s desk, “he would sign it.” The assault on nutritional assistance comes one day after Obama’s State of the Union speech, which was billed as a major address on social inequality but in fact sets the framework for a deeper attack on the working class.
    The cuts are part of the so-called farm bill, a five-year omnibus measure that deals with programs administered by the United States Department of Agriculture.
    The measure had the full support of the House Democratic leadership, including Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Minority Whip Steny Hoyer. Democrat Collin Peterson told The Hill that Pelosi was key in the bill’s passage, saying, “She really worked the bill."
    "I think we got it about right," said, Peterson, the top Democrat on the House Agriculture Committee. “Of course it’s not perfect, if you want perfect, you’ll get that in heaven,” fellow Democrat Tim Walz, who voted for the bill, told Politico .


    This is disgusting.  The White House and Congress refuse to create jobs.  So many people are out of work because there are no jobs and the economy remains in the toilet and yet Democrats and Republicans are working together to cut food stamps.

    They are no longer the people's representatives and we need a major transformation in this country.

    I'm to the point that I'll even get behind term limits.  I am so sick of the members of Congress enriching their own pockets while screwing the American people over.

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


    Thursday, January 30, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, over 1000 violent deaths since the start of Nouri's assault on Anbar, two government ministries are attacked in Baghdad, Americans agree the Iraq War produced no measurable success, and much more.



    Pew's Richard Wilke Tweets on one of Pew's latest poll:






  • The Pew-USA Today poll is covered by Susan Page (USA Today).  Her breakdown includes, "On Iraq, Americans by 52%-37% say the United States mostly failed to achieve its goals. That is a decidedly more negative view than in November 2011, when U.S. combat troops withdrew. Then, by 56%-33%, those surveyed said the U.S. had mostly succeeded." It was an illegal war and it was an unpopular war.  Public opinion turned on it firmly in the summer of 2005.  That is also when Cindy Sheehan staged her first Camp Casey outside Bully Boy Bush's Crawford, Texas ranchette.  Camp Casey was named after Cindy's son Casey who died serving in Iraq.

    Cindy's currently running for governor of California:


    Peace and Freedom Party of Los Angeles presents:
    THE END POVERTY IN CALIFORNIA TOUR
    with
    Cindy Sheehan
    Candidate for California Governor 2014
    Also featuring:
                                               
    Poet Matt Sedillo   & Hip Hop artist Wil B


    Friday, January 31, 2014   6:00pm-9:00pm
    Peace Center West,  3916 Sepulveda Blvd
    Culver City, CA, 90230

    $10 Suggested Donation – no one turned away for lack of funds
    Reception, Meet and Greet the Candidate, Light Refreshments






    The illegal war accomplished little -- if anything -- worth praising.  AFP notes, "Violence has killed at least 917 people in Iraq this month, more than three times the toll for January 2013, according to an AFP tally based on reports from security and medical officials." AFP's Prashant Rao Tweets:









  • Good for AFP for keeping their count but the gold-standard of non-governmental figures isn't AFP.
    Through yesterday, Iraq Body Count counts 1037 violent deaths in Iraq so far this month.  That leaves today's numbers and Friday's number before a final count for the month.


    Nouri al-Maliki's assault on Anbar Province didn't stop the violence.

    UPI insists, "Iraqi forces regained control of parts of two cities overrun by militants aligned with al-Qaida after intense fighting that's killed 850, officials said." But to support that claim, all UPI offers is control of al-Nasaf ("on the western outskirts of Fallujah").  I'm sorry, is that considered good?

    Because when the assault started at the end of December, militias controlled no parts of Iraq.

    Since he started his assault, Nouri's lost territory.  Even if he regains it, he lost it to begin with.

    And that includes Baghdad, as Ann pointed out last night:

    Press TV reports, "Officials say Iraqi forces have retaken control of key areas in west Baghdad from militants amid a deadly standoff between militants and security forces."
    Retaken.
    And note that the Baghdad areas were not "taken" until after Nouri started his assault on Anbar Province.
    Nouri al-Maliki is a crook and tyrant but, even worse, he's a jinx.
    Everything he does backfires.



    Baghdad -- where not one but two ministries were attacked today.  Jason Ditz (Antiwar.com) points out, "But despite those modest gains, the city of Fallujah remains more or less entirely under AQI control, as well as much of Ramadi. The rest of the Anbar Province is largely in open revolt, with Sunni tribal leaders opposed to the Maliki government’s heavy-handed treatment of them."


    Today's violence?   National Iraqi News Agency reports  a bomb in the garage of Baghdad's Transport Ministry left 1 police member dead and "others injured,"2 assailants blew themselves up in the garage and then others tried to enter the Ministry and six were killed, 2 police members were killed and seven more were injured.  Suadad al-Salhy (Reuters) reports on the attack on the Ministry of Transportation.   al-Salhy reports 24 deaths -- four were bombers who took their own lives, 2  were bombers who were shot dead, the other 18 were presumably security forces (though the report doesn't state that).  al-Salhy also notes 50 were injured.
    Tang Danlu (Xinhua) reports, "Gunmen stormed an office of Iraq's Human Rights Ministry in the capital of Baghdad on Thursday and seized a number of officials, a police source said.  The attack occurred before noon when eight gunmen broke into the office in al-Qanat area after a clash with the guards and took unknown number of officials as hostages, the source told Xinhua on condition of anonymity." The garage is the Transport Ministry.  The other aspect of the attack is thought to be all the Human Rights Ministry.  The two are next door to one another.  Both were attacked today.

    That's what prime minister of Iraq and chief thug Nouri has brought with his assault on Anbar, violence everywhere.

    And he's also brought this:


    احد الجرحى الذين اصيبوا اليوم بسبب القصف المتعمد من قبل مليشيات المالكي التي تستهدف الاحياء السكنية في ،




    That's one of Nouri's victims today --  injured by his forces shelling Falluja.  NINA reports that hospitals have received 141 civilians have been killed in Ramadi and Falluja alone this month with another 509 injured and:  "He added that this can not be considered as final number because there are dead and wounded in areas which could not be moved to the hospital." Through yesterday, Iraq Body Count counts 1037 violent deaths in Iraq so far this month.  It's doubtful many counts will include the 141 civilians killed by the bombings and shellings from Nouri's forces.  NINA also notes military shelling left 3 civilians dead in Ramadi with eight more injured.


    Nouri al-Maliki is a War Criminal and collective punishment is a War Crime.  Daoud Kuttab (Crimes Of War) explains:

    Under the 1949 Geneva Conventions, collective punishments are a war crime. Article 33 of the Fourth Convention states: “No protected person may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed,” and “collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.” Israel, however, does not accept that the Fourth Geneva Convention or the Additional Protocols apply to the West Bank de jure, but says it abides by the humanitarian provisions without specifying what the humanitarian provisions are.
    By collective punishment, the drafters of the Geneva Conventions had in mind the reprisal killings of World Wars I and II. In the First World War, Germans executed Belgian villagers in mass retribution for resistance activity. In World War II, Nazis carried out a form of collective punishment to suppress resistance. Entire villages or towns or districts were held responsible for any resistance activity that took place there. The conventions, to counter this, reiterated the principle of individual responsibility. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Commentary to the conventions states that parties to a conflict often would resxort to “intimidatory measures to terrorize the population” in hopes of preventing hostile acts, but such practices “strike at guilty and innocent alike. They are opposed to all principles based on humanity and justice.”
    The law of armed conflict applies similar protections to an internal conflict. Common Article 3 of the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 requires fair trials for all individuals before punishments; and Additional Protocol II of 1977 explicitly forbids collective punishment.


    Nouri's assault of Anbar was supposed to (a) deal with 'terrorists,' (b) be a swift operation and (c) demonstrate Nouri's skill.

    In fact, (a) it's left many civilians dead, injured and homeless (over 150,000 people have fled their homes -- they better not try to flee to Baghdad since the military is preventing anyone entering Baghdad from Anbar), (b) it started the last week of December and it's ongoing with no clear end in sight and (c) he lost control of Falluja, Ramadi, other parts of Anbar and also of Baghdad.

    Skill?

    The assault on Anbar has actually demonstrated that Nouri has no problem targeting civilians, that he utilizes collective punishment (an international recognized War Crime), that he's inept as well as criminal.


    Today's violence?

    National Iraqi News Agency reports a Sooq Shallal of Alshaab area car bombing killed 1 Iraqi soldier and left nine people injured, an armed attack in Kirkuk left 2 Asayish (Kurdish security force) dead, an armed attack in Buhriz left 2 police members injured, an eastern Baghdad (al-Talbiyah area) roadside bombing left five people injuredBabylon's Chief of Police, Hamza Atiya, survived a Hilla assassination attempt which left two of his bodyguards injured, a Kasra car bombing (Morocco Street) left 2 people dead and nine more injured, the Ministry of the Interior announces the Iraqi Air Force bombings in Anbar today killed 27 people,  and security forces boast they killed 24 suspects today on a highway in Anbar Province.

    Nouri's making promises in order to get a peaceful conclusion to the violence he initiated.  The answer, Nouri feels, is largely getting Sahwa to control Anbar.   Sahwa in Anbar are Sunni fighters.  Loveday Morris (Washington Post via Arizona Star) reports:

    To bring them on board, al-Maliki has recently said there is no limit on arming and equipping tribal fighters. Government spokesman Ali al-Moussawi said the Iraqi Cabinet has approved $3.4 million for tribesmen and more than $17 million for infrastructure projects in Anbar. “We are supplying them with more weapons and whatever they need,” he said. 
    But promises to incorporate fighters from the Awakening into the state security forces failed to materialize after the U.S. withdrawal. Facing cuts in salaries and threats from the al-Qaida militants they had fought, numbers dwindled to fewer than half the more than 100,000 men who made up the movement at its peak.

    The Sahwa are Iraqis (largely Sunni -- but not just Sunni according to then-Gen David Petraeus' testimony to Congress in April 2008) who were paid to stop attacking the US military and their equipment.  April 8, 2008, Senator Barbara Boxer noted they were being paid $182 million a year by US tax payers.  Nouri was supposed to pay them, he was supposed to integrate them -- mainly into the security forces but to find government jobs for those not integrated into the security forces.  The US government continued to pay a large number of Sahwas through 2010 as a result of Nouri's repeated refusals to pay the Sahwa.  In addition to failing to find them jobs and failing to pay them, Nouri also began issuing arrest warrants for various Sahwa members and leaders.

    And now he wants to be their friend and they just may be stupid to fall for that.  But the reality is Nouri needs them right now so he will promise them anything.  The thing about Nouri's promises though, they never seem to stick.  His word is worthless.  If pattern holds, he'll use the Sahwa to get some form of resolution to the crisis he kicked off and then he'll kick them to the curb.

    Mustafa Habib (Middle East Online) offers:

    The Iraqi government is facing not just one serious crisis but several. In less than a month the way that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has reacted to various disputes in the country has unleashed a series of crises. He has passed a national budget that is unacceptable to many including the Iraqi Kurdish and Iraqi oil producers, he has angered the heads of a number of provinces and sparked violent clashes in Sunni Muslim provinces by dispersing demonstrations in Anbar.
    To many, it seems that al-Maliki believes that the best way to respond to these crises is just to create another.
    “The 'creation of crises' really is the best description of the political situation in Iraq over the past four years,” Ninawa's governor, Sunni Muslim politician Atheel al-Nujaifi, told NIQASH. “It's brought the country to the brink of civil war more than once. I believe that the Iraqi people cannot cope with any more crises – especially because there really is no clear strategy for the future that might give them even a little hope.”

    Yes, that does describe Nouri, lurching from one crisis to another.  He lacks leadership skills as well as intelligence.  Remember the attack on Anbar is really an attack on protesters.   Al Arabiya News observes:

    Protests broke out in Sunni Arab-majority areas of Iraq in late 2012 after the arrest of guards of then-finance minister Rafa al-Essawi, an influential Sunni Arab politician, on terrorism charges.
    The arrests were seen by Iraqi Sunnis as yet another example of the Shiite-led government targeting one of their leaders.

    But the demonstrations have tapped into deeper grievances, with Sunnis saying they are both marginalized by the Shiite-led government and unfairly targeted with heavy-handed tactics by security forces.



    AFP notes, "It is likely to raise fresh concerns about the capabilities of Iraq’s security forces amid fears the April 30 general elections could be partially delayed, as was the case for provincial elections in April 2013." Yes, AFP, we have repeatedly noted that here for weeks now.  Thanks for finally picking up on it.  Prashant Rao re-Tweets his boy-pal today letting the whole world laugh at him and AFP.  Those late to the party can refer to "A crackpot runs AFP, Al Jazeera and the Christian Science Monitor" -- about how 'analyst' Reider Visser's half-baked analysis influenced Prashant Rao and Jane Arraf thereby making their calls as wrong as Visser's calls -- and while we'd long noted Visser didn't know what he was talking back, it wasn't until that moment that we realized Vissar had sanity issues -- he posted about how he was being followed around the world, and disrupted in libraries, and the FBI was posing as the State Dept and so much more.


    Today, Prashant re-Tweets Reidar Visser's latest 'analysis.' Let's see how Visser does.


    First thing to note, the slots are being discussed, not candidates.


    The list of candidates will once again be vetted by the Justice and Accountability Commission -- a body that was supposed to have done work in 2005 and then vanished.  But Nouri used them in 2010 to kick out opponents.


    Reider offers the following on slots.

    Nouri's State of Law: 277
    cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr's Sadr bloc: 214
    Ibraiahm al-Jaafari's Islah: 205
    Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq's Ammar al-Hakim's Muwatin: 273
    Ayad Allawi's Wataniyya (formerly Iraqiya): 239
    Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq's Arab Iraqiya: 255
    Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi's Mutahhidun: 259


    Main thing to note, Ayad Allawi's far from the political death so many have insisted.


    Let's move over to stolen artifacts.  Yair Rosenberg Tweets:
  • Annals of chutzpah: Iraq seeks return of Jewish archive that it stole from the Jews. My latest in :



  • The Jewish archive is a trove of Jewish artifacts which were stolen by the Iraqi government under Saddam Hussein.  Since the 2003 invasion all but a handful of Iraqi Jews have either left the country or been killed. This didn't happen overnight.  The current government did nothing to protect the Jewish population but thinks they have a right to the Jewish possessions. The White House insists that the archive must be returned due to a contract with the Iraqi government.  Stolen property can never be contractually negotiated.  You can only enter a legal contract over property with someone who is the rightful owner.  Yesterday, Ruth noted the Orthodox Union's press release on the issue:



    For Immediate Release                                                           Contact:
    January 29, 2014                                                                    Roslyn Singer, 212-613-8227

    The Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations (OU), the nation’s largest Orthodox Jewish umbrella organization, commends Senators Pat Toomey (R-PA) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) for introducing Senate Resolution 333, strongly recommending the United States renegotiate the return of the Iraqi Jewish Archive to Iraq. The OU also recognizes Senators Schumer, Kirk, Cardin, Rubio, Roberts, Kaine, Boxer and Menendez for their co-sponsorship and support for this important Senate Resolution.
    The Iraqi Jewish Archive is a trove of Jewish holy books and communal documents rescued from the flooded basement of Iraq’s intelligence building during the United States’ led ousting of Saddam Hussein in 2003.  The Archive, documenting 2,600 years of a Jewish Iraqi history, contains more than 2,700 books and other Jewish artifacts seized from oppressed Iraqi Jews and their institutions by the Hussein regime during the 1970s and 1980s. Sent to Washington, D.C., for restoration and now on display at the Smithsonian Institute, the Archive is scheduled to be returned to Iraq in June 2014 if no immediate action is taken to change the terms of the initial agreement with the Iraqi government.
    Nathan Diament, Executive Director for Public Policy for the Orthodox Union voiced his personal concern: “Due to the oppressive nature of Saddam Hussein’s regime, a once thriving Iraqi Jewish community of more than 150,000 people was reduced to no more than 60 persons by the time United States and coalition forces arrived in Bagdad in 2003. While the Hussein regime is no longer in power, these restored works documenting the Iraqi Jewish community, rightfully belong to that community now living in diaspora around the world, not the oppressive country from which they fled.
    The Orthodox Union thanks Senators Toomey and Blumenthal for their leadership and urges the Senate to pass this resolution in a timely manner.”

    Yair Rosenberg (Tablet magazine) ends his article on the issue as follows:

    Today, there is almost no one left in Iraq to appreciate the Torah scrolls fragments, kabbalistic works, and other rare gems found in the collection. But outside Iraq, there is a thriving Iraqi Jewish community in Israel and abroad. These descendants deserve to have their possessions returned to them, or at least made readily accessible, not put on display in a Baghdad museum where no Israeli can safely visit.
    What happened to the members of Iraq’s venerable Jewish community was a tragedy of profound proportions. Let’s not compound it by abandoning the best historical witness to the lives they led, the treasures they kept, and the world they lost.














    Creamy Corn Soup in the Kitchen

    $
    0
    0
    "Do you ever cook soup?"  Tricia asked that in an e-mail.  All the time.  I've got chicken soup on the stove right now.  Chicken, onion, mushroom, garlic, potatoes, red bell pepper and celery. 

    Tricia wanted to know about corn soups, possibly a chowder or something creamy?

    All Recipes has a Creamy Corn Soup recipe that I love.  I love it for the taste.  It's also a recipe that you can make even if you're a beginning cook. 




  • Directions


    1. In a large pot over medium heat, combine the onion, garlic, parsley and butter or margarine. Saute for about 5 minutes, or until onions are tender.
    2. Add the flour, stirring well, to make a pasty mixture. Whisk in the milk and the broth. Add the corn and the cream cheese and allow to heat through. Add the garlic salt, black pepper and cayenne pepper to taste. Stir together and serve.


    Community member KeShawn e-mailed asking what was "the deal with garlic.  I don't understand how to mince."

    First, if you want to use minced garlic but don't want to do it yourself, you can usually find a jar of minced garlic at most supermarkets.  It will most likely be on the same row as the olives and salad dressing if it is not next to the fresh garlic in the produce section.

    If you want to mince yourself, buy some garlic in the produce section .

    Think of the cloves as hard petals on a flower.  Break off what you need -- what you are breaking off is the garlic cloves.

    Now there are two ways to get the tough outer skin off.  There are more than two ways but most people use either one of two ways.

    You can press down on a clove with a large butcher knife.  You are not trying to squash the clove, just break open the tough outer skin.

    Or you can cut off an end -- or both the way my friend Mayra does -- and peel it off.  (Some people use a potato peeler after cutting one or both ends.  No, you can pull the skin off after you cut one or both ends off.)

    You now have peeled garlic cloves.

    To "mince" them.

    Did you know garlic was a member of the onion family?

    It is.

    Do you know how to chop an onion?

    Most people do.

    Mincing is like chopping an onion. 

    You want thin slices.  Cut lengthwise and then crosswise. 

    If you picture the garlic clover from the garlic bulb as a much smaller onion that you need to chop, you'll be able to mince the garlic without any real problems.


    Now to the fleecing of Detroit.  I have repeatedly noted that this neoliberal scam is about destroying workers pensions and having a tag sale on the city's resources.  Thomas Gaist (WSWS) makes that very clear today:
     

    Details about a 99-page plan of adjustment for restructuring Detroit’s finances began emerging late this week. The plan, drawn up by Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr, will establish a union-controlled retiree “health care trust,” lease the water department to a regional authority and impose deep reductions in pensions, according to the Detroit Free Press, which obtained the document.
    On Friday, the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan sent out a statement announcing a tentative agreement with union-affiliated objectors, which had filed a court challenge to Orr’s plan to eliminate city-paid retiree health benefits altogether. The statement read, “The Detroit Bankruptcy Mediators are pleased to announce that all of the parties to the bankruptcy lawsuit concerning health insurance and other post-employment benefits for Detroit’s retirees (so-called OPEBs) last night reached a settlement-in-principle of all issues in the case covering such benefits through the end of 2014. Following completion and signing of a Mediation Agreement, the parties will submit a stipulation to the Bankruptcy Court dismissing the lawsuit.”
    The statement continued, “The Mediators hope that this settlement will provide a foundation for all of the parties to the bankruptcy to re-double their mediation efforts to reach meaningful agreements which can be incorporated into a fair and balanced agreed-upon Plan of Adjustment to be presented to the Bankruptcy Court for confirmation.”
    Behind-closed-doors mediations overseen by federal mediator Gerald Rosen—selected as point man for the negotiations by US Bankruptcy Judge Steven Rhodes—are ongoing, aimed at piecing together a deal which would convince the trade unions and their affiliated retiree committees to drop all lawsuits against the city and support the adjustment plan. A tentative agreement on retiree health benefits through the end of 2014 has already been reached, according to MLive, and the lawsuits filed by union-affiliated retiree groups are set to be withdrawn.
    The initial adjustment plan, which is not publicly available, calls for the creation of the Detroit Voluntary Employees Beneficiary Association (VEBA), which the city will pay $524 million into over 10 years. The VEBA arrangement is designed to gain the support of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), the United Auto Workers (UAW), and other trade union affiliated forces for the bankruptcy process.
    An unnamed source cited by the Free Press said city worker pension funds will receive only 25 percent of what is owed to them, while other creditors will receive 22 percent under Orr’s adjustment plan. These figures are by no means certain. The Wall Street Journal cited a source familiar with the details who said that “the recovery rate for the pension funds could end lower than the balance sheet shows.”

    You should be very concerned.  Not only is this unfair to Detroit workers, neoliberals are also using Detroit as the test case to see what they can get away with in other cities.


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


    Friday, January 31, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, Nouri's assault on Anbar continues, the White House tries to charm the KRG into giving Nouri his way, Nouri's forces appear to have a Sunni man on fire today, Secretary of State John Kerry's friend -- now being paid by taxpayers -- really wasn't suited for the job Kerry gave him, and much more.




    Tweet of the Day:


    There’s a lot of killing in Darfur. On the other hand, it isn't a fraction of the dead in Iraq, let's say, and it isn't even a tiny fraction


    On a day when even Iraq's ministries have to admit over 1,000 violent deaths this month of January, let's start with thoughts and opinions.  Dave Johnson (Seeing The Forrest) notes there's still no publicly provided answer from the US government to the question: "So why DID we invade iraq, anyway"?


    No answer given, just silence, and the hope that, at some point, everyone will just forget.

    Thursday on All Things Considered (NPR -- link is audio and text). host Robert Siegel spoke with professor Imad Shaheen and NPR's  Michele Kelemen and Deborah Amos about the Middle East.  Siegel used the segment to work in comments from an interview he did with Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq.  And presumably, we're supposed to overlook the fact that an interview was conducted and a segment not provided to showcase the interview -- and overlook that this week, the 'news' program, made time for segments on how to fix "beefy butternut squash chili," luge stories, Superbowl stories, Superbowl related stories, "funny video" stories, "a new look at George Eliot," movie reviews, book reviews, music reviews and a woman who spays animals.  Due to all of that and so much more, All Things Considered didn't have time to air an interview with Saleh al-Mutlaq who met with US President Barack Obama this month.  Below we'll excerpt the opinions of al-Mutlaq that made the broadcast segment.


    SIEGEL: And some players in the region see something else receding: American power and American influence. For example, in Iraq, the deputy prime minister, Saleh al-Mutlaq, a Sunni Muslim, says the U.S. should've done more to create a government that Sunnis could trust. He told me Washington should have and could have.


    SALEH AL-MUTLAQ: America is America. America is the biggest and most important country in the world. If they are really serious in trying to enforce reconstruction(ph) of the country, they will be able to do that.

    [. . .]

    SIEGEL: Now, you mentioned the Iraqis. I want to play something that Saleh al-Mutlaq, the Iraqi deputy prime minister, told me. He is a Sunni Muslim from Anbar Province and I put it to him that President Obama's harshest critics say that the U.S. is not just leaving behind a void that Iran might be filling, but that the U.S. is about to tilt to Tehran, become friendly with Iran.
    And here's what the Iraqi deputy prime minister said.

    AL-MUTLAQ: Well, I mean this is the question of everybody in the region, that something is happening which is strange, that from all that conflict between Iran and America and after America has given the region, especially Iraq, to the Iranian, now they are getting on in dialogue in order to improve their relation. And this is not only my concern. It's the concern of everybody in the region. And it's the worry of everybody in the region, because if you strengthen Iran to that extent, then Iran is going to be the policeman of the region.

    SIEGEL: You feel that Iraq has been handed over to Iran.


    SALEH EL-MUTLAQ: Definitely.


    Tuesday, January14th,  Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq spoke in DC at the US Institute of Peace.  We noted it in that day's snapshot. MP Nada al-Juburi was part of the delegation from Iraq and we noted some of her remarks at the Institute of Peace in the January 16th snapshot.  Joel Wing (Musings On Iraq) has posted the video of her discussion with MP Ezzat al-Shebander that the Institute of Peace's  Sarhanq Hamasaeed moderated.


    Senator Joe Biden, in the years before becoming US Vice President, advocated that Iraq be a federation.  James Kitfeld (National Journal) argues today


    Biden, then a senator, championed a more federal system explicitly allowed by the Iraqi constitution (at the insistence of the Kurds), devolving power from the central government in Baghdad to the provinces. Although Biden denied it at the time, his proposal would almost certainly have led to the de facto soft partition of Iraq into three autonomous regions dominated by Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds. A similar approach in the 1990s patched together Bosnia out of the detritus of the Balkans civil war between Serbs, Croats, and Muslims. In a 2007 op-ed, Biden warned, "If the United States can't put this federalism idea on track, we will have no chance for a political settlement in Iraq and, without that, no chance for leaving Iraq without leaving chaos behind."

    He was ahead of his time. "Biden got it dead right, and I still think transitioning to a federal power-sharing arrangement is the only way to stop the killing and hold Iraq together," says Leslie Gelb, former president of the Council on Foreign Relations, who wrote the op-ed with Biden.

    No, Joe Biden didn't get it right -- dead right or otherwise -- because Joe Biden is an American citizen.  It is not for him, or any other American, to determine what sort of nation-state or country Iraq should be.   Self-determination is not a passing fancy, it's a cornerstone of democracy.

    He was more than welcome to float the idea to the Iraqi people but he had no right to impose it.  The Senate agreed with that which is why his proposal never found traction there but was instead repeatedly rejected.  Had the US split Iraq into three regions, the issue would have been "The US destroyed our country further by breaking us apart in a Balkanization scheme." Though Biden did popularize the idea, he can't claim credit for it nor even just credit for applying it to Iraq.  War Hawk Edward P. Joseph teamed with Brookings' Michael O'Hanlon to promote the idea in 2007.  But they were basing it on the proposal of the Council on Foreign Relations.

    Which would bring us back to Leslie Gelb, wouldn't it?  Gelb backed the Iraq War -- and did so, he said, "to retain political and professional credibility." I don't know how much "professional credibility" there is in applauding someone for promoting your idea when you refuse to acknowledge that it was your idea.  But I do know it's unethical.  

    I also know that if the Iraqi people had decided to split their country into a federation, it might have worked and it might not have.  In other words, I know that Geld lacks the gift of premonition.

    He supports the split so he thinks it would work.  That doesn't mean it would work.

    Since he's not an Iraqi, his continued obsession with a concept that Iraq refused to entertain is a bit of waste of time.
    There's been a lot of deceit, stupidity and silence since media attention in the west returned to Iraq.  Not a lot of bravery, however.  Few have stepped up to the plate to offer anything of real value -- especially as Nouri al-Maliki's assault on Anbar is one War Crime after another.  What happened to all the voices that spoke out when Bully Boy Bush was in offie?  One of them speaks loudly today.   Former US Attorney General Ramsey Clark shares (at Pravda):


    However, the US and UK are seemingly remarkably selective when it comes to tyrants who "kill their own people", and not only have failed to censure their tyrannical Iraqi puppet, Nuri al-Maliki, but are arming him to the teeth with the same weapons which are linked to the horrific birth defects, and cancers throughout Iraq, which he is now using on "his own people." Moreover, if allegations from very well informed sources that he holds an Iranian passport are correct, to say that US-UK's despot of choice appears in a whole new political light would be to massively understate.To facilitate Al-Maliki's assault on Iraq's citizens, the US "rushed" seventy five Hellfire missiles to Baghdad in mid-December. On 23rd January Iraq requested a further five hundred Hellfires, costing $82 million - small change compared to the $14 Billion in weapons provided by America since 2005.The AGM-114R Hellfire II, nauseatingly named "Romeo", clocked in at: $94,000 each - in 2012. Such spending on weaponry in a country where electricity, clean water, education and health services have all but collapsed since the fall of Saddam Hussein.
    Last week an "American cargo jet loaded with weapons" including 2,400 rockets to arm Iraqi attack helicopters also arrived in Baghdad.(iii)
    This week a contract was agreed to sell a further twenty four AH-64E attack helicopters to Iraq "along with spare parts and maintenance, in a massive $6.2 Billion deal." With them comes the reinvasion of Iraq, with: "hundreds of Americans" to be shipped out "to oversee the training and fielding of equipment", some are "US government employees", read military, plus a plethora of "contractors", read mercenaries. (iv)
    According to Jane's Defence Weekly, on November 15th 2013 Iraq also took delivery of: " its first shipment of highly advanced Mi-35 attack helicopters as part of a $4.3 Billion arms purchase from Russia", of an order of: "about 40 Mi-35 and 40 Mi-28 Havoc attack helicopters." 
    The all to "attack his own people" in the guise of defeating "Al Qaida" in Anbar province and elsewhere where the people have been peacefully protesting a near one man regime of torture, sectarianism, kangaroo courts which sentence victims who have also had confessions extracted under torture.

    Along with being a former US Attorney General (and the son of a Supreme Court justice), Clark founded the International Action Center.  Ramsey Clark used his voice to call out the Iraq War, even before it started.  It's a shame so many others can't find their voices.


    The State Dept has continued to ignore Iraq.  Which really just makes people wonder where Jonathan Winer is?  Remember last September when State Dept spokesperson Marie Harf declared, "The State Department has appointed a Senior Advisor for MEK Resettlement, Jonathan Winer, to oversee our efforts to help resettle the residents of Camp Hurriya to safe, permanent, and secure locations outside of Iraq, in addition to those countries, such as Albania, that have admirably assisted the United Nations in this important humanitarian mission."

    The US taxpayers are paying Winer's salary.  At what point does he start giving reports on his progress or lack of it?

    Maybe at the same time that the press starts why a lobbyist got this post to begin with?

    Does he have special language skills?

    Nope.

    Does Winer have a history of working on problems like these?

    In recent years, he's been a lobbyist for APCO Worldwide and Alston & Bird.

    During the Clinton administration, he was in the State Dept.  From 1994 to 2000, he served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Law Enforcement.  While that is State Dept experience, it's really not experience that's going to help resettle the Ashraf community.  

    And it's not just me who notices that he lacks the skills for this posting, he apparently does at well.


    Expert field of competence:
    AML/CFT policy, legal regimes, regulation, design, assessment, compliance, remediation.

    (AML/CFT is Anti-Money Laundering/Combating the Financing of Terrorism.)

    Anyone see anything there about refugees or resettling?

    Nope.

    Because he has no experience.  

    So why was he picked?

    Oh, that's right -- because of who he knows.  From 1985 to 1994, he was Senator John Kerry's chief legal counsel.  Well it's good that John's able to find employment for his friends but at what point does the American people see results for the salary they're paying Jonathan Winer?


    But what's Winer's salary -- even if he's unable to produce results -- when you compare it to all the other US tax dollars the US government can't account for?





  • $6.6 billion of U.S. taxpayers' money earmarked for Iraq reconstruction has been lost, stolen or 'misplaced'.



  • Dropping back to  Tuesday's snapshot:

    Turning to the topic of the Ashraf community,  Iraq's Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued the following today:

     The Cabinet approved today January 28, 2014 on Iraq's contribution with the amount of half a million dollars to a trust fund proposed by the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on October 23, 2014 to cover costs related to transporting the residents of Camp Liberty (formerly known as Ashraf) to a third country.
    Iraq fulfilled its international and humanitarian obligations to transport Ashraf residents to Camp Liberty, waiting for the implementation of international commitments to resettle the Camp Liberty residents outside Iraq.
    The government's decision reaffirms its position on the need to resettle the residents of Camp Liberty in third countries outside Iraq according to the commitments and understandings between Iraq and the United Nations.

    Why has the State Dept had nothing to say about this?  Since the western press hasn't reported on it, it's possible the State Dept doesn't know about it.  But when you've appointed someone to be over this issue for the State Dept and they're taking taxpayer dollars for this job, there's need to be a little more visibility.

    Especially when nasty rumors are swirling that Jonathan Winer's not doing any work but is using the post to enrich his pockets outside the government.


    While the State Dept is silent on all things Iraq, the US Embassy in Baghdad issued the following yesterday:


    U.S. Embassy Baghdad
    Office of the Spokesman
    For Immediate Release
    The U.S. Embassy in Baghdad strongly condemns the January 30 terrorist attack in Baghdad on Iraq’s Ministry of Transportation.  We extend our sincere condolences to the families of the victims and hope for a rapid recovery for those who were injured.
    The United States stands with the Iraqi people and will continue its robust support of the Government of Iraq in its fight against terrorism.


    AFP reports that the Iraqi ministries released their figure for January death tolls today (apparently before the day was over) and they found 1,013 people had died in violence.  The move resulted in this Tweet from Jon Williams.


  • endures bloodiest month since April 2008. Ministries of health, interior & defence say 1013 dead in January, including 795 civilians.


  • Press TV offers this breakdown, "According to the figures, compiled by the ministries of health, interior and defense and released on Friday, 1,013 people were killed in January, including 795 civilians, 122 soldiers and 96 policemen."

    Historically, the ministries -- two of which remain headless and controlled by Nouri (Ministry of Defnese and Ministry of Interior) -- have provided an undercount.  Iraq Body Count hasn't yet posted their toll for January.  Jason Ditz notes Antiwar.com's count is 1,840.  Ditz also notes that Iraq's toll is 1,202.


    B-b-but, it says 1,013 above!!!!!  AFP says so!!!!  Press TV says so!!!!

    They lie, they whore.  What are we supposed to say here but the obvious?

    Jason Ditz reveals that 1,013 is one number but the Iraqi government also noted 189 "militants" were killed for a total of 1,202.

    Prashant Rao is really acting like Piss Ant Rao -- Mike's name for him.

    How many violent deaths?

    1,202.

    When Nouri's forces announce they've killed "terrorists" -- usually in the midst of mass arrests -- we don't call them "terrorists." We call them "suspects" because that's what they are.  There was no judicial finding.  How dare AFP leave out the group the Iraqi government calls "militants."

    I hope we all get that Nelson Mandela was a "militant" and a "terrorist" in the eyes of the now disgraced South African government.

    AFP acts like a tool of the Iraqi government and not like a news outlet.

    1,202 deaths from violence is what the Iraqi government announced -- but AFP couldn't report that, could they.

    Good for Jason Ditz for catching that.  We'll return to the death toll for January in Monday's snapshot when we'll have two other outlets to note.


    Despite the huge death toll and the increased violence,  Iraqi Spring MC notes protests took place today in Samarra, Tikrit, RawaAnbar and, below, in Baiji.






    الجمعة الموحدة في قضاء بيجي بمحافظة صلاح الدين
    .




    Since December 21, 2012, protests have been ongoing in Iraq. Nouri's earlier efforts to stop the protests haven't stopped them.  His threats, his attacks, none of it has worked.  Now if he'd actually listened to the grievances and addressed those?  Things might be a lot different right now.


    This week, the Center for Strategic & International Studies published a report by Anthony H. Cordesman and Sam Khazi entitled [PDF format warning] "Iraq in Crisis."

    It's a lenghthy report with a lot of important passages.  But let's focus on the protests.  The report notes:


    Maliki's increasing repression and centralization of power over the course of 2010 - 2013 fueled the growth of Al Qaeda and other Sunni extremist movements in spite of what appeared to be Al Qaida's defeat in fighting from 2005 to 2008. The US military reported in July 2010 there were only approximately 200 "hard core" fighters left. 

    And:

    At the same time, AQI/ISIS increased its presence in Anbar in Western Iraq, and made use o f its new facilities in Syria. It evidently did reach out to Sunni tribal leaders in the West, and fighters in the Sons of Iraq. It also formed cadres of trained fighters that had trucks with heavy machine guns and mortars, gaining a level of armed mobility it not demonstrated in combat even during the peak fighting in 2005 -- 2008. 
    It was these shifts that allowed it to invade Fallujah and Ramadi in late December 2013, and exploit the power vacuum Maliki left when he removed the army as a result of popular anger against is use against Sunni protest camps. Maliki effectively empowered AQI/ISIS by arresting Ahmed al-Alwani and killing his brother on December 28, 2013, and by using a large-scale military operation to shut down the large anti- government protest camp near Ramadi two days later. Many of the Sunni tribes then mobilized their fighters, and the resulting fighting that persuaded Maliki to withdraw the army from Anbar’s cities and to try to rely on a weak and corrupt Iraqi police force. As a result, Al Qaeda was able to occupy key parts of Fallujah and Ramadi a force of some 75 to 100 armed trucks and less than 1000 fighters

    At some point, the White House is going to have to start seriously confronting Nouri al-Maliki.

    For the record, acting as Nouri tough-guy to get Nouri's way on the oil?  That's not standing up to Nouri.  That's cowering before the tyrant.

    And the White House did that again today.


    The White House
    Office of the Vice President

    Readout of Vice President Biden's Call with President of the Iraqi Kurdistan Region Masoud Barzani


    Vice President Biden spoke today with President of the Iraqi Kurdistan Region Masoud Barzani. The Vice President emphasized the importance of the relationship between the United States and the Iraqi Kurdistan Region, and stressed the United States’ commitment to strengthening its partnership with Iraq. The Vice President and President Barzani both confirmed the need for close cooperation between the Kurdistan Regional Government and the Iraqi government to reach agreement on a way forward on the matter of energy exports and revenue sharing. The Vice President and President Barzani are committed to supporting efforts to confront the ongoing challenge of terrorism in Iraq.


    It's a shame that they have more concern over pleasing Nouri than they do over the safety of the Iraqi citizens.  Sunnis took to the streets to protest over a year ago for serious reasons.  The issues are numerous.  Layla Anwar (An Arab Woman Blues) has summed up the primary issues motivating the protesters as follows:


    - End of Sectarian Shia rule
    - the re-writing of the Iraqi constitution (drafted by the Americans and Iranians)
    - the end to arbitrary killings and detention, rape and torture of all detainees on basis of sect alone and their release
    - the end of discriminatory policies in employment, education, etc based on sect
    - the provision of government services to all
    - the end of corruption
    - no division between Shias and Sunnis, a one Islam for all Iraqi Muslims and a one Iraq for all Iraqis.


    Iraqi prime minister and chief thug Nouri al-Maliki's assault on Anbar Province continues and is, in part, his effort to stop the ongoing protests -- the Constitutionally protected ongoing protests.

    His assault has been a 'success' -- he's lost parts of Baghdad, he's lost Falluja and Ramadi, he's seen two government ministries attacked in Baghdad, over 1062 people killed this month, Nouri's forces arrested police elements in Ramadi who refused to take arms against the rebels,  Euronews notes"reports from rebel media sources in Fallujah claim that an army barracks south of the city was captured and razed to the ground earlier this week." and now an attack on Baghdad International.

    National Iraqi News Agency reports three rockets attacked the airport today.   Arab News points out, "Air traffic was not disrupted, but the ability of militants to strike such a site is likely to heighten concerns about the vulnerability of Iraq’s vital infrastructure as security deteriorates across the country."


    Nouri's assault on Anbar has only demonstrated (a) how weak security actually is and (b) how inept Nouri is.



     Al Arabiya News reports the Iraqi military announced they'd killed 40 suspects in Falluja this week.  In some of the other violence, National Iraqi News Agency reports 3 corpses were discovered "dumped in a river near Alsabtiya bridge northeast of Baquba today," a Mosul armed attack left 1 Iraqi soldier dead, and a home invasion in Badush left 1 woman dead.

    Nouri's assault is a long string of War Crimes.  From Geneva International Centre for Justice's "Stop al-Maliki brutality against civilians" (BRussells Tribunal):


    On behalf of a coalition of NGOs Geneva International Centre for Justice (GICJ) has sent an urgent appeal to the International community and UN bodies following its appeal from 13 January 2014 in view of the horribly deteriorating human rights situation and the continuous brutal attacks against civilians in the province of al-Anbar/ Iraq.
    Since 22 December 2013, an operation led by Iraqi government forces is under way in the al-Anbar province, which, although initially under the pretext to combat terrorists hiding in the desert, quickly turned into a full scale military attack against residential areas with  heavy artillery, tanks and air force. Residential neighbourhoods came under shelling; hospitals and schools were damaged, over hundred civilians killed so far and even injured fired upon.

    Symbolic for the atrocities committed by the army was a video published on several Iraqi satellite TVs on 22 January 2014, showing how al-Maliki forces drag the dead body of a young Tribesman by tying his leg to a military vehicle. 
    Until this day government forces are surrounding the cities in the province of al-Anbar, the biggest of them Ramadi, Fallujah, Karma and Khalidiya, cutting of all vital supplies. This happens under the pretext that these cities have been infiltrated by Al-Qaeda, although the citizens themselves have repeatedly and clearly refuted such claims. Countless people have already fled in fear of the government forces, who are known for their indiscriminate brutality against civilians. The international community must immediately call for a halt of this highly disproportionate use of force.




    On YouTube video has surfaced of Nouri's forces today . . . next to a man being burned alive.  Did they set the Sunni male on fire?  It appears they're not concerned with putting out the fire so it's fair to conclude they started it.   It's the sort of government cruelty that's led Iraqis to protest in the first place.













    antiwar.com
    jason ditz



     



    Detroit and the economy

    $
    0
    0
    Like Iraq, what's happening in Detroit gets little serious media coverage.  WSWS has been an exception in covering Detroit.  Jerry White (WSWS) reports:

    Last week, the Detroit news media leaked parts of the restructuring plan that Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr is set to implement in the largest municipal bankruptcy in US history. Euphemistically called a “plan of adjustment,” it outlines a savage assault that will set a precedent to escalate the attacks on the working class throughout the US and internationally.

    The plan includes ending medical benefits for 23,500 retired city workers and forcing them onto Medicare or Obama’s insurance exchanges. Retirees will also see their already meager pension checks slashed as the city reduces payments to pension trust funds by as much as 75 percent.

    Orr is organizing a fire sale of public assets, including the Detroit Institute of Arts and the municipal water and sewerage system, to pay off the Wall Street banks and other wealthy creditors who control the city’s debt. The elimination of 700 of 1,700 jobs at the water department is only the down payment on the massacre of city jobs to come.

    The Detroit bankruptcy is part of the ruling class strategy to turn the clock back and return workers to conditions of economic peonage not seen since the 19th century. Flatly rejecting any Wall Street-style bailout for the population of Detroit, the Obama administration is using the bankruptcy as a test case to override state constitutions and other legal protections against the destruction of public employee pensions.

    What is taking place is the wholesale theft of workers’ benefits and public assets by a parasitic financial elite that wants the wealth for itself. This criminal operation is being carried out by the politicians of both big business parties at the federal, state and local levels, sanctioned by the courts, and promoted by the media, which is systematically lying to the public.


    It really shocks me that people are so unwilling to speak out against what's taking place in Detroit.  This is not something minor nor is it something specific to Detroit -- it will be implemented throughout the United States.  If not out of compassion, you'd think people would be interested and speaking out due to self interest.  But that's how it goes, I guess that's how it goes.

    People are lulled into some sort of hope-is-around-the-corner belief and they don't get how bad the economy truly is or how so many of us are screwed.

    America was never all that it claimed but there is no longer a plausible American Dream in this country and we've got a man in the White House who doesn't give a damn.  How sad that it had to be a Democrat but how revealing at the same time, you know?


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


    Monday, February 3, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, the assault on Anbar continues, Nouri files lawsuits against a judge and a reporter, KRG President Massoud Barazni gives DC the cold shoulder, and much more.




    Saturday, UNAMI issued the following:

    Baghdad, 1 February 2014 – According to casualty figures released today by UNAMI, a total of 733 Iraqis were killed and another 1,229 were wounded in acts of terrorism and violence in January*.

    The number of civilians killed was 618 (including 178 civilian police), while the number of civilians injured was 1,052 (including 237 civilian police). A further 115 members of the Iraqi Security Forces were killed and 177 were injured not including casualties from Anbar operations.
    “Iraq continues to face substantial security challenges by armed groups who promote violence and seek to divide people. Political, religious and civil leaders urgently need to show national unity in dealing with violence and in promoting social peace. Security operations need to go hand-in-hand with inclusive policies, based on the respect for human rights, the rule of law, social development”, the Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General (SRSG), Mr. Mladenov said. “As fighting continues to affect the people of Anbar, I am deeply alarmed by the humanitarian situation of thousands of displaced families and particularly of those stranded in Fallujah. They lack water, fuel, food, medicine and other basic commodities”, the UN Envoy added.  “It is vital that everything possible is done to ensure that urgent humanitarian aid reaches those affected people”, he said. 
    *Casualty figures for January do NOT include casualties resulting from the ongoing fighting in Anbar, owing to problems in verification and in ascertaining the status of those killed and injured
    Anbar excluded, Baghdad was the worst affected Governorate with 882 civilian casualties (297 killed 585 injured), followed by Salahuddine (105 killed 169 injured), Diyala (89 killed 90 injured), Ninewa (81 killed 82 injured), and Kirkuk (21 Killed, 101 injured).
    According to information obtained by UNAMI from the Health Directorate in Anbar, the total of civilian casualties in Anbar up to 27 January was 138 killed and 598 injured, with 79 killed and 287 injured in Ramadi and 59 killed and 311 injured in Fallujah. Media sources as of 31 January quoted health officials from the Anbar health department stating that civilian casualties in Anbar in January 2014 have been 140 killed and 660 injured.

    Saturday, Iraq Body Count also released their total for violent deaths in the month of January: 1076.  The Iraqi ministries offered their count Friday and Press TV covered it, "According to the figures, compiled by the ministries of health, interior and defense and released on Friday, 1,013 people were killed in January, including 795 civilians, 122 soldiers and 96 policemen." Historically, the ministries -- two of which remain headless and controlled by Nouri (Ministry of Defnese and Ministry of Interior) -- have provided an undercount. Friday, Jason Ditz noted Antiwar.com's count is 1,840.  Ditz also notes that Iraq's toll is 1,202.



    Friday's snapshot included this from Felicity Aruthnot's  Pravada column on Nouri al-Maliki's assualt on Abnar:.


    However, the US and UK are seemingly remarkably selective when it comes to tyrants who "kill their own people", and not only have failed to censure their tyrannical Iraqi puppet, Nuri al-Maliki, but are arming him to the teeth with the same weapons which are linked to the horrific birth defects, and cancers throughout Iraq, which he is now using on "his own people." Moreover, if allegations from very well informed sources that he holds an Iranian passport are correct, to say that US-UK's despot of choice appears in a whole new political light would be to massively understate.To facilitate Al-Maliki's assault on Iraq's citizens, the US "rushed" seventy five Hellfire missiles to Baghdad in mid-December. On 23rd January Iraq requested a further five hundred Hellfires, costing $82 million - small change compared to the $14 Billion in weapons provided by America since 2005.The AGM-114R Hellfire II, nauseatingly named "Romeo", clocked in at: $94,000 each - in 2012. Such spending on weaponry in a country where electricity, clean water, education and health services have all but collapsed since the fall of Saddam Hussein.
    Last week an "American cargo jet loaded with weapons" including 2,400 rockets to arm Iraqi attack helicopters also arrived in Baghdad.(iii)
    This week a contract was agreed to sell a further twenty four AH-64E attack helicopters to Iraq "along with spare parts and maintenance, in a massive $6.2 Billion deal." With them comes the reinvasion of Iraq, with: "hundreds of Americans" to be shipped out "to oversee the training and fielding of equipment", some are "US government employees", read military, plus a plethora of "contractors", read mercenaries. (iv)
    According to Jane's Defence Weekly, on November 15th 2013 Iraq also took delivery of: " its first shipment of highly advanced Mi-35 attack helicopters as part of a $4.3 Billion arms purchase from Russia", of an order of: "about 40 Mi-35 and 40 Mi-28 Havoc attack helicopters." 

    The all to "attack his own people" in the guise of defeating "Al Qaida" in Anbar province and elsewhere where the people have been peacefully protesting a near one man regime of torture, sectarianism, kangaroo courts which sentence victims who have also had confessions extracted under torture.

    My apologies to Felicity Aruthnot because I wrongly credited this to Ramsey Clark and did not realize my error until I read her same column at Dissident Voice Saturday morning  Again, my apologies for my error.


    Iraq's prime minister and chief thug Nouri al-Maliki continues his assault on Anbar Province.  Ramzy Baroud (Arab News) comments:


    As US Secretary of State John Kerry hurried to his helicopter ready to take off at the end of a visit to Iraq last year, it was becoming clearer that the Americans have lost control of a country they wished to mold to their liking. His departure on March 24, 2013 was the conclusion of a “surprise” visit meant to mark the 10th anniversary of the US invasion of Iraq. Ten years prior, the US had stormed Baghdad, unleashing one of the 20th century’s most brutal and longest conflicts. Since then, Iraq has not ceased to bleed.
    Kerry offered nothing of value on that visit, save the same predictable clichés of Iraq’s supposedly successful democracy, as a testament to some imagined triumph of American values. But it was telling that a decade of war was not even enough to assure an ordinary trip for the American diplomat. It was a “surprise” because no amount of coordination between the US Embassy, then consisting of 16,000 staff, and the Iraqi government, could guarantee Kerry’s safety.
    Yet something sinister was brewing in Iraq. Mostly Muslim Sunni tribesmen were fed up with the political paradigm imposed by the Americans almost immediately upon their arrival, which divided the country on sectarian lines. The Sunni areas, in the center and west of the country, paid a terrible price for the US invasion that empowered political elites purported to speak on behalf of the Shiites. The latter, who were mostly predisposed by Iranian interests, began to slowly diversify their allegiance. Initially, they played the game per US rules and served as an iron fist against those who dared resist the occupation. But as years passed, the likes of current Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki, found in Iran a more stable ally: Where sect, politics and economic interests seamlessly align. Thus, Iraq was ruled over by a strange, albeit undeclared troika in which the US and Iran had great political leverage where the Shiite-dominated government cleverly attempted to find balance and survive.
    Of course, a country with the size and history of Iraq doesn’t easily descend into sectarian madness on its own. But Shiite and Sunni politicians and intellectuals who refused to adhere to the prevailing intolerant political archetype were long sidelined — killed, imprisoned, deported and simply had no space in today’s Iraq — as national identity was banished by sect, tribe, religion and race.


    Also offering a take on the current events is Saadula Aqrawi (Kurdish Globe):



    Nothing seems to have changed in the new federal democracy of Iraq: the government is ruled by the same ideology, the same minds, the same policies. Personally, I don't think the democratic system is to blame, it's more about the cultures of the Middle East.

    Nothing seems to have changed in the new federal democracy of Iraq: the government is ruled by the same ideology, the same minds, the same policies.
    Personally, I don?t think the democratic system is to blame, it's more about the cultures of the Middle East.
    The Kurds have taken the Iraqi government to task over the political cost of excluding Sunnis, Kurds and other ethnic minorities.
    The Iraqi government's mismanagement of Iraqi politics has contributing to the recent surge in violence.
    The insurgents believe the Iraqi government is too dominated by Iran, and Baghdad's mistreatment of the Sunnis and the Kurds is pushing the former towards extremism.
    The unwise policies currently being pursued by the Iraqi Government are the same that drove Iraq to civil war over the last decade, and there is every reason to fear the same fate may befall Iraq once more. 




    Iraqi novelist and activist Haifa Zangana delivered a presentation before the European Parliament last Thursday.  BRussells Tribunal carries the presentation in full and we'll note the opening here:

    National Iraqi News Agency reported on Fri 24th January that the Iraqi military's mortar shelling the night before left 4 people dead and 32 more injured "including women and children" and Saturday’s military shelling of Falluja left 5 people dead and 14 more injured -- "most of them women and children." Falluja General Hospital was shelled as well.
    Iraqi’s government assault on Anbar continues.  Maliki’s Collective punishment is called “Revenge for the martyr Mohamed” which was preceded by a campaign with the title: “Revenge for martyrs”.
    And the attacks have been indiscriminate leading many civilians to flee.  – The UN refugee agency on Friday reported[1] that more than 65,000 people had over the past week fled the conflict in the cities of Fallujah and Ramadi in central Iraq's Anbar province. Since fighting broke out at the end of last year, more than 140,000 people have been made homeless by fighting according to Iraq's Ministry of Displacement and Migration.
    This number comes on top of the 1.13 million people already internally displaced in Iraq and who are mostly residing in Baghdad, Diyala and Ninewa provinces.
    "Many of the displaced, nonetheless, are still in desperate need of food, medical care, and other aid. As the insecurity has spread, many families who fled several weeks ago have been displaced again," according to UN.
    The UN in Iraq has asked the government to facilitate the opening of a humanitarian corridor to reach displaced and stranded families in Anbar province. Currently, it is impossible to reach the area from Baghdad and relief agencies are using roads coming from northern Iraq.
    Why am I talking about this and not about workshops for women’s empowerment and gender equality and political participation?  Because In order to fully address women’s issues and come with helpful policy suggestions we need to address women not as separate from the rest of society, but as a part of it  together with men.
    .. and allow me to read the rest of the report :
    “Other areas of Iraq including Baghdad, Erbil, Kerbala, Salah-al-Din and Ninewa have witnessed the arrival of thousands of displaced people. People are reportedly without money for food and lack suitable clothing for the rainy conditions. Children are not in school and sanitary conditions, particularly for women, are inadequate.”
    The suffering of the displaced is far beyond the sheer loss of a house, it is the loss of neighborhood, community; schools and health service, the feeling of safety associated with familiarities and on the long run the submission to the newly manufactured identity   . The lack of one of these or the combination of all leads to extreme levels of trauma, fear, depression, anxiety and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder[2].
    The regression in women’s situation is so devastating that she has reached the bottom of human needs. Just to survive.
    I will focus on violence in the public sphere and how it became so prominent that women have been forced to give up hard earned rights, such as employment, freedom of movement, abolition of polygamy, and the right for education and health service, seeking instead, protection for themselves and their families.


    All Iraq News repors a security source has told them "that the security forces are preparing to storm in Fallujah city." Ammar Karim and, Salam Faraj (AFP)  add, "A security official told AFP that an assault on the city was imminent, but a journalist in Fallujah said it was largely calm on Monday."

    In reaction to the announcement of an impending all-out assault on Falluja, Wael Grace (Al Mada) reports Anbar government officials are calling such an attack "madness" and stating it will only increase the national crisis.  MP Hamid al-Mutlaq denounces the plan as "insane" and declares that it can only lead to more blood spilled and more cracks and fissures in the national unity.  He states you cannot call for peace while screaming war.

    Khaled Qaraghouli (Kitabat) notes the military assault on the cities of Anbar has resulted in indiscriminate bombing and shelling which have in turn led many to flee their homes -- fleeing from the military, which is supposed to provide safety -- and becoming displaced while the public infrastructure in Anbar is being destroyed by the bombings and shellings.

    Friday, a horrific video came out of Anbar and made it to YouTube.  From that day's snapshot:

    On YouTube video has surfaced of Nouri's forces today . . . next to a man being burned alive.  Did they set the Sunni male on fire?  It appears they're not concerned with putting out the fire so it's fair to conclude they started it.   It's the sort of government cruelty that's led Iraqis to protest in the first place.


    That video is impossible to forget.

    Mahdi Jassim (Kitabat) notes the video  today in a column that opens noting how Iraq (which created the zero) is seen as the owners of the written word, that a Moroccan friend points this out to Mahdi Jassim.  And how Jassim wonders what the impact of that video will be on the way people see Iraq, watching soldiers dancing next to corpses being burned?  Mahdi Jassim asks where is God's humanity and how can that soldier be dancing while the corpse is burning?   Jassim writes of wanting to believe it was a lie, wanting to believe it was being seen wrong somehow  Jassim writes that it appears the government is now beyond all laws -- international and humanitarian -- and that shameful crimes, barbaric crimes are being carried out.   Jassim says that as the government continues to fail to rebuke the actions captured on video, it sends a message that these actions are not the plans of a few soldiers but the direction that the government itself has trained the soldiers to carry out.

    It's a very strong column.

    Nothing like it has appeared in the US press but the US press hasn't even noted the video which surfaced Friday -- still hasn't noted the video.

    Let's note some of the day's violence thus far. National Iraqi News Agency reports 2 Abu Deshir car bombings left 1 person dead and sixteen more injured, Joint Operations Command announced they killed 3 suspects in Mosul and burned their car as well, 1 civilian was shot dead in Baquba, a Taj al-Din car bombing left three people injured, an eastern Baghdad sticky bombing (Palestine Street) left 1 police member killed and another injured, a Sadr City car bombing left five people injured, attacks in Abu Garma and al-Mukhisa villages left 2 Iraqi soldiers dead and two more and one Sahwa injured,  the Ministry of Defense announced their forces had killed 57 people in Anbar Province today, this apparently does not include the 57 that the MoD announced they had killed last night and today in Ramadi alone, an attack on a checkpoint "northeast of Baquba" left three Iraqi soldiers injured, 4 corpses were discovered dumped in Baghdad (all were shot dead), 2 Baghdad shootings left 1 person dead and another injured, Tigris Operations Command announced they had killed "the Emir of the ISIS and four of his aids" in Diyala Province, security forces announced that northeast of Baquba they killed "a close relative" of a man they suspect of being a terrorist, and Dr. Essam Hassan (the "Acting Iraqiya Rector" -- Iraqiya University) survived an assassination attempt (by grenade) in Baghdad todayAll Iraq News adds a Mahmoudiya suicide car bomber took his own life and that of four other people while leaving fifteen more injured.


    That's 138 reported dead and forty-seven reported injured.  And you can drop it by 57 and insist that the two government press releases are covering the same 57 dead.  So that would make 81 dead.

    How do you misreport that?

    Never underestimate the desire of western outlets to whore.

    Sinan Salaheddin and the Associated Press do it with an article headlined "Iraqi officials say car bombings in and around Baghdad kill at least 23 people" which opens, "A new series of car bombings in and around Baghdad on Monday killed at least 23 people, officials said, as Iraq's Shiite-led government grapples with a stubborn Sunni extremist-led insurgency in the western Anbar province." So they just ignore the Iraqi government's announcement?  They wait until paragraph eleven to include, "Also on Monday, a Defense Ministry statement said military operations overnight in Ramadi killed 57 militants." They don't ignore it, they bury it.  Ignoring it?  That's what Ammar Karim and Salem Faraj (AFP) do here.


    Nouri's never content with just one crisis, he always needs to create more.  Today, AFP reports he's filed lawsuits against a judge and a report:

    Warrants were issued last month for Munir Haddad and Sarmad al-Taie, apparently for criticising Nuri al-Maliki, under an article of the criminal code that prohibits defaming or insulting government employees.
    A local press watchdog said the warrant for Taie, who writes a regular column for the Al-Mada newspaper and is a frequent guest on television current affairs programmes, was the first against a journalist since the US-led invasion in 2003.


    Friday's snapshot noted US Vice President Joe Biden's phone call to KRG President Massoud Barzani, carried the White House statement and I pointed out, "It's a shame that they [the White House] have more concern over pleasing Nouri than they do over the safety of the Iraqi citizens." Today Rudaw reports:


    Kurdistan Region President Massoud Barzani has postponed a planned visit to Washington this week because of other commitments, said his chief of staff, Fuad Hussein.
    “President Barzani told Joe Biden (the US vice president) that because of some other commitments he couldn’t visit Washington at this time,” Hussein told Rudaw. “That is why the visit was postponed.”


    That's only surprising if you weren't paying attention.  In 2012, Barazni made clear his opposition to the US giving Nouri F-16s.  And today?  Not only are those going to be handed over, helicopters and Hellfire missiles are being provided to Nouri.  And on top of all of that, Joe Biden wants to hold Nouri's hand and reassure him while telling Barzani that concessions (to Nouri) need to be made.

    President Massoud Barzani is a much admired figure in the KRG and he's a leader on the world stage but Biden wants to treat like an errand boy and hand him a grocery list?

    Of course, Barazni's insulted.  And that's before you get to the White House's historic betrayal of Baraniz on the 2010 US-brokered Erbil Agreement that they used Barazni's name and reputation to sell and then refused, after everyone signed the contract, to stand by it.  Yeah, it's about time Barzani put some distance between himself and the US government.

    Maybe even a brief spell will force the White House to take Barzani a little more seriously?


    Moving on to a new topic,  Iran's FARS News Agency reports:


    "The MKO is like a cancer that Iraq has been afflicted with, but uprooting it is nearly complete and it has reached its final days,” former Iraqi National Security Advisor Mowaffak al-Rubaie told FNA on Sunday.
    He pointed to meddling in Iraq’s internal affairs as one of MKO’s goals, and said, “This grouplet should have been driven out from Iraq and its members should have been handed over to the Iranian government many years ago.”
    Al-Rubaie reiterated that there is no other option left for Iraq, but to expel the MKO members.
    In January, Iraqi Prime Minsiter Nuri al-Maliki underlined his government’s resolve to speed up efforts to expel the MKO members from Iraq.

    Speaking in a joint press conference with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in Baghdad, Maliki blamed the UN for prolonging the presence of the MKO members in Iraq.

    We need background.  Let's star with Mowaddak al-Rubaie.  He's a Shi'ite who was a member of Nouri al-Maliki's Dawa Party until 1991 when he wanted the party -- still operating in Iraq at the time -- to publicly declare their goal was to kill then-Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.  They refused and he left the party.  Making that declaration would have been a suicide mission for the party members in Iraq.  It wouldn't have had an effect on al-Rubaie -- he wasn't in Iraq.

    From 1979 until after the US-led invasion of Iraq (March 2003), al-Rubaie lived in London.

    Despite being out of the country for 24 years, the US immediately appoints him to the Iraqi governing council and, the following year, he's given the post of National Security Advisor.  Based on what?

    National Security?  He studied medicine in London, he'd fled the country for 24 years.  But he was one of the useless, chicken s**t Iraqis who wouldn't fight Saddam but would lee the country and spend 24 years advocating the US government to topple Saddam Hussein.  What a loser, what a chicken.  Until April of 2009, he held the post of Natioanl Security Advisor.   At which point, he left the post and was named a member of Parliament and held that post until the March 2010 parliamentary elections.

    Are you confused?

    Don't think it's you.  There was no 2009 parliamentary elections.  Rules are broken for trash like al-Rubaie.  No elections doesn't mean he can be (illegally) named to be a Member of Parliament.  But then came the elections and al-Rubaie had to leave.  He wasn't re-elected, no political slate wanted to appoint him to any open seat.

    We've noted the coward weakling here many, many times.  Such as May 9, 2007:

    Mowaffak al-Rubaie goes to DC and Gordo tries to keep it in his pants but has a difficult time doing so. The article's entitled "Official Takes Case to U.S., but Skeptics Don’t Budge" (New York Times) but it might as well be called, "Gordo gets The Bedroom Tapes and Performs 'I Forget'." Check my math, but I count twelve. Twelve paragraphs before Gordo tells readers that we're dealing with yet another Iraqi who left the country and didn't come back until after the start of the illegal war. Gordo can't bring himself to tell readers when. It was near the start of the 80s. He was gone for roughly 20 years.
    It's not minor. At one point, near the end, al-Rubaie is trying to sell Congress on the idea that Iraq will be a 'generational' thing and Carl Levin states that's too long. The paternalistic attitude doesn't just come from the US administration, it comes from their proxies: a whole host of exiles who saw an illegal war as just the thing to put themselves into power.
    He returns in 2003 and the US government appoints him to the Iraqi Governing Council, then in 2004 he's appointed to the Coalition Provisional Authority and then, in 2006, puppet Nouri al-Maliki appoints him the country's national security adviser.
    Now does anyone, for even one damn second, believe that someone gone for two decades has the popular support among Iraqis to lead? No, of course not.
    In June 2006, he penned an op-ed for the Washington Post:


    The eventual removal of coalition troops from Iraqi streets will help the Iraqis, who now see foreign troops as occupiers rather than the liberators they were meant to be. It will remove psychological barriers and the reason that many Iraqis joined the so-called resistance in the first place. The removal of troops will also allow the Iraqi government to engage with some of our neighbors that have to date been at the very least sympathetic to the resistance because of what they call the "coalition occupation." If the sectarian issue continues to cause conflict with Iraq's neighbors, this matter needs to be addressed urgently and openly -- not in the guise of aversion to the presence of foreign troops.
    Moreover, the removal of foreign troops will legitimize Iraq's government in the eyes of its people. It has taken what some feel is an eternity to form a government of national unity. This has not been an easy or enviable task, but it represents a significant achievement, considering that many new ministers are working in partisan situations, often with people with whom they share a history of enmity and distrust. By its nature, the government of national unity, because it is working through consensus, could be perceived to be weak. But, again, the drawdown of foreign troops will strengthen our fledgling government to last the full four years it is supposed to.


    The exile nature of the puppet government goes a long way towards explaining what someone who's had a seat in all the post-invasion Iraq governments would have tow rite about 'legitimizing' the puppet governments. The government is not made up of Iraqis and never has been. The ones in charge are repeatedly exiles. They are handpicked by the United States.
    They have no legitimacy. When it happens once, an Iraqi might think, "Well, good he came back." (It's always a "he.") When it happens over and over?
    al-Rubaie came to DC to do a song and dance: Keep sending money, keep letting your service members die to prop a government by those of us who spent decades in exile.
    They aren't Iraqis. They were born there, they chose to leave. After US troops are on the ground, they choose to return, after having made their homes elsewhere for decades (al-Rubaie set up shop -- like many -- in England). They have no legitimacy and they have no right to rule. When they speak of the 'time under Saddam,' it's greeted with derision because while many Iraqis lived through that time, the exiles were off in other countries.
    All they've brought back is a patronizing attitude that they are so much better than the people of Iraq. That's been one of the many repeated reasons that, government after government, the puppets have no legitmacy in the eyes of the Iraqi people.
    There is no 'generational' thing to overcome, just excuses offered by the US government and exiles for why Iraqi people are not allowed self-rule. As hollow as the excuses seem from the outside, they seem even worse on the ground in Iraq.



    So that's the Chatty Cathy, now for the group he was speaking of.  When he says "MEK in Iraq" he means the Ashraf community.   As of September, Camp Ashraf in Iraq is empty.  All remaining members of the community have been moved to Camp Hurriya (also known as Camp Liberty).  Camp Ashraf housed a group of Iranian dissidents who were  welcomed to Iraq by Saddam Hussein in 1986 and he gave them Camp Ashraf and six other parcels that they could utilize. In 2003, the US invaded Iraq.The US government had the US military lead negotiations with the residents of Camp Ashraf. The US government wanted the residents to disarm and the US promised protections to the point that US actions turned the residents of Camp Ashraf into protected person under the Geneva Conventions. This is key and demands the US defend the Ashraf community in Iraq from attacks.  The Bully Boy Bush administration grasped that -- they were ignorant of every other law on the books but they grasped that one.  As 2008 drew to a close, the Bush administration was given assurances from the Iraqi government that they would protect the residents. Yet Nouri al-Maliki ordered the camp repeatedly attacked after Barack Obama was sworn in as US President. July 28, 2009 Nouri launched an attack (while then-US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was on the ground in Iraq). In a report released this summer entitled "Iraqi government must respect and protect rights of Camp Ashraf residents," Amnesty International described this assault, "Barely a month later, on 28-29 July 2009, Iraqi security forces stormed into the camp; at least nine residents were killed and many more were injured. Thirty-six residents who were detained were allegedly tortured and beaten. They were eventually released on 7 October 2009; by then they were in poor health after going on hunger strike."April 8, 2011, Nouri again ordered an assault on Camp Ashraf (then-US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was again on the ground in Iraq when the assault took place). Amnesty International described the assault this way, "Earlier this year, on 8 April, Iraqi troops took up positions within the camp using excessive, including lethal, force against residents who tried to resist them. Troops used live ammunition and by the end of the operation some 36 residents, including eight women, were dead and more than 300 others had been wounded. Following international and other protests, the Iraqi government announced that it had appointed a committee to investigate the attack and the killings; however, as on other occasions when the government has announced investigations into allegations of serious human rights violations by its forces, the authorities have yet to disclose the outcome, prompting questions whether any investigation was, in fact, carried out."  Those weren't the last attacks.  They were the last attacks while the residents were labeled as terrorists by the US State Dept.  (September 28, 2012, the designation was changed.)   In spite of this labeling, Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) observed that "since 2004, the United States has considered the residents of Camp Ashraf 'noncombatants' and 'protected persons' under the Geneva Conventions."  So the US has an obligation to protect the residents.  3,300 are no longer at Camp Ashraf.  They have moved to Camp Hurriyah for the most part.  A tiny number has received asylum in other countries. Approximately 100 were still at Camp Ashraf when it was attacked Sunday.   That was the second attack this year alone.   February 9th of this year, the Ashraf residents were again attacked, this time the ones who had been relocated to Camp Hurriyah.  Trend News Agency counted 10 dead and over one hundred injured.  Prensa Latina reported, " A rain of self-propelled Katyusha missiles hit a provisional camp of Iraqi opposition Mujahedin-e Khalk, an organization Tehran calls terrorists, causing seven fatalities plus 50 wounded, according to an Iraqi official release."  They were attacked again September 1st.   Adam Schreck (AP) reported that the United Nations was able to confirm the deaths of 52 Ashraf residents.  In addition, 7 Ashraf residents were taken in the assault.  Last November, in response to questions from US House Rep Sheila Jackson Lee, the  State Dept's Deputy Assistant Secretary for Iraq and Iran Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, Brett McGurk, stated, "The seven are not in Iraq." McGurk's sworn testimony wasn't taken seriously.

    The National Council of Resistance of Iran issued a press release today which includes:

    The United States must keep its promise to protect the residents of Camp Liberty before they can be transferred to safe havens outside Iraq, former Governor Howard Dean has told a meeting at the US Senate.
    Mr Dean also condemned Iran's terrorist meddling in the Middle East and accused the US of sacrificing Liberty residents to keep Iran at the nuclear arms negotiating table.
    He said: "These 3,000 people in Camp Liberty were disarmed by American troops in 2004 voluntarily in exchange for a piece of paper... that said these are protected people under the Geneva Convention and the Americans will take responsibility for protecting them.
    "Now there is loose talk in the state department that our obligation ran out in 2009 when we turned everything over to Iraq. That is the kind of talk that we cannot have. That is the path to cynicism.

    "You do not sell out 3,000 unarmed people because they become inconvenient, because you hope to pacify a group of people that do not have a history of keeping their word and who are as we sit at the table, killing Americans by supplying IED’s to Afghan Taliban."
















     













    Nanci Griffith

    $
    0
    0
    Do you know Nanci Griffith?  The singer-songwriter?

    I first heard of her via PBS -- see, it does have value. 

    She found early fame out of Austin, Texas. 

    If you're trying to classify her voice, I'd say it probably resembles Emmylou Harris.  If you're trying to classify her songs, I'd say Laura Nyro and Jackson Browne. 

    But she's her own unique voice. 

    I'm visiting Mike and Elaine at least for the week (maybe two).  Thank you to C.I. who insisted I use her flying miles for myself and my granddaughter. 

    And so Monday evening night and early morning (which is why none of us blogged on Monday) we were listening to music.

    I love my husband but he'll admit when we listen to music at the house, it's two he has to hear before we can get to my choice, he has to, you understand.  And that's fine but I was the guest so they said I could pick from whatever (or play my own -- but I didn't have any of my own, I'm not an iPod woman). 

    And I'm going through there music and it's really the first time for Elaine's and for a lot of my son's too.  I'd been to their old place before they moved to Hawaii but we all usually operated out of my house so I'd go with Elaine and dash in or they'd have us (my husband and I) over for dinner or something like that.

    So I'm going through the music and find one of my all time favorite albums.

    Nanci Griffith's One Fair Summer Evening.

    I love this album.  It's a live album from 1988.

    I think I got it in 1989 after I saw Nanci on some PBS program performing.

    I wrote her name down and went to the music store the next day.  Remember when we had those?  They're pretty much all gone now so I guess it doesn't matter.

    This is how long ago it was, I bought it on cassette.

    And how I loved it.

    I would listen over and over in the kitchen on the clock radio/cassette player we had in there.

    Long before I moved to CDs, I had worn the tape out.

    There was hiss and drop off.

    I have missed that album over the years.

    But when I'd think about getting it, I'd either change my mind and decide it was too expensive (we were putting kids through college) or I'd be at a store that didn't have it.  I was going to get it at Borders Books once.  They're no more now as well.

    Anyway, I got into the 90s (yes, I know it's 2014) and went online today and ordered it.  From Amazon.  It'll be at my house before I will be.

    I just loved and still love this album.

    I would probably rank it as one of the ten best albums of all time.

    That's not hyperbole.  It's right up there with Sgt. Pepper's for me.

    The songs are wonderful including "I Would Bring You Ireland" which is one of my favorites.  She wrote that and it's one of 8 songs on the album that Nanci either wrote or co-wrote.  And the four covers are wonderful as well with my favorite being the title track.




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


    Tuesday, February 5, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, the assault on Anbar continue, the US Ambassador in Iraq says Iraq goes up in flames with one wrong move, military recruiters are caught stealing, yet a Senate Subcommittee praises them, Barack Obama's administration (like Bully Boy Bush's administration before him) is only concerned about getting Iraq's oil on the world market,  and much more.

    In 1980, the comedy classic (on the American Film Institute's 100 Funniest Movies), Private Benjamin was released.  Jewish American Princess Judy Benjamin (Goldie Hawn in an Academy Award nominated performance) becomes a widow on her wedding night when Yale (Albert Brooks) dies while they're having sex.  With no husband, no plans for her future and in a state of grief, Judy ends up spilling her problems on talk radio and a man schedules a meeting with her to help her address them.  The man is army recruiter Jim Ballard (Harry Dean Stanton).  Spinning a series of lies to make his recruitment number, he gets her signed up.

    On base, she refuses to unpack due to a mix up.  Captain Doreen Lewis (the late Eileen Brennan, in an Academy Award nominated performance) is shown the new recruits by Sgt LC Ross (Hal Williams) and is addressing them as they stand at order -- all at order except for Judy Benjamin who files her nails before going over and touching the Captain on the shoulder.

    Judy: Excuse me, 

    Captain Lewis:  Huh?

    Judy:  I hate to interrupt you but, uhm, could I speak to you for a sec?

    Captain Lewis: Oh, my Lord.  Sgt, would you look at this.

    Sgt Ross:  I've seen it, ma'am. 

    Captain Lewis:  What's -- what's your name, princess, huh?

    Judy: Judy.  

    Captain Lewis:  Judy.

    Judy:  Judy Benjamin.

    Captain Lewis:  Judy Benjamin.

    Judy:  Uhm, I think they sent me to the wrong place.

    Captain Lewis:  Uh-huh.

    Judy:  See, I did join the army but I joined a different army.

    Captain Lewis:  Uh-huh.

    Judy:  I joined the one with the condos and the private rooms. 

    Captain Lewis and Sgt Ross laugh.

    Judy: What?


    Judy: No, really.  My-my recruiter, Jim Ballard, told me that --

    Captain Lewis: I don't care! I don't care what your lousy recruiter told you, Benjamin. Now I'm telling you there is no other army. 

    Judy:  Wait a minute.  I don't want to have to go to your boss or anything, okay? 

    Captain Lewis mouths the words "my boss."

    Judy:  I just  -- Look, to be truthful with you, I can't sleep in a room with 20 strangers.

    Captain Lewis:  Oh, dear.

    Judy: And I mean look at this place.  The army couldn't afford drapes?  I mean I'll be up at the crack of dawn here.  And I have to tell you, I am frankly a little shocked

    Captain Lewis: You're shocked?

    Judy: Yes.

    Captain Lewis: Why?

    Judy: This place is a sty.  

    Captain Lewis:  It's a sty?

    Judy:  Yeah, I mean, look-look.

    Judy lifts up a pillow on a bed and points to it.

    Judy:  Look-look at these stains.

    Captain Lewis:  Mm-hmm.

    Judy:  God knows where this has been 

    Captain Lewis:  Yeah.

    Judy:  And have you seen the bathroom?


    Captain Lewis:  What, uh -- Do you think that the latrine -- Do you think that it's unsanitary? 

    Judy:  Oh, it's disgusting. 

    Captain Lewis:  Disgusting?

    Judy:  There are urinals in there. 

    Captain Lewis:  Well that's because this is the army, Benjamin, it's not a sorority house.  Uh, may I see your toothbrush?  Please?  Please?


    I don't care what your lousy recruiter said, Captain Lewis snarls.  Recruiters have probably the worst image of anyone in the military.  They have that image for a number of reasons.

    During wartime, they are the people seen as luring innocents into becoming cannon fodder.  That's why recruiting stations are protested during wars.  It's why many people believe military recruiters should not be allowed on campus.

    Their job is to meet quotas.  They have lied to do so.  Iraq War veteran and war resister Joshua Key has spoken and written of how his recruiter swore to him that if he signed up he would be stationed in Oklahoma and never sent out of the country.

    They get away with these lies.  Even if their lies are recorded, no court holds them accountable and the brass doesn't give a damn what recruiters say, only that they make their quotas.

    I note that because I had to sit through a Senate hearing this morning where people were praising the 'good' recruiters.  Who are the good ones?

    Nancy Meyers, Charles Shyer and Harvey Miller wrote a very funny script (and were nominated for an Academy Award for this screenplay).  When we laugh, we're generally responding to one of two things: shock (disbelief) or recognition.   Private Benjamin had a lot of scenes people could laugh at due to recognition.


    Recruiter Ballard: What does that look like to you?

    Judy:  What?  Club Med?

    Recruiter Ballard:  It's the Fort Ord Army Base in Monterey, California. 

    Judy:  Those look like condos.

    Recruiter Ballard:  Mm-hmm.  And every soldier gets his or her own private room. 

    Judy:  What are these?  Yachts?

    Recruiter Ballard:  The army is the best kept secret in the world, Judy.

    Judy:  Looks great.  But, see, you don't know me.  I'm not -- I'm not the army type.

    Recruiter Ballard:  You can forget that old brown boot image of the army. It's the army of the 80s.  You'd love it.  All the ladies do -- all 89,000 of them. Here, check out this list of jobs. There's over 300 jobs there and there's only a couple of them not offered to the ladies -- trained killers, stuff like that.  How much do you earn now per month?

    Judy:  Now? 

    Recruiter Ballard:  Mm-hmm.

    Judy: Nothing. 

    Recruiter Ballard: Nothing?

    Judy:  Thanks.

    Judy starts to cry.

    Recruiter Ballard:  What are you thinking 

    Judy:  I'm thinking about . . . my family . . . and my house . . . and all the gifts I have to return 

    Recruiter Ballard:  Judy, you shouldn't be saddled with a lot of decisions and a lot of responsibilities right now.  Now I'm prepared to offer you $458 a month, train you in the job of your choice, pay for your food, your housing, all your medical  and give you a thirty-day paid vacation.  And let me tell you something else.  A lady with your education and background could easily land an assignment in Europe.

    Judy:  Europe?  I do need to get away.

    Recruiter Ballard:  And I promise you we'll get you in the best physical shape you've ever been in in your life.

    Judy:  It'd be like three years at La Costa. 

    Recruiter Ballard:  La Costa, that's good.

    Judy:  What if I hate it once I get there?

    Recruiter Ballard:  Quit.  It's a job like anything else. 


    That's a recognizable scene.  And it's funny that it happens to Judy Benjamin.  She's a film character -- a great one -- and without those lies, you've got no storyline for the film.

    But this happens over and over in real life and that's not funny.

    I had to sit through a hearing where the Chair praised recruiters and the great work they do.  And was bothered by the latest recruiting scandal -- and surprised by it.  There's nothing surprising about it.


    "However, I'm disappointed that it took a small story in the Washington Post in 2012 for this Subcommittee to even have an inkling about problems with this large contract," declared Senator Claire McCaskill this morning, "and that it took almost two years and our repeated insistence for the Army to inform the Subcommittee that the problems that the Post reported were just the tip of the iceberg."


    Yesterday cam news of fraud in a government program used to recruit for the US military.  We had other things to cover in Monday's snapshot and that was fine because I knew we could grab the issue  via today's hearing.

    This morning the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Financial and Contracting Oversight held a hearing and heard from a series of witnesses: Lt Gen William T. Grisoli (Director of the Army Staff), Maj Gen David E. Quantock (Commanding General of the Army's Criminal Investigation Command and Army Corrections Command), Joseph P. Bentz (Army Audit Agency's Principal Deputy Auditor General), retired Lt Gen Clyde A. Vaugh (former Director of Army National Guard), retired Col Michael L. Jones (former Division Chief Army National Guard Strength Maintenance Division), Philip Crane (president of Docupak) and retired Lt Col Kay Hensen (former contracting officer National Guard).  The Subcommittee Chair is Clare McCaskill and the Ranking Member is Rob Johnson.


    We'll note this overview of the scandal that the Chair provided.

    Chair Claire McCaskill:  The Recruiting Assistance Program was born in 2005 when the Army National Guard was struggling to meet its recruitment numbers due to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.  The National Guard's Recruiting Assistance Program, known as GRAP,  would provide incentives to the National Guard soldiers and civilians to act as informal recruiters or recruiting assistants.  These recruiting assistants would receive a payment between $2,000 and $7,500 for every new recruit.  The contract was run out of the Army National Guard's Strength Maintenance Division, known as ASM, and administered by a contractor Docupak.  The recruiting assistants were hired by Docupak as subcontractors.  After the program was put in place, the National Guard began to meet its recruiting goals and the active Army and Army Reserve began their own similar programs.  In 2007, however, Docupak discovered instances of potential fraud which it referred to -- which it referred to the Army.  Four years later, after suspecting a pattern of fraud, the Army requested a program wide audit.  And what the audit found was astounding.  Thousand of National Guard and Army Reserve participants who are associated with payments that are high or medium risk for fraud with an estimated total amount of 29 million dollars paid fraudulently.  This criminal fraud investigation is one of the largest that the Army has ever conducted -- both in terms of sheer volume of fraud and the number of participants. Although recruiters were prohibited from participating in the RAP program because recruiting was already part of their job duties.  Investigators found that potentially over 1200 recruiters fraudulently obtained payments.  For example, in Texas, a former member of the National Guard was sentenced to four years and nine months in prison for leading a conspiracy to obtain $240,000 in fraudulent recruiting bonuses.  He did this by providing kickbacks to National Guard recruiters in return for the names and Social Security numbers of  recruits who had in fact already been recruited.  The fraud was not limited to service members because anyone could sign up to be a recruiting member.  There were also cases of people not affiliated with the Army stealing names and Social Security numbers of potential recruits and receiving referral payments that they were not entitled to.   Even one case of fraud would have been too many.  Instead, we now know that thousands of service members, their family and friends may have participated in schemes to defraud the government they served and the tax payers.


    In 2005, the 'brief' Iraq War -- sold as a cake walk and one that, Rumsfeld and others insisted, would find the US greeted as heroes with roses strewn in their paths -- was already obviously not going to be brief.

    In 1990, Bully Boy Bush's father, US President George HW Bush, went to war on Iraq.  That was the Gulf War and it lasted from August 2, 1990 to February 28, 1991.  By 2005, it was clear that the Iraq War was not going to be brief.  In 2005, the Afghanistan War would hit the four-year mark.

    That alone was enough to depress recruitment.  In addition, January 29, 2002, Bully Boy Bush gave a State of the Union Address in which he referred to the "axis of evil" -- a group of countries: Iraq, Iran and North Korea.   Reports that the US government would declare war on Iran were already making the rounds -- and would continue to including in The New Yorker -- and it was thought that a war on Iran or North Korea or both was likely.

    This depressed recruitment.

    The Iraq War was illegal.  That depressed recruitment.

    War resisters within the ranks were increasing and the rah-rah 'turned corner, democracy created' of the administration was countered with the voices as well as due to the Abu Ghraib prison abuse and War Crimes scandal -- Seymour Hersh (The New Yorker) and CBS News broke the news on that.

    "We needed recruits," Chair McCaskill  noted.  "We were in a very stressful position for command.  We were. really, for one of the first times in our history, beginning to use the Guard and the Reserves in operational capacity.  They were being asked to do what they were never asked to do before."

    And that depressed recruitment as "weekend warriors" were now on a never-ending weekend outside the country.  The recruitment was also depressed by the stop-loss policy -- where, when your contract was up and you were out, the US government would inform you that you weren't leaving, you were being stop-lossed and kept in the military.  This was referred to as "the backdoor draft."

    Recruitment was also depressed by the tours of duty. During Vietnam, you did a tour and that was that unless you wanted to go back.  In the '00s, you did a tour and it stretched out and was longer and you then found out you were being deployed again and again.  And the down time was non-existent.

    In this environment, the program was embraced and embraced so warmly, apparently, that legal aspects were not considered by the military command before this program was implemented.  Chair McCaskill and Ranking Member  Johnson attempted to establish the vetting of the program, by the military, before it was implemented and the witness before them were unable to confirm if it was ever vetted or examined before it was utilized.

    We'll note this exchange from the hearing.


    Chair Claire McCaskill:  The first is let me get a sense of why it took four years from the time that Docupak gave you some indication that there was a problem?  Can you lay out for us in a way that would make me feel more comfortable, why it took until 2011 for the audit to be called for.

    Maj Gen Daivd Quantock:  Chairman McCaskill, I'd like to take a shot at that question.

    Chair Claire McCaskill: Thank you.

    Maj Gen David Quantock:  If you look at the -- at the -- at how the case came to everybody's attention.  First off, it's only two cases in 2007 that are CID investigations and they came through a fraud hotline.

    Chair Claire McCaskill:  Okay.

    Maj Gen David Quantock:  So understand that over this period of time, CID investigated over 43,000 criminal investigations.

    Chair Claire McCaskill:  Right.

    Maj Gen David Quantock:  So two cases in 2007 wouldn't have raised.  Then in 2008, there were five cases.

    Chair Claire McCaskill:  Okay.

    Maj Gen David Quantock:  And then of course that would not send a signal.  And then two more cases in 2009.  And then in 2010 we had ten cases in one year that one of our, uh, Huntsville agents, in Huntsville, Alabama, realized there's something that could be misconstrued -- or cause some kind of systematic concern.  So they raised it to us, we took a kind of hard look at it and that's when we basically went over to Triple A and said, 'Can you take a hard look at this, there looks to be -- there could be some kind of systematic failures in this program.  Could you do a D dive on this program? to see if there's something we should be concerned about other than the 19 cases  that we're doing?' In addition to that, Docupak came to us in 2010 because they got the same ten cases we did.  And they also made us aware that there seeing some irregularities as well.  So it was a combination of Docupak, our agents at Huntsville -- Huntsville, Alabama office.  They really brought this to life and that's when we asked Triple A to take a look at the entire program.

    Chair Claire McCaskill:  Well make sure you convey to, uhm, that investigator, that law enforcement professional in Huntsville our appreciation that he raised the flag in 2010.  So basically what you're saying, General, is that, up until 2010, this appeared to be isolated incidents as opposed to a pattern and a systemic fraud?


    Maj Gen David Quantock:  Yes, ma'am.  I've got 150 fraud investigators, civilians, and we look at dozens of fraud investigations.  So this was just another one of those kind of dots on a map that crossed the entire United States.  Not only that the 19 cases were, again, across the United States.  So there was really nothing that just jumped to our attention that would --

    Chair Claire McCaskill:  Okay.

    Maj Gen David Quantock:  -- direct us that we've got a major problem here.

    Chair Claire McCaskill:  Uhm, Gen Grisoli, one of the things -- and I'll get to questions for the auditor after Senator Johnson has a chance to question -- but one of the things I'm worried about is holding people accountable.  And this is maybe a question for both you and Gen Quantock.  I know that two years ago we identified 1,200 recruiters and over 2,000 recruiting assistants.  I know we're looking at a statue of limitations.  I'm really concerned that there are going to be people that there are people that wear a uniform that are going to beat this by virtue of the statute of limitations or they're only going to get "titled," not going to lose benefits, be allowed to retire and go their way.  I mean, these are criminals that have dishonored the uniform that we are all so proud of.  And I'd like you to address that briefly, if you would, what we need to be doing statutorily so that either lengthening the statute of limitations or making sure that if there is some kind of procedure internally that you lose your benefits because I don't want to mess with anybody's benefits if you've served our country honorably but if you've served dishonorably I think you deserve more than the word titled in your file.

    Lt Gen William Grisoli:   Madam Chairwoman, we-we have the same concern you have on this particular issue.  And as we prioritize our efforts, we try to prioritize the greater risk of falling into that category where the statute of limitations.  As far as looking at some assistance from Congress?  We're okay now but I think we may have to come back and ask for some assistance.  We'll let you know as we work with you through these problem sets and we address the highest priority first and the ones that are closest to the statutory limits.  We'll work with that and communicate with your staff.


    Chair Claire McCaskill:  It's going to break my heart if a lot of people get away with this on behalf of the amazingly brave and courageous people who step across the line.  It's just going to break my heart.  And we've got to figure out a way to hold every single one of them accountable.  If nothing else, just for the benefit of all those, the vast, vast majority that serve so well.


    Lt Gen William Grisoli:  I would --

    Maj Gen David Quantock: Madam Chairwoman --

    Lt Gen William Grisoli:  --  agree.  Go ahead, sir.

    Maj Gen David Quantock:  Madam Chairwoman, I would just say that was one of our major points, about prioritizing the cases was based on the age of these case so that we could get after and do exactly that.  The other thing was going through basically over a hundred thousand people that could be held accountable in trying to figure out the high, medium and low risk so we didn't waste our time on the low risk cases and we went after the high and the medium risk and also the biggest dollar cost that was lost. All of those things were sort of our focus so we could really focus in.  That's why today we've got 104 cases adjudicated and 16 individuals already in confinement.  And we, again, continue to go after this very aggressively across the entire [word not audible, the general's accidentally hit the microphone as he waived his hand and the 'thump' was louder than his voice] force.


    Has anyone been punished?  I don't believe so but decide for yourself based on this exchange.


    Chair Claire McCaskill:  Let's talk about leadership and fraud in this instance. There is evidence that one major general committed fraud, 18 full colonels, 11 lieutenant colonels and dozens of other mid-level and junior officers.  I need to know -- and if you can't give me specifically all of those today -- I need to know for the record what has occurred in all of those instances in terms of holding them accountable.  It is particularly egregious when it is our leadership.  And that's why I hope they've gotten priority and I'd love you to speak to that Gen Quantock. 

    Maj Gen David Quantock:  Yes, ma'am.  Actually, that was our first priority, was to look at all senior level misconduct up front. So in addition to age, we also looked at senior level conduct.  I'd have to take it for the record to go back and, uh, breakdown all those cases.  But again it was dollar value, it was age of the case and it was, of course, our first priority was senior leader misconduct before we looked at anything else.

    Chair Claire McCaskill:  To your knowledge, have any of them gone to prison?

    Maj Gen David Quantock:  Uh, no, ma'am, to my knowledge, none of them have gone to prison.

    Chair Claire McCaskill:  Have any of them lost benefits to your knowledge?

    Maj Gen David Quantock:  Uh, no, ma'am, not to my knowledge.

    Chair Claire McCaskill:  Have any of them been forced to resign from their service?

    Maj Gen David Quantock:  Uh . . . [long pause] I'd have to take that one for the record, ma'am.

    Chair Claire McCaskill:  Okay. It's very important that we know that.

    Maj Gen David Quantock:  Yes, ma'am.  Absolutely. 

    Chair Claire McCaskill:  I think we've learned one thing over the last six or seven years of contracting oversight and that is the way you really begin to change a culture that would allow this to happen is to have everyone see that the folks with all the stuff [gestures to shoulders indicating military ribbons and decorations -- the military brass] were held as accountable as a young member of the Guard who figured out he could scam the system and game this to make thousands of dollars he was not entitled to -- or she.

    Maj Gen David Quantock:  I will tell you, though, one of the leaders was-was for one case and it was for $7,500  because they brought in a doctor.  In that particular case, the statute of limitations did rise up and the Assistant US Attorney failed to go forward with the case because it wasn't that the statue of limitations had then expired at that point but, by the time it went through the courts, it would have.


    Again, doesn't sound like anyone's been punished.  And if, in 2010, you put a priority on investigating officers involved in this?

    By 2014, you would have handed out some punishments.

    Quit lying.  The whole thing's a joke.  And why are we surprised that some recruiters would steal?

    There is a code for the military and it does include forbidding lying.

    But the lies of recruiters are tolerated and laughed about within the military.

    But now you're surprised that thousands of dollars would be stolen by people?

    If you tolerate, if you encourage lying in recruitment, why are you shocked when the same people move on up to theft?

    If there's no honor code being followed, why are you surprised that there are no ethics?

    McCaskill and others went on and on about the horror of stolen money and it is a horror and I'm not dismissing it on some nonsense grounds of, "It's only thousands!  Do you know how much was spent on the Iraq War!"

    I'm not dismissing at all.

    It is theft and it should be punished.

    But hop off your high horses because Congress never explores what recruiters do and recruiters are never held accountable for misleading and lying.

    If you went to a job interview with McDonalds tomorrow and they told you they'd pay you $16 an hour and then didn't, you'd have a grievance, a legal claim based on what you were promised.

    But Congress doesn't give a damn about the lies recruiters tell and yet now they want act outraged that the same people whose job includes lying on a regular basis, deceiving American citizens, are also petty thieves?

    Where is the sense of perspective?

    Not to be found among the US personnel in Iraq.   ABC News Radio quotes US Ambassador to Iraq Robert Beecroft stating of Iraq, "We're in a very precarious situation where a misstep anywhere could set off larger conflicts within the country, and that's what we need to stay away from.  The wrong person gets killed, the wrong mosque gets attacked and exploded and you run the risk of sectarian conflict."

    Beecroft goes on to make ridiculous statements that we won't even bother to quote.  But on that?  How did it come to that?  Beecroft won't say.  He won't note that this didn't happen yesterday, or even last year.  This is the fallout of the political crisis -- all of today's Iraq crises stem from that.

    In 2010, Nouri's State of Law lost to Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya.

    Allawi should have been the winner.  He's like Al Gore in that regard only the press wouldn't admit Al Gore actually won Florida (not just the popular vote but the state of Florida as well) in the 2000 elections until about a year after the election.  It was known in March 2010 that Nouri had lost.

    But US President Barack Obama wasn't going to let the US puppet Nouri down.  So while Nouri dug his heels in refusing to step down and bringing the Iraqi government to a half for eight months, the US government brokered a contract: The Erbil Agreement.

    To get the heads of all the political blocs to sign on, the contract had to give them something in exchange for their giving Nouri a second term.  The power-sharing arrangement was written into the Constitution.  The US officials in Iraq swore they would stand by it.  Barack personally gave his assurance in November to Ayad Allawi.

    Nouri used the contract to get his second term, insisted that the contract couldn't be implemented right away and then, as usual, broke his promise and never implemented it.

    And Barack broke his promises and didn't stand behind the agreement.

    Nouri didn't get the votes for a second term.  The only reason he's prime minister right now is because of that contract and he refused to honor it.  In fact, nearly 8 months after he became prime minister, his spokesperson suggested The Erbil Agreement was illegal and, therefore, Nouri didn't have to honor it.

    Cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr, Iraqiya and the Kurds were all calling on Nouri to implement the agreement -- calling publicly -- by the summer of 2011.

    This is the failure from which the other problems arise.

    'No, it's not!  The Kurdish issue is an important issue!  It has not been resolved!  That has nothing to do with The Erbil Agreement!'

    The issue existed before The Erbil Agreement.  Nouri became prime minister in 2006 and the Constitution (Article 140) commanded him to do a census and referendum in Kirkuk to allow the people to determine whether they would be part of the central government out of Baghdad or part of the semi-autonomous Kurdish Regional Government in the north.

    Nouri refused to obey the Constitution.

    But The Erbil Agreement?  One of the things the Kurds had put into this document -- which all leaders including Nouri signed off on -- was that Article 140 would be immediately implemented.  And they believed that because before they signed it, liar Nouri had announced this would take place at the start of December 2010.

    It was only after the contract gave him a second term that Nouri immediately announced the census and referendum to take place in weeks was now off.

    All of the problems stem from this. Nouri is an illegitimate leader who rules as a dictator.

    He loathes Sunnis and is trying to prove himself a man by covering for his weakness and frailty when he ran out of Iraq like a little chicken in the 70s and hid out for decades while begging the US government to go to war on Iraq.  He only returned after they did.

    So he works that inadequacy out on the Sunni population today.  (Nouri's a Shi'ite, Saddam Hussein was a Sunni.)

    And that's why he's launched the Assault on Anbar which has only served to add to the list of his War Crimes while demonstrating he's even weaker -- in every way -- than his opponents have alleged.

    Will Morrow (WSWS) reports:



    Iraqi military forces renewed their shelling and aerial bombardment of Fallujah over the weekend, in preparation for a ground assault to reclaim the city, located in Iraq’s western Anbar province.
    Government forces are reportedly stationed 15 minutes from Fallujah, awaiting a final go-ahead from Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to launch their invasion. For several weeks the city has been subjected to indiscriminate artillery fire and aerial strikes that have killed an unknown number of civilians, and a blockade that has restricted access to food, medicine and water.
    The government has delivered an ultimatum to anyone still inside the city to leave or be treated as a supporter of the Al Qaeda-affiliate Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS). Maliki administration officials had previously sought to negotiate with local tribal forces who took control of the city at the beginning of January. A top Iraqi security official told Reuters on Sunday: “That’s it. They were given enough time to make their choice, but they failed ... The message was clear, we offered them to leave the city and be a part of the national reconciliation project. But, if anyone insists on fighting our forces, he will be considered an ISIS militant whether he is or not.”
    The Turkish Weekly reported yesterday that government forces, backed by helicopters, are fighting local tribesmen to retake parts of the capital of Anbar province, Ramadi. The newspaper said that seven bodies had been brought to the Ramadi hospital. The government declared that it had killed 50 “terrorists” in Ramadi and 15 “militants” in Fallujah over the weekend. However, it is impossible to confirm the identity of those killed, as the government labels all those fighting the military as “terrorists.”
    The government is acting with the full support of the Obama administration. Vice President Joe Biden called al-Maliki on January 26 to tell him “that the United States continues to support Iraq in its fight against the Al Qaeda-linked militants,” according to the Washington Post. The fighting recalls the devastating sieges of Fallujah by US occupation forces in 2004 that levelled much of the city and transformed it into a deserted ruins.




    Through yesterday, Iraq Body Count counts 93 violent deaths so far this month.  Last month saw over a thousand deaths -- and even the United Nations made a point to note that their count did not include those killed in the assault on Anbar.  Nouri's assault hasn't decreased the violence, it's increased it.


    Today, National Iraqi News Agency reports 3 Pajwan bombing (Kirkuk) left five people injured, a Mosul car bombing left eight people injured (six are Iraqi soldiers), a Mosul suicide bomber took his own life and the lives of 2 Iraqi soldiers with six more left injured, a southwest Baghdad car bombing (Bayaa area) left 1 person dead and eight more injured, Baghdad Operations command notes a second bombing (same are) left 2 people dead and ten more injured, another southwest Baghdad car bombing left six people injured,  a Taji roadside bombing left four police officers injured, an eastern Baghdad sticky bombing (Palestine Street) left one police member injured, a Mosul attack left 1 Turkmen woman dead and her husband injured, 1 "of the leaders in 'Daash' terrorist organization" was killed "west of Mousl," 2 "Katyusha rockets hit an army headquarters of Baghdad's Green Zone," the Green Zone was also hit by a mortar shell,  and 2 corpses were discovered in Baghdad (one had gunshot wounds, the other's head had been bashed in).


    Attacks on the Green Zone -- successful ones.  It appears the clock is turning back, beyond 2008, to 2007 and 2006.

    Beecroft better start showing some diplomacy skills real quick.  And Nouri should be ordered -- yes, "ordered," he's a US puppet and wants weapons, that's your tool -- to stop the assault on Anbar immediately.

    It started in December.  It's now February.  Those Iraqis who stated at the start of the assault that the deeper point of the assault was to halt the intended April 30th parliamentary elections are looking extremely clairvoyant.

    But note what US officials focus on:  Oil.

    From today's State Dept press briefing:


    QUESTION: On Iraq.
    MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
    QUESTION: What are your thoughts about Iraqi intentions to triple its oil production, more specifically doing so in closer cooperation with Iran?

    MS. PSAKI: Well, broadly speaking the United States has a strong interest in well-supplied global energy markets, which growing oil and gas exports from Iraq can help ensure. And we support any production gains made by Iraq and encourage its increasing investments in developing its energy infrastructure. As you know, this is a long way off or a longer-term process. As we’ve made very clear, not just to Iraq but to any country in the global community, as a matter of policy, engaging with Iran’s energy sector runs risks, including violating and running afoul of U.S. and international sanctions. It is not that we think that has happened at this point, but it is just something that we have cautioned and been clear about with countries around the world, including Iraq.

    QUESTION: Have Saudis – Saudi officials expressed their concern over this arrangement to their American colleagues?

    MS. PSAKI: I’d have to check on that, Scott. Obviously, we’re closely engaged with the Saudis. We would share a concern about any violation, of course, of our U.S. international sanctions. But again, this is a long-term process in terms of oil production, but I’ll check and see if there’ve been conversations we can read out to all of you.



    Not War Crimes, not the 140,000 refugees the assault has created.

    Oil.

    Well someone might want to inform the State Dept that currently Iraq's shipment of oil to Jordan has ceased due to the assault Anbar.

    Maybe that will give our 'diplomatic geniuses' -- who, remember, are now the government department responsible for Iraq -- a needed push to attempt to stop the assault on Anbar.
















    My brother is dead to me

    $
    0
    0
    I am one of 8 siblings.  None of them are dead to me.

    I'm quoting the ridiculous Dylan Farrow.

    Today her brother Moses (she and Moses are the adopted children of Mia Farrow and Woody Allen) went public and stated his father did not molest Dylan and that Dylan was coached by Mia.

    To which Drama Queen Dylan responded, "My brother is dead to me. My mother is so brave and so courageous and taught me what it means to be strong and brave and tell the truth even in the face of these monstrous lies."

    To which I respond, Mia Farrow act your damn age already.

    The elderly woman (69 this week) has declared Soon-Yi dead to her.  Now her daughter is declaring Moses dead.

    That's not a family at all.

    Or as C.I. says in  "Mia and her brood drag whatever's left of the name through the mud" -- that's not a family, that's a mob.

    And C.I. said that before Dylan's remarks today.

    I have two parents who are living and seven siblings.

    At some point, we are all ticked off at someone else. 

    My sister was furious with me a year ago, I'll fess up, because I had three times forgotten promises to her.  This was not intentionally on my part.  Emergencies came up -- in one case the ER. 

    But I had made promises and I broke them three times in a row and it was hurtful to her and it made her feel disrespected and unwanted.  I am sorry that I broke even one promise but I am even sorrier that my actions made her feel so bad.

    When we were having our disagreement (I'm also sorry that when she confronted me, I got defensive instead of saying, "You're right, I was wrong."), my parents didn't choose sides.  My siblings didn't choose sides.

    No went around whining, "You're dead to me."

    Which also includes my sister and me.

    Mia is a lousy mother and the proof is in the fact that she's allowed her family to be ripped apart.  She has raised them to believe that disagreements mean you are banished.

    She should be ashamed of herself and she's a lousy mother.

    And I find it deeply disturbing that the ones who get banished are the adopted ones.

    Mia's making very clear that she does not consider adopted children to be her children.  They're only conditional children and they stop being children when they do something she doesn't like.

    I am the mother of 8 children.

    I love them dearly.

    Have they ever disappointed me?

    Yeah, they have.

    And because we're a family, they've been able to make up for it.  They weren't banished, they weren't told they weren't family.

    Mia Farrow is a very sick woman who should probably stop Tweeting and get some real therapy.



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


    Wednesday, February 5, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, attacks in Baghdad scare the politicians, the Anbar assault continues with Nouri planning to hide behind Sunnis because he's lost so many soldiers in the Iraqi army, Brett McGurk spins for Congress, Jen Psaki tries to pretend 7 years isn't a big time to wait on a promise, and much more.

    Nouri al-Maliki is the chief thug and prime minister of Iraq and his assault on Anbar Province continues. Ramzy Baroud (International Policy Digest) offers an explanation at how arrived where they are now:


    Mostly Muslim Sunni tribesmen were fed up with the political paradigm imposed by the Americans almost immediately upon their arrival, which divided the country based on sectarian lines. The Sunni areas, in the center and west of the country, paid a terrible price for the US invasion that empowered political elites purported to speak on behalf of the Shia. The latter, who were mostly predisposed by Iranian interests, began to slowly diversify their allegiance. Initially, they played the game per US rules, and served as an iron fist against those who dared resist the occupation. But as years passed, the likes of current Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, found in Iran a more stable ally: where sect, politics and economic interests seamlessly align. Thus, Iraq was ruled over by a strange, albeit undeclared troika in which the US and Iran had great political leverage where the Shia-dominated government cleverly attempted to find balance, and survive.
    Of course, a country with the size and history of Iraq doesn’t easily descend into sectarian madness on its own. But Shia and Sunni politicians and intellectuals who refused to adhere to the prevailing intolerant political archetype were long sidelined -- killed, imprisoned, deported and simply had no space in today’s Iraq- as national identity was banished by sect, tribe, religion and race. Currently, the staff of the US embassy stands at 5,100, and American companies are abandoning their investments in the south of Iraq where the vast majority of the country’s oil exists. It is in the south that al-Maliki has the upper hand. He, of course, doesn’t speak on behalf of all Shia, and is extremely intolerant of dissidents. In 2008, he fought a brutal war to seize control of Basra from Shia militias who challenged his rule. Later, he struck the Mehdi Army of Shia cleric Moqtada Sadr in a Baghdad suburb. He won in both instances, but at a terrible toll. His Shia rivals would be glad to see him go.
    Maliki’s most brutal battles however have been reserved for dissenting Sunnis. His government, as has become the habit of most Arab dictators, is claiming to have been fighting terrorism since day one, and is yet to abandon the slogans it propagates. While militant Sunni groups, some affiliated with al-Qaeda, have indeed taken advantage of the ensuing chaos to promote their own ideology, and solicit greater support for their cause, Iraq’s Sunnis have suffered humiliation of many folds throughout the years long before al-Qaeda was introduced to Iraq --  courtesy of the US invasion.

    The assault on Anbar is only a more public and more extreme version of what Nouri's carried out for years.  He's done so with the criminal participation of the US government.  And now the US government is actively involved in War Crimes.


    "While al-Qaeda in Iraq has been powered by prison breaks and the Syrian civil war, it has also been fueled by the alienation of much of the Sunni population from the Shi’a dominated government in Baghdad," declared US House Rep . Ed Royce today.  "Al-Qaeda has become very skilled at exploiting this sectarian rift; and Maliki’s power grab has given them much ammunition.  This is a point that Ranking Member Engel and I underscored with President Maliki when he visited Washington last fall."

    He was speaking this morning at the House Foreign Affairs Committee.  Royce is the Chair of the Committee and US House Rep Eliot Engel is the Ranking Member.  Appearing before the Committee this morning was  the US State Dept's Deputy Assistant Secretary for Iraq and Iran Brett McGurk.

    In his opening remarks, Chair Ed Royce cautioned, "But Iraqis should know that their relations with Iran and the slow pace of political reconciliation with minority groups raise serious Congressional concerns.  While he may not be up to it, Maliki must take steps to lead Iraq to a post-sectarian era."

    We're going to note some positions expressed from others.  We'll start with the Ranking Member.  Please note, I usually only add (in brackets: "[]") to illuminate what's being said.  But War Hawk Engel is not going to get to lie here.  He can offer his opinion, and he does, but when he lies that all US troops are out of Iraq?

    We're not going to play that game.  We're also not ever going to include his crocodile tears.

    Like Hillary Clinton, Engel voted for the Iraq War.  If you feel her clarification that her vote was wrong -- but after Gates' book who can believe her when he reveals she lied to the American people with regards to the so-called "surge" of US troops into Iraq because she was trying to get votes -- you should also be aware that Engel has never apologized.  So he should cry for the American dead, he should be haunted by them.  He voted for an illegal war.  That said, the people killed in Falluja when the US military was ordered to attack twice in 2004 matter as well.  Even if Engel doesn't think so.
    .


    Ranking Member Eliot Engel: Iraq continues to be ravaged by sectarian violence and the situation's getting worse.  Last year, more than 8500 Iraqis were killed in bombings, shootings and other acts -- the most since 2008.  I should note that on Monday of this week, the senior leadership of al Qaeda excommunicated and disowned their affiliate, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria -- ISIS -- as a result of that group's tactics in Syria. For the purpose of this hearing, ISIS remains a threat to stability in Falluja, other areas of Anbar Province and the whole of Iraq.  Some may argue that the lack of an enduring US presence in Iraq  has contributed to the resurgence of violence -- especially in Sunni terrorism related to al Qaeda.  But let's be honest, the dire security situation in Anbar Province is much more about Iraqi politics than it is about the United States.  In any case, the direct use of US military force in Iraq is virtually unthinkable at this point.  We've withdrawn from Iraq and we aren't going back.  Although we no longer have boots on the ground [except for Special-Ops and the 100 or so Brett McGurk noted today were guarding the Embassy and its diplomatic staff and, as Brett noted, various 'trainers' and persons who facilitate the selling of weapons], the US does maintain a huge stake in Iraq's security.  And I believe we should continue to provide appropriate assistance  to the Iraqi military and their fight against ISIS.  But we must also recognize that the current situation in Anbar cannot be resolved through military means alone. An all-out assault on Falluja by the Iraqi security forces would play right into the hands of ISIS, reinforcing the perception among Sunnis that they have been systematically victimized by Prime Minister Maliki's Shia-led government.  To defeat al Qaeada, the Iraqi government must take a page  out of our playbook from the Iraq War and enlist moderate Sunni tribes in the fight.  I understand that [US] Vice President [Joe] Biden recently discussed this issue with Prime Minister Maliki encouraging him to incorporate tribal militias fighting al Qaeda into security -- into Iraqi security forces and to compensate those injured and killed in battle.  By taking these steps, I'm hopeful that Maliki can begin to bridge the widening sectarian gulf  in Iraq.  

    Did Joe Biden talk to him?  I'm really tired of  Joe and his talk right now and probably going to let it rip on him next week.  But for now, we'll note that Joe  did do that.  As he's done repeatedly and, apparently, ineffectively since 2009.  In other words, he's accomplished nothing and is still trying the same tactics which is a complete waste of time.  Iraq is now on him in the minds of Americans.  He might want to try something new real quick or he might want to accept the fact that the destruction of Iraq will be hung around his neck should he choose to run for the presidency.



    US House Rep Ted Poe:  al Qaeda's resurgence is directly related to Prime Minister Maliki's mishandling of his government.  Incompetence and corruption seem to be the norm.  The centralized power alienated the Sunnis and brought back Shia hit squads. He has allowed Iranian supportive operatives to kill MEK Iranian dissidents [the Ashraf community] now on seven occasions without consequences. The last time you were here, Mr. McGurk, you testified before my Subcommittee and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen's Subcommittee, I predicted that there would be another attack.  Seven days after you testified in December, Camp Liberty was attacked again.  All this chaos has created an environment ripe for al Qaeda.  al Qaeda's re-establishing a safe haven to launch attacks outside the region.  That is a totally unacceptable trend.  The question is: What is the United States going to do?


    Now we'll note another opinion expressed:

    US House Rep Brad Sherman:  In the 1940s, we occupied countries no one doubted our right to occupy. We took our time, we created new governments and those governments created new societies.  At various other times, we've invaded countries, achieved a limited objective or as much as could be achieved at reasonable cost and we left.   The first example of that was Thomas Jefferson's military intervention in Libya.  In Iraq and Afghanistan, we established a bad example. The world -- and even some in the United States -- doubted our right to occupy, so we hastily installed Karzi in Afghanistan and in Iraq we installed a structure which is now presided over by Mr. Maliki.  It is not surprising that Afghanistan and Iraq continue to be problems since we hastily handed over governance to those who are ill prepared. Iraq is not the most important Arab state strategically.  It does not become more important in the future because we made a mistake in the past that cost us dearly in blood and treasure.  We should not compound that mistake.  On the other hand, Iraq is important in part because of its proximity to Iran which I believe is one of the greatest threats to our national security. Finally, I agree with several of the prior speakers that we need to, with regard to Camp Liberty and the T-Walls



    T-Walls are basically barrier walls which would protect from bombs placed outside the walls and which would also heighten security within the camp.

    If you don't understand how inept the White House and the State Dept are, let's do a walk through.  Starting with the October 3rd snapshot which reported on that day's Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing.  We'll again note this exchange between Senator John McCain and  the State Dept's Under Secretary for Political Affairs Wendy Sherman as well as Committee Chair Robert Menendez' follow up.



    Senator John McCain:  In the situation as it relates to the Camp Ashraf people, we know that they were Iranian dissidents.  At one point,  they were designated as a terrorist organization.  But the United States government, it's true, gave them an assurance that if they moved [to Camp Liberty] they would be protected.  We know that the Iranian influence has increased in, uh, in Iraq.  In fact, we know now that Iraq is alive and well and doing extremely well moving back and forth across the two countries.  Now there was a murder of, I believe, 51 people who were members of this  camp and many of them had in their possession guarantees from the United States of America that they would not be harmed.   What-what lessons -- First, are these facts true?  And, second, if they are true, what message does that send to people who we say will be under our protection?


    Wendy Sherman:  Senator, uh, I share your, deep concern about what happened, uh, at Camp Ashraf.  This was a vicious attack in September 1st and many lives were lost.  And the US continues to press the government of Iraq at every opportunity, at very senior -- at the most senior levels to ensure the safety and security of residents at Camp Hurriya where many of the MEK were moved for better safety.  We strongly and swiftly condemned the attack.  We of course extend  our condolences to the victims' families and we are working with the government of Iraq and the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq, UNAMI, to peacefully and voluntarily transfer the surviving residents to safety at Camp Hurriya on September 12th.  And we are working for the protection of the people in Camp Hurriya because we do not want a repeat of this.   So, to date, the government of Iran -- of Iraq has moved in over 700 large T-walls, over 500 bunkers, over 600 small T-walls and nearly 50,000 sandbags.  UN monitors visit the camp daily in accordance with the MOU to asses human rights and humanitarian conditions.  But I must say, Senator, the real answer to this, to the safety and security of all the people in the camps -- who wants to live in a camp? -- is resettlement to third countries to get out of Iraq and to get out of harms way.  And I would call on all the people who are here today representing the rights and the interests of the MEK and the leaders of the MEK in the camps and in Paris, uh, to allow this resettlement to go forward because until the resettlement happens safety and security is going to be a risk.  We will do everything in our power to keep people safe in these camps.  But, as you point out, the al Qaeda threat is increasing in Iraq and it is difficult.


    Senator John McCain:  And I hope that this issue will be raised with the Iraqi government.  And we in Congress may have to look at the kind of aid and how we are extending that to Iraq if this kind of thing is going to be countenanced by the Iraqi government.  I don't -- I've used up all my time.  And I thank you for your response.

    Chair Robert Menendez: Before I turn to Senator [Edward] Markey let me echo what Senator McCain has said in this regard.  And I put out a statement in this regard, I also talked to our Department.  You know, America went to the MEK and we said, 'Disarm and we will protect you.'  And then we ultimately left and that protection has not been there.  You can put up I don't care how many tons of sand bags but when elements of the Iraqi forces actually may very well be complicit in what took place, sand bags aren't going to take care of the problem.  And I agree with you that resettlement is a critical part.  Maybe the United States could be part of leading the way in saying to a universe of these individuals that in fact you can be resettled to the United States.  And that would get the rest of the world to offer further resettlement. But it is unacceptable to lose one more life when American commanders gave these individuals a written guarantee towards their safety.  And it sends a message to others in the world that when we say we are going to do that and we do not, they should not trust us.  And for one thing that this Committee can do since it has jurisdiction over all weapon sales is that I doubt very much that we are going to see any approval of any weapon sales to Iraq until we get this situation in  a place where people's lives are safe.   

    ,
    They moved them there, they just refused to put them up.  But don't worry, insisted the State Dept, they're going up immediately.

    No, they aren't.  And the US government is obligated under the Geneva Conventions to maintain the safety of the Ashraf community as long as it is in Iraq.

    November 13th, Brett McGurk appeared -- we reported on that hearing in the November 13th snapshot, the November 14th snapshot and the November 15th snapshot.  Like that hearing, we'll be covering today's in multiple snapshots.  This following exchange is from the November 14th snapshot.


    US House Rep Dana Rohrabacher:  You believe them that that there's really a security reason that they haven't put those T-walls up at Camp Liberty?


    Brett McGurk:  No, I do not think that there are legitimate security reasons that the T-walls have not been put up.



    US House Rep Dana Rohrabacher: You sounded to me when I was listening to you -- and I listened very closely to what you said -- that we can't blame the leadership -- the Maliki leadership for the lack of security at Camp Liberty?


    Brett McGurk:  Uh, no.  And in fact my conversation with Maliki was that you need to get as many T-walls into that facility as possible without any excuses.  Period.  Full stop.  So I -- if I -- You may have heard me say something differently but I --



    In November, the promised T-Walls were still not up.  In the December 26th snapshot, we noted a statement from State Dept spokesperson Jen Psaki which included:



    We continue to call on the GOI to take additional measures to secure the camp against further violence, including by immediately installing additional protective barriers, such as bunkers and t-walls. 


    Wait?  You're still calling, in December, for the T-Walls to go up?  The ones the State Dept said in October were going up?

    The next month, in the January 28th snapshot, we noted the US Embassy in Iraq's press statement which included:

    He [Brett McGurk] noted that in meetings with senior Iraqi officials the U.S. will continue to press the Government of Iraq (GOI) to buttress security inside the camp, and welcomed the commitment to install additional t-walls following the next Camp Management meeting among camp residents, UNAMI and the GOI. DAS McGurk stressed the urgency of relocating the residents of Camp Hurriya to third countries as soon as possible and noted the full-time efforts of Jonathan Winer, Senior Advisor for MeK Resettlement, towards that objective. Given the special challenges involved in addressing these issues, DAS McGurk expressed deep appreciation to UNAMI and UNHCR for their work and ensured ongoing U.S. Government support of their efforts.


    And today we learn that T-Walls are still not up.

    The same conversations take place over and over with no results from Nouri al-Maliki.  So why are the conversations happening?

    No, I'm not saying shoot him the way they did int he past.  (Though no one will mourn the death of Nouri whenever it comes.)  I'm saying you stop arming him.  You stop taking, "I'm going to do it." He wants a helicopter?  Let him put up all the T-Walls first.  Then give him one.  For the second one?  Don't swallow his "I'll work on it" about national reconciliation.

    He agreed to that formally in 2007 to keep US funding.  And he never followed up on it.  The de-Ba'athifcation was supposed to end.  That was a promise he made the US government.  And not something that was supposed to take years to end.  It was supposed by 2008.  It never has.

    Why are you arming him?

    Not only is hurting the Iraqi people, it is hurting the government's prestige and strength around the world as various world leaders look on and watch Nouri get what he wants from the US government without ever following up on any promises he makes to them.

    If I'm the government of Algeria, for example, why should I worry about keeping my word in any dealings with the US government when Nouri al-Maliki has at least a seven year pattern (going back to 2007) of failing to live up to his promises and yet still getting billions of US aid to his country as well as weapons?

    The White House looks weak and ineffectual because that's how it's acting.  And it's shameful and embarrassing but, most importantly, it is contributing to the deaths and injuries of thousands of Iraqis.

    And with all these failures, the one Brett wanted to focus on was the flights over Iraq from Iran to Syria (supposedly providing Syria with weapons)?

    That's the issue that Brett says is " where the Iraqi government has not done enough"?  Not the failure to protest the Ashraf community?  Not the failure to end the de-Ba'athifcation process as Nouri promised he would in 2007?

    Repeating, the White House looks weak and ineffective.  Even journalists are bringing it up now.  Today Jen Psaki presided over the State Dept press briefing and the State Dept spokesperson Psaki got asked about another promise made but never kept.


    QUESTION: I wanted to ask you about your efforts regarding having a hydrocarbon law and why is it being held up. And how does that affect all the contracts that many American companies have already signed with the north – with the northern region of Kurdistan?

    MS. PSAKI: Well, I think broadly speaking on the specific – excuse me – hydrocarbon issue, I’d have to connect you with one of our experts on that, and I’m happy to.

    QUESTION: Right.

    MS. PSAKI: As you know, our position has long been that we believe that all of these contracts and any revenue should go through the central government, and that’s been the case we’ve continued to make. But obviously, the Media Note we sent was pretty detailed, and if you have a specific question about an energy resource, I can connect you with some experts.

    QUESTION: Well, I do, because one of the main stumbling blocks and the points of contention between the central government and the regional government of Kurdistan is basically the hydrocarbon law that has been held up for the past --

    MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.

    QUESTION: -- I mean, for the past six years or so. So, I mean --

    MS. PSAKI: Well, Said, why don’t we connect you with someone --

    QUESTION: Okay.


    MS. PSAKI: -- from our Iraq desk who can get into more level of detail about specific forms of energy.


    The hydrocarbons law?  Go look at the 2007 benchmarks Nouri signed off on?  He promised in 2007 to see that was passed.  Seven years ago.  The White House looks ridiculous.


    Again, we're not done with today's hearing. It is important and we will cover it in two more snapshots (including tomorrow's).  But let's move to the Iraqi people who are suffering now and who will suffer even more when/if the US government makes good on Brett McGurk's revelation at the hearing today that the White House wants to send even more Apache helicopters and Hellfire missiles as well as fifty more drones.  By the way, Brett's a liar, a cheap liar.  And his lie today that the tribes will be the ones leading an attack on Falluja and just be backed by the military.?

    What Anbar tribe leader or member will be flying any of the existing helicopters?  Or over the Hellifre missiles.  Oh, that's right, they won't be.

    They'll be cannon fodder.  And there's primary reason for that which is a cheap little hustler like Brett will never tell.  The Iraqi military is thinned out.  The assault on Anbar has led -- as the 2008 assaults on Basra and the Sadr City section of Baghdad -- to numerous defections.  Nouri tried arresting some in early January and had to drop that plan because arresting those who walked out only made more Iraqi soldiers walk off the job.  This was before the reports/spin/rumors that 'al Qaeda in Iraq' had enough weapons to destroy the government -- more weapons than Nouri's government.

    Nouri doesn't have the forces to take Falluja based on the desertion rate in the Iraqi military currently and it's a little whorish that Brett McGurk before Congress and didn't inform them of that but Brett's a little whorish anyway, right?


    As the assault on Anbar Province continues, things heat up across Iraq including a curfew gets imposed on Tikrit, Mosul's curfew is extended -- for 7 more days, and a section of Baghdad's already sealed off Green Zone gets further sealed off.

    The Green Zone is the 'secure' area of the capital where the US set up headquarters during the invasion and initial occupation.  It's where the US Embassy is today as well as many of the Iraqi government buildings and where many of Iraq's 'elite' (such as Nouri) live. Marcy Casey and Cortini Kerr (Foreign Policy) note that the Parliament is also in the the Green Zone.  The Green Zone never suffers from lack of electricity the way the rest of Baghdad -- or the country, for that matter -- so often does.

    Iraqis deride it as where politicians hide out to.   But the fortified part of the capital isn't so fortified.  NINA reports:

    Foreign Ministry announced that " one of the terrorists riding a motorcycle bombers tried to enter the security perimeter of the building of the ministry at about nine in the morning but he blew himself up at the first external checkpoint of the Ministry headquarters .  

    And then came the car bomb outside the Foreign Ministry. Seven people dead and more injured.

    Then the Ministry of the Interior spokesperson Saad Maan announced that "the number of victims of the bombings which occured today near the Ministry of Foreign [Affairs] by two suicide bombers reach 20 dead and 28 injured." All Iraq News also notes the statement and that both bombings are now identified as suicide bombings by the Ministry.  Laura Smith-Spark, Jomana Karadsheh and Saad Abedine (CNN) observe, "Conflicting accounts have emerged, with initial reports from security sources indicating all three of the morning blasts were car bombings." Kareem Raheem (Reuters) reminds, "The blasts came a day after two rockets were fired into the Green Zone, home to the prime minister’s office and Western embassies, and are likely to heighten concerns about Iraq’s ability to protect strategic sites as security deteriorates."

    The US Embassy in Baghdad issued the following today:
    February 5, 2014
    U.S. Embassy Baghdad
    Office of the Spokesperson

    For Immediate Release                                                     
    The U.S. Embassy in Baghdad condemns the vicious terrorist attack today on the Iraqi Ministry of Foreign Affairs.  We extend our sincere condolences to the families of the victims, to Minister of Foreign Affairs Hoshyar Zebari, and to our colleagues and friends at the Ministry, and hope for a rapid recovery for those who were injured.

    The United States stands with the Iraqi people and will continue to work closely with the Government of Iraq to combat those who commit such senseless acts.   

    National Iraqi News Agency reports 3 Baghdad car bombings left 1 person dead and eight more injured, in an update on this attack it is noted that the death toll rose by 9 (to ten) with a total of thirty-two injured,  a Baghdad car bombing in al-Saha district left 2 people dead and ten injured, an oil pipeline outside of Tikrit was blown up, a suicide bomber (wearing an explosive belt) and a car bombing attacked a west Mosul police station leaving five police members injured, a suicide bomber attacked the al-Shurta army headquaters and took his own life as well as the lives of 2 Iraqi soldiers with six more left injured,  a Baghdad bombing (Dora district) left six people injured, the Ministry of Defense announced security forces had "killed 35 members of the terrorist organization 'Daash'," a Mosul car bombing left four SWAT members injured, a suicide tanker bombing north of Tikrit left the bomber dead as well as 3 Iraqi soldiers and 7 police members, an Abi Tammam bombing left three people injured, a Jisr Diyala roadside bombing left 3 people dead and five injured, a Katyusha rocket attack on central Baghdad (Haifa Street) left six people injured, a Sharqat roadside bombing left 1 military officer dead and five other people injured, 2 Iraqi soldiers were shot dead at an eastern Mosul checkpoint (Zebour), a suicide bombing attack on a Baghdad checkpoint (Karada Mariam) claimed the life of the bomber and 2 Iraqi soldiers, 1 police member and 1 civilian, another suicide bomber in Baghdad's Karada Mariam district blew himself up and killed 1 civilian and left five more injured,  and a Baghdad car bombing near the Baghdad Municipality left 1 person dead and four more injured.  All Iraq News adds 3 corpses were discovered in Basra. Alsumaria adds that there was a mortar attack on a Nineveh Province prison northwest of Mosul.


    On "another suicide bomber in Baghdad's Karada Mariam district blew himself up and killed 1 civilian and left five more injured, " this was at the Ibn Zanbour restaurant.  AP explains that the "nearby falafel restaurant frequented by officials and visitors waiting for security escorts to take them inside the Green Zone, a walled-off area that houses the prime minister's office and the U.S. and other foreign embassies."


    Above is  22 dead from the attack on the ministry (20 dead from spokesperson plus 2 dead -- the suicide bombers) and plus the ones in the paragraph above that comes to 101 dead.  There's also 127 noted as injured.

    Duraid Salman and Ammar al-Ani (Alsumaria) note Nouri announced today that the assault on Anbar is "nearing the end."

    Which means what?

    Two more weeks?

    Four?

    Iraq's supposed to hold parliamentary elections April 30th.  Those ballots have to start being printed March 1st.  That's 23 days from now.

    As the assault continues, into its third month, this started in December, Karl Vick (Time magazine) asks:


    What has changed? Not as much as hoped from a U.S. investment of well over $1 trillion. Iraqis no longer have an American occupation to resist, but combatants find ample fuel in the sectarianism that claimed  50,000 lives there from 2006 to 2008. The situation is aggravated on the one hand by the exclusionary performance of the Shiite-heavy government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s, and the resurgence of Sunni extremism in the heavily sectarian civil war in neighboring Syria, which has spilled across the border. Last month Iraq’s deputy interior minister said al-Qaeda-linked forces now back in Fallujah, 44 miles west of the capital, held weapons “huge and advanced and frankly enough to occupy Baghdad.” 
     

    Today, the US State Dept issued the following:


    Joint Statement of the Iraq-U.S. Joint Coordination Committee on Energy

    February 5, 2014


    The Governments of the Republic of Iraq and the United States of America reaffirmed their commitment to joint cooperation in the areas of oil production and export, natural gas, electricity resiliency and reliability, clean energy, and critical energy infrastructure protection during the second meeting of the Joint Coordination Committee (JCC) on Energy, held February 5, 2014 in Baghdad.
    Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister for Energy Dr. Hussain Al Shahristani chaired the meeting with U.S. co-Chairs Deputy Secretary of Energy Daniel Poneman and Special Envoy and Coordinator for International Energy Affairs at the State Department Carlos Pascual.
    During today’s meeting, both sides reiterated the significance of Iraq’s future energy sector development and its contribution to greater economic prosperity, as well as the valuable role that Iraq plays in providing a steady flow of petroleum resources to global markets. Both sides lauded Iraq’s offshore installation of the central metering manifold platform for the new single point moorings (SPMs) and recognized Iraq’s bold plans to increase further its oil production and exports.
    The delegations discussed Iraq’s Integrated National Energy Strategy; opportunities to strengthen production and export infrastructure in order to meet Iraq’s mid- and long-range export goals; Iraqi and U.S. lessons learned in the field of natural gas capture and distribution; and best practices from the United States and the region.
    The two sides discussed the importance of improving the protection of critical energy infrastructure for oil, natural gas, and electricity installations. To this end, Iraq and the United States are embarking on a significant new area of cooperation by having experts from the U.S. Departments of Energy and State work with Iraq to develop approaches to protect Iraq’s energy infrastructure from terrorist attack or natural disaster.
    The two governments discussed the importance of supporting Iraq’s efforts to harness its vast natural gas resources. They reviewed the status of Iraq’s work to capture natural gas that is currently flared and redirect it to meet Iraq’s growing energy demand. We have agreed to form a new working group under the JCC focused on combining mobile power generation technologies with reduction in gas flaring. We hope to engage both government and industrial actors in bringing forward rapid, deployable solutions. The delegations also discussed continued efforts to build Iraqi Government capacity to oversee and regulate the natural gas sector, including through programs under the Department of Commerce’s Commercial Law Development Program. The U.S. delegation discussed the current development of shale gas resources and its impact on international markets.
    For its part, the United States expressed its continued support of Iraq’s energy sector, committing to workshops and technical assistance that built upon the success of earlier programs. One such earlier program provided 230 key engineers and managers in Iraq’s Ministry of Electricity on best practices in energy security, operations, maintenance, and safety. We have agreed to form a new working group under the JCC on the roles energy efficiency and renewable energy can play in meeting electricity needs, including energy efficient standards and business models for renewable energy.
    The JCC on Energy was established by the 2008 Strategic Framework Agreement between Iraq and the United States to strengthen the two nations’ strategic partnership on a variety of initiatives. The United States hosted the first JCC on Energy in Washington, DC, on April 23, 2012 at the Department of Energy. The November 1, 2013 meeting of the Higher Coordinating Committee, chaired by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and Vice President Joseph Biden, reaffirmed the value of the JCC on Energy. The Republic of Iraq and the United States committed to convening the next JCC on Energy in Washington, D.C., at a date to be agreed.



    Quickly.  In yesterday's snapshot, I stated, "Oil. Well someone might want to inform the State Dept that currently Iraq's shipment of oil to Jordan has ceased due to the assault Anbar. Maybe that will give our 'diplomatic geniuses' -- who, remember, are now the government department responsible for Iraq -- a needed push to attempt to stop the assault on Anbar."

    Proof insisted an e-mailer.  I had none.  I was going by what a US Senator told me in private yesterday.  But today, today, you've got a news story on it.  Raheem Salman, Ahmed Rasheed, Isabel Coles and Jason Neely (Reuters) report: "Trucked exports of oil from Iraq to neighboring Jordan have been halted due to deteriorating security in Anbar province where militants have overrun the city of Falluja, an oil ministry spokesman said." There's your proof.

    Now this:

    US House Rep Jon Runyan:  Today's hearings will focus on technological incentives  initiatives of the Veterans Benefits Administration as well as the secondary effects of those initiatives.  Specifially, we'll hear information on the status of the Veterans Benefit Management System 6.0 release and the Veterans Relationships Management System including E-Benefits.  We will also address the recently implemented secure electronic transition of service treatment records between health care artifacts in the image management solution in the Dept of Defense and VA's VBMS.  Additionally, the Subcommittee will seek information on VA's Work Credit System within the new electronic framework of their regional offices and the national work que, the propose rule of VA as it relates to the standardized forms. Many of these technological advances will reduce the reliance on paper processes and were designed to simplify and streamline the VA's services to veterans, their families and survivors.

    I would like to cover that hearing, I was at it this afternoon.  There may or may not be time for it tomorrow.
    If there's not, I'll see if there's a chance of covering it at Third on Sunday.  And he was speaking this afternoon as he Chaired the House Veterans Affairs Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs.














    cnn
    jomana karadsheh

    saad abedine

    Unemployment benefits

    $
    0
    0
    Joseph Kishore (WSWS) reports:


    The US Senate failed to move forward with a three-month extension of federal unemployment benefits yesterday, leaving 1.7 million long-term unemployed workers without any cash assistance.
    The vote on Thursday fell one short of the 60-vote supermajority required to end debate, with a handful of Republicans joining Democrats in supporting the measure. Even if the bill were to pass the Senate, it would still have to clear the Republican-controlled House of Representatives. Including family members, some 5 million people have been affected already by the December 28 expiration of extended benefits, a number that is growing by close to 1 million every month.
    The Democratic Party and the Obama administration are engaged in a cynical charade over the benefits. The crisis facing the long-term jobless is seen as an opportunity to posture as opponents of inequality in the run-up to the 2014 mid-term elections. Even as the White House issued a statement criticizing Republicans for blocking the bill, the administration prepared to sign a bill that will cut food assistance by $8.7 billion over the next decade.
    The cut-off of extended unemployment benefits at the end of last year was the result of a decision by the Democrats not to include an extension of the program in a budget deal worked out with the Republicans. “We know it’s a political game,” said Republican Senator Orrin Hatch, commenting on the Democratic maneuvers.
    The two parties are engaged in behind-the-scenes negotiations over the jobless benefits, including discussions over other social cuts to pay for them and the introduction of changes that will further restrict access. Both parties are carrying out a strategy to use the unemployment crisis to blackmail workers into accepting poverty-level wages.

    The two-party duopoly should have been ended long ago.

    As I've noted previously, it's getting to the point that I favor term limits.  If we can't get a viable third party going, term limits isn't an answer but it's something.

    The other night, Elaine and I both wrote about an album we love: "A few thoughts on Nanci Griffith's One Fair Summer Evening" and "Nanci Griffith" and Elaine went on to break down the album even further so be sure you read her "About the songs on Nanci Griffith's One Fair Summer Evening."

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


    Thursday, February 6, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, Human Rights Watch releases a report on the Iraqi government's abuse of Iraqi women, the White House has managed to alienate the Kurds, we look at Brett McGurk's Iraq testimony (where he lied, where he omitted), and much more.



    US House Rep Ileana Ros-Lehtinen:  In addition to the biggest issue, which is that we don't have al Qaeda on the run, there are two issues which I continue to be very concerned about.  The first is the safety of the residents of Camp Liberty.  They still have very little protection.  When last you testified, Mr. McGurk, 192 T-walls were up.  Then the big progress, supposedly, is that 43 T-walls are now up in addition.   This is out of 17,500 T-walls. T-walls save lives.  Put them up.  Number two, the Iraqi Jewish archives.  Ted Deutsch and many other members are very concerned, don't want them to be shipped back.  The Iraqi government incorrectly states that these papers are theirs.  That is not true.  And we hope that you continue to work on that.  And the bigger issue that brings us together is that obviously since the departure of our troops, al Qaeda's re-emergence has caused Iraq to take a very worrisome turn for the worse.  We've sacrificed so much blood and treasure there to watch it descend into full sectarian violence and an al Qaeda safe haven.  So we've got to rebuild our influence there.

    That's Ros-Lehtinen speaking at yesterday's House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.  The sole witness appearing before the Committee  was US State Dept's Deputy Assistant Secretary for Iraq and Iran Brett McGurk.  Committee Chair Ed Royce and Ranking Member Eliot Engel were among those noted in yesterday's snapshot.  We'll be covering the hearing for several snapshots.

    Yesterday we noted the T-walls and we'll use Ros-Lehtinen to recap on that and to note other topics as well.  We jump to her questions for McGurk and there aren't any ". . ." in the exchange we're noting below but please note she asked three questions and we grab one here and two more later and the three were asked at once and they were answered at once by McGurk.


    US House Rep Ileana Ros-Lehtinen::  On the issue of T-walls at ,Camp Liberty why have there been only 235 out of 17,500 T-walls put up?  And why have we only seen an addition of 43 since our November Subcommittee hearing?  Can you please commit that you will put extra effort in saving lives there?

    Brett McGurk:  On Camp Liberty, on specifically the issue of T-walls, I have, again, made a number of trips to Iraq and every time I go, from Maliki on down, I raise the issues of T-walls.  We got T-walls moving back into the camp, earlier this month.  They stopped.  I raised it again last Thursday with the Iraqi National Security Advisor.  I understand this morning, T-walls are moving into the camp again.  I visited the survivors and residents of Camp Liberty earlier this month.  I told them I promised I would do everything I could.  I also urged them to do everything they could and that meant showing up at these camp management meetings where plans are made to move the T-walls into the camp.  This is an issue I'm going to continue to stay on top of.

    How lucky for him that the T-walls, he 'understands' started going up again Wednesday morning when he was to appear before the Committee on Wednesday afternoon.

    This is nonsense.  We went over this yesterday.  The Congress was told by the State Dept in October that the remaining T-walls would be put out.  Brett McGurk himself repeated that to the Congress in November.  The State Dept issued a statement in December saying the T-walls were going up.  They still weren't.  In January, it was the US Embassy in Baghdad, noting McGurk's visit to Camp Liberty, that said the T-walls were going up.

    It's a shame no one asked Brett McGurk what his 'understanding' really meant.

    Did someone pass on that Nouri says now they'll go up.  What does his answer mean?

    And since the world -- including the European Union -- think he's a liar for his November testimony on the kidnapped Ashraf residents and who has them?  Since the UN didn't call him a liar but did put out a statment (again) contradicting his claims on that, why should we believe him now?

    And if he's before Congress again in a few months and the T-walls are still not up, does anyone tell him that he's doing a lousy job and suggest that it's past time the State Dept stopped wasting time and money repeating actions and statements that do not effect any change?

    Or are we all supposed to stand there rooting for Brett and the State Dept to win the longest marathon ever?


    In her opening remarks, Ros-Lehtinen noted the Jewish archives.  These were discovered by the US military shortly after the start of the Iraq War, they were discovered submerged in watery basement.  These artifacts are Jewish artifacts.  Many were stolen from them by Saddam Hussein's government.  Many they were prevented from leaving with.  The artifacts came to the US to be restored so that they could be preserved for the future.

    Nouri al-Maliki has insisted that his government has the right to these documents which include the Torah which, last time anyone checked, was not an official document of the Iraqi government.  Also, last time anyone checked, the number of Jews in Iraq could be counted on one hand -- a direct result of the post-invasion Iraqi government's refusal to protect the Jews of Baghdad.

    After the documents were restored, they went on exhibit last year.  The US National Archives and Records Administration not only displayed them, they digitized them.  The National Archives notes:

    Startling evidence of the once vibrant Jewish life in Iraq came to light in May 2003 — over 2,700 books and tens of thousands of documents were discovered in the flooded basement of the Iraqi intelligence headquarters by a US Army team.
    The remarkable survival of this written record of Iraqi Jewish life provides an unexpected opportunity to better understand this 2,500-year-old Jewish community. For centuries, it had flourished in what had generally been a tolerant, multicultural society. But circumstances changed dramatically for Jews in the mid-twentieth century, when most Iraqi Jews fled and were stripped of their citizenship and assets.


    As Jewish people from around the world came to view them, one Iraqi woman whose family fled to Israel found her report cards from when she was a little girl.  Others found records and belongings of their parents.

    This is not the property of the government Iraq.  This was personal property which was systematically stolen by a government of a country that has historically persecuted the Jews.

    Those decades of persecution are why it so offensive to so many Jewish people around the world that this cultural heritage is going to be handed over to the Iraqi government.

    The White House and the State Dept lamely and wrongly assert that they have to return it.

    Their argument is that an agreement was made that the US would restore the documents and then hand then hand them to the government of Iraq.

    But you can't enter into a property contract with anyone other than the owner of the property or a legally designated representative of the owners of the property.


    The Iraqi government has no claim of ownership.  They also were not contracted by the world's Jewish community to represent the property on their behalf.

    This is stolen property.

    As we already noted, Ro-Lehtinen stated, "The Iraqi government incorrectly states that these documents are theirs." That's what she was referring to when she said it.  Here she is asking about it (again, she asked three questions all at once during the questioning, we're splitting it up and splitting Brett McGurk's responses up).


    US House Rep Ileana Ros-Lehtinen::  The Iraqi Jewish Archives, you have been engaged in discussions with the Iraqis on this issue and your staff has spoken with representatives, the Iraqi Jewish Diaspora and the Jewish community as a whole.  But could you give us an update on progress of these discussions?  Have there been alternative plans proposed?

    Brett McGurk:  On the -- on the Jewish archives,  uhm, as you know, this a very sensitive topic.  Uhm, I've been working directly with the Iraqis on this.  I was just in Iraq and raised it with those officials in charge of the file.  We are engaged in sensitive negotiations with the Iraqis.  Uhm, in the coming weeks the Director of Iraq's Archives and Library will be coming to the United States and, again, I hope to report progress on this  But we're engaged  and it's a sensitive investigation but I will keep you fully informed of those talks. 

    How about you explain what you're talking about?

    Brett McGurk is not talking about the archives being turned over to the Jewish people -- though he did  mislead Congress on just that in 2013.  What he's talking about is handing them over to Iraq and then maybe something will be done like it can tour every few years in the US.

    Ros-Lehtinen is very much concerned about this issue.  She's not joking or pretending.  She's not the only one in the House -- in fact every Democrat and Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee believes the documents should be returned to the Jewish community.  There's also sizable objection in the US Senate to these documents being wrongly handed over to the Iraqi government.  In the Senate, Senator Chuck Schumer has been one of the leaders on attempting to prevent this from happening.

    But when Brett starts making his pleasing bleets, he needs to be stopped.  He needs to be asked specifically what he's discussing.  Ros-Lehtinen was at the hearing where he lied.  She was out of the room when he was forced to clarify his remarks to explain there was no talk of these documents being turned over to their rightful owners.

    He's real good about offering false flattery and 'shaping' his responses, he's just not so good about telling the truth.

    Let's note this exchange.


    Chair Ed Royce: You were just in Baghdad meeting with Iraqi officials.  You state that you detected for the first time acknowledgement that government of Iraq missteps may have made the problem worse.  And as I noted in my statement, this is not the feeling that Ranking Member Engel and I received when we -- when we raised this issue with the [prime minister] of Iraq in our meeting. So, that was a few months ago. I am somewhat encouraged by this but how encouraged should we be?  Because our concern has long been that this lack of reconciliation is compounding the problem seriously

    Brett McGurk:  I have found, frankly, Mr. Chairman, an attitude among the Iraqis that was similar to the tactics that we used in the early part of the war that the security problem was simply a security problem and not a problem that was fused with economics and politics.  And we had a series of conversations over the course of last year as the, uh, ISIL attacks increased, in which Iraqis saw this mainly as a security problem.  All I can say is that I've been there twice, uh, this month.  Uh, since  the infiltration of ISIL into Falluja and Ramadi.  And I have heard from across the board, from the prime minister on down that unless you enlist local Sunnis in those areas, you'll never defeat and isolate ISIL and we've seen that now manifested in a commitment the Iraqi Cabinet has passed a number of resolutions saying tribal leaders and fighters will be given full benefits of the state and most significantly Prime Minister Maliki has made a commitment that tribal fighters who oust ISIL from these areas will be incorporated into the formal security services of the state: the police and the army.  That did not happen with the Awakening fighters that we worked with in 2007 through 2008.  So that is a very significant commitment.  We now need to stay on the Iraqis to make sure that they follow through.

    People sat through that crap.  Some nodded.  In agreement?

    'Awakening' are Sahwa, also known as 'Sons Of Iraq' (or 'Daughters Of Iraq' for the much smaller numbered female counterparts).  The then-top US commander in Iraq, Gen David Petraeus, explained the Sahwa.  We reported on it in the April 8, 2008 snapshot:

    Today The Petraeus & Crocker Variety Hour took their act on the road.  First stop, the Senate Armed Services Committee.  Gen David Petraeus and US Ambassador Ryan Crocker are supposed to be providing a status report on the Iraq War.  They didn't.  In fact, Petraeus made clear that the status report would come . . . next September.  When the results are this bad, you stall -- which is exactly what Petraeus did. 
    The most dramatic moment came as committee chair Carl Levin was questioning Petraeus and a man in the gallery began exclaiming "Bring them home!" repeatedly.  (He did so at least 16 times before he was escored out).  The most hilarious moment was hearing Petraeus explain that it's tough in the school yard and America needs to fork over their lunch money in Iraq to avoid getting beat up.  In his opening remarks, Petraues explained of the "Awakening" Council (aka "Sons of Iraq," et al) that it was a good thing "there are now over 91,000 Sons of Iraq -- Shia as well as Sunni -- under contract to help Coalition and Iraqi Forces protect their neighborhoods and secure infrastructure and roads.  These volunteers have contributed significantly in various areas, and the savings in vehicles not lost because of reduced violence -- not to mention the priceless lives saved -- have far outweighed the cost of their monthly contracts."  Again, the US must fork over their lunch money, apparently, to avoid being beat up. 
    How much lunch money is the US forking over?  Members of the "Awakening" Council are paid, by the US, a minimum of $300 a month (US dollars).  By Petraeus' figures that mean the US is paying $27,300,000 a month.  $27 million a month is going to the "Awakening" Councils who, Petraeus brags, have led to "savings in vehicles not lost".  Again, in this morning's hearings, the top commander in Iraq explained that the US strategy is forking over the lunch money to school yard bullies.  What a pride moment for the country.


    At that hearing, Senator Barbara Boxer noted that the US was spending $182 million each year ($18 million a month) to "Awakening" Council members and "why don't we ask the Iraqis to pay the entire cost of that program"?

    Had Boxer not asked that basic question, the US government would not have attempted (repeatedly) to stop paying for Sahwa.

    It's cute the way Brett thinks he can get away with rewriting history.  2009, specifically May 2009, is when it all goes to hell.  So sorry but Bully Boy Bush is not in the White House.  If this is news to you, you can refer to Heath Druzin's "'Sons of Iraq' still waiting on promises" (Stars and Stripes) from May 2009.

    Today, Brett and other liars want to whine, "Oh, if only Nouri . . ." No.

    It was the current administration that stood by and did nothing as the Sahwa were targeted, as they weren't paid, as they weren't absorbed into the security forces, US President Barack Obama didn't do one damn thing.

    This includes when Sahwa leader Adel Mashhadani was arrested.  From March 2009, Barack did nothing.


    W-w-ait!  Barack and the White House only began insisting dropping the Sahwa was a mistake this past summer!

    That is true.  It took the idiots that long to realize it.

    But Adel al-Mashhadani was still alive then.

    January 21st, just last month, Sameer N. Yacoub (AP) reported on the latest rounds of executions in Iraq and noted, "The statement quoted the justice minister, Hassan al-Shimari, as saying those executed included Adel-al-Mashhadani, a former anti-al-Qaeda Sunni leader in Baghdad who was sentenced to death in late 2009 for murder and kidnapping."

    Isn't that something, singing the importance of the Sawha for months now and doing nothing -- not even lodging a complaint -- to keep Adel al-Mashhadani from being executed.


    Let's note another exchange.


    Ranking Member Eliot Engel:  It was my opinion when the Chairman and I met with Mr. Maliki, it was my opinion that he was a good listener but I didn't think he provided too much in terms of answers to the questions that we had -- one of which was overflights.  I think that he just came to listen but really didn't come to put his head together with us an help solve the problem


    Brett McGurk:  Uhm-uhm, I found Congressman that since the Prime Minister's trip, that your meeting with him, other meetings he had here on the Hill, uh, he spent about two hours with President Obama in the Oval Office.  Uhm, he got a very direct message on a number of issues and we have seen some fairly significant changes from that visit and so I want to thank you for the meeting you had with him and I think you made an influence on some of the issues we'll discuss on Camp Liberty, we've seen some changes, and, particularly, a need for a holistic strategy to defeat ISIL and enlisting the Sunnis into the fight at the local level we have seen some fairly dramatic and significant changes from that visit.


    Have we seen changes?  Or does Brett just love to keep saying "holistic" whenever he appears before Congress?


    Nouri's done nothing "holistic."

    He lies all the time.

    The protests that kicked off December 21, 2012 and that have continued for over a year was the expression of outrage that slowly built up.  In the fall of 2012, the first reports emerged of women and girls in Iraqi prisons and detention centers being tortured and raped.

    Parliament investigated and found that to be true and Nouri did his usual -- he stayed silent thinking he could ignore it.

    What happens in the prisons is always what gave the protests their deeper meaning.  Yes, the lack of jobs and the lack of public services were important.  But with Sunnis targeted for arrests, with Sunnis disappearing into the 'legal' system, the torture and rape of women and girls was the last damn straw.

    Why is the State Dept never made to respond to that issue when they appear before Congress?


    Human Rights Watch notes today:



     Iraqi authorities are detaining thousands of Iraqi women illegally and subjecting many to torture and ill-treatment, including the threat of sexual abuse. Iraq’s weak judiciary, plagued by corruption, frequently bases convictions on coerced confessions, and trial proceedings fall far short of international standards. Many women were detained for months or even years without charge before seeing a judge.

    The 105-page report, “‘No One Is Safe’: Abuses of Women in Iraq’s Criminal Justice System,”documents abuses of women in detention based on interviews with women and girls, Sunni and Shia, in prison; their families and lawyers; and medical service providers in the prisons at a time of escalating violence involving security forces and armed groups. Human Rights Watch also reviewed court documents and extensive information received in meetings with Iraqi authorities including Justice, Interior, Defense, and Human Rights ministry officials, and two deputy prime ministers.

    “Iraqi security forces and officials act as if brutally abusing women will make the country safer,” said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East and North Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “In fact, these women and their relatives have told us that as long as security forces abuse people with impunity, we can only expect security conditions to worsen.”

    In January 2013, Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki promised to reform the criminal justice system, beginning with releasing detained women who had judicial orders of release. A year later, the brutal tactics of security forces remain essentially the same and hundreds of women remain in detention illegally.



    This is not a secret.  Again, Parliament investigated this in 2012 and found it to be true.

    Why has the US Congress failed to probe it, failed to even demand answers from State Dept witnesses appearing before it?

    Alexandra Zavis (Los Angeles Times) covers the Human Rights Watch report and notes:

    The vast majority of the more than 4,200 women detained in Interior and Defense Ministry facilities are Sunni Muslims, according to figures provided by the prime minister’s office. But women of all sects are subjected to the abuses documented in the report, Human Rights Watch said.
    The group found that women are detained not only for crimes they are said to have committed, but also to harass male family or tribe members, a practice that amounts to collective punishment for alleged terrorist activities, Human Rights Watch said. 
    Some are held for months or even years after judges have ordered their release, the report says. Even if they are freed unharmed, they are frequently stigmatized by their families and communities, because they are perceived to have been dishonored, it says.

     

    Why does this State Dept not care about women?

    Why is John Kerry on some sort fanatical mission with regards to Israel and Palestine when he needs to be focused on Iraq?

    Or have we all forgotten that the State Dept is over the US mission in Iraq?  That transition, from DoD to State, took place in the fall of 2011.  And State has been given billions of taxpayer dollars to oversee this mission.

    But John Kerry is unhinged and goes from attempting to lead and market a war on Syria, to believing he's the messiah who will bring peace to the Israelis and Palestinians?  And all he really ends up doing is insulting both parties.

    In the most recent past, special envoys were created to work on the issues regarding the plight of the Palestinians.

    Kerry needs to be doing his job and his chief focus is supposed to be on Afghanistan and Iraq -- those are the State Dept's two big budget items.

    Back to the hearing.  Again, Ros-Lehtinen asked three questions at once and Brett McGurk responded to all three in one response.  But we've divided it up here to zoom in on various details.


    US House Rep Ileana Ros-Lehtinen::  And thirdly, on al Qaeda's resurgence, a lot of us this is due to the failure in the Iraqi government and Iraqi leadership since we left the country.  There are national elections planned in Iraq in April.  We were successful after the surge in getting the government to participate in more inclusive power-sharing government that kind of mollified the Sunnis in Iraq and left al Qaeda marginalized.  Then after we left, the Iraqis took another step backwards.  Now it is the Sunnis who are marginalized drawing many to al Qaeda.  What steps are we taking to ensure that the Sunnis are participating in these elections and that Iraq can return to that sort of power-sharing government we saw in the post-surge Iraq?  And continuing with the Sunni-Shia issue, we've seen over the last  few days that the Iraqi military has been bombarding Falluja which was overtaken by al Qaeda late last year presumably preparing for an assault; however, the Shi'ite dominated government  cannot successfully take Falluja on its own without the help of the Sunni tribal leaders in the region.  Can you describe the current Maliki government and these leaders?  And do you think Maliki will be able to gain their support given Maliki's crackdown on Sunnis in Iraq for these past few years?  Thank you sir.

    Brett McGurk:  On the issue of elections and Sunni participation, as I said in my testimony, we are focused to holding election April 30th.  This will be the third full term elections for a four year government -- the first one in December 2005,  uh, and then 20, uh, 10 and this year.  As you, uh, may know, the head of the main Sunni coalition, Osama [al-] Nujaifi was in the United States two weeks ago.  He had meetings with the President, the Vice President, he met the Secretary of State at his home.  Uhm, so we are very focused on making sure that the elections happen, that they produce a genuine and credible result and that they allow a government to form that reflects the makeup of Iraqi society with all represented.  In Falluja, as I described in my testimony, the plan is to have the tribes out in front but with the army in support because this is -- they face -- ISIL is an army.  They have heavy weapons, they have 50 caliber sniper rifles.  They are very well trained and very well fortified.  So we have to have the Sunni's tribal local people out in front but they will require security support.  And General [Lloyd] Austin was in Iraq last week and in talks with Iraqi military leaders.  We are advising the military commanders as best we can, building  on the lessons that we learned in these areas for tactical and strategic patience for planning and to make sure that civilian casualties are minimized.

    That's interesting.  It's not full response or a truthful one but it's interesting.

    We've already noted Nouri's threats to hold the April 30th elections in only some provinces.  From last month's "Will Nouri call off elections in provinces he's unpopular in?" (January 25th):


    Duriad Salman and Ammar al-Ani (Alsumaria) report al-Nujaifi gave two interviews today, the first to Sky News and the second to Alsumaria.  Osama al-Nujaifi noted Nouri cannot continue to act unilaterally, that there are checks and balances in the system and he was concerned that Nouri thinks he's "singular" when it comes to decision making and that this could lead Nouri to attempt to postpone the upcoming election citing "poor security." Nouri did just that last year.  And he wasn't supposed to.  He ruled that Anbar and Nineveh could not vote.  Under pressure from the US, specifically Secretary of State John Kerry, Nouri relented and, months later, allowed the two provinces to vote.
    He never should have been allowed to postpone them.  He doesn't have that power.  The Independent High Electoral Commission is the only one that does and, as their name notes, they are supposed to be "independent."
    If Nouri tries to keep provinces from voting, it will be worse than last time and it will be worse then cancelling the election all out.  It will be corrupt.
    He penalized the two provinces he was most disliked in last year.  Those were provincial elections, citizens were voting on who to represent them in their provincial governments (think state governments if you're in the US and confused).  These parliamentary elections are like federal elections.  And if Utah wasn't allowed to vote to send people to the House and Senate, it wouldn't be a real election in the US.
    In a later report, Duriad Salman and Ammar al-Ani report that the 'independent' commission is now saying that one or more provinces could be prevented from voting in the parliamentary elections.



    Seems like Congress should have been informed of that.  I'm not aware of any US outlet that's reported on the above.  But it is news in the Arab press.  And it should have been addressed by Brett McGurk in the hearing in response to the question.

    Today was like every other day in Iraq of late, violence spread out around the country with an emphasis on Baghdad.

    National Iraqi News Agency reports a Baghdad sticky bombing (Tayran square) left two people injured,  a Baghdad sticky bombing (Shaab district) left three people injured, a Baghdad car bombing (Karrada district) left five people injured, a Baghdad car bombing (Camp Sara area) left four people injured, 2 Baghdad car bombings (Hurriah area and Battol area) left thirteen people injured, a Baghdad car bombing (Jamelah neighborhood) left 1 person dead and seven more injured,  a Baghdad car bombing (Jkok area -- NINA notes this was the 7th Baghdad car bombing) left six people injured,  an attack on a Rifaii checkpoint left 1 Iraqi soldier dead and another injured, a Baquba car bombing claimed 1 life and left nine people injured,  security forces in Jurf al-Sakhar state they killed 3 al Qaeda in Iraq members, 2 Shabaks were shot dead in Mosul, a grenade attack on a central Mosul checkpoint left three police members and four civilians injured, 1 police member was shot dead at a Muqdadiya checkpoint, Dr. Jalil Ibrahim al-Obeidi was kidnapped from his Baquba private clinic (he is also the Director of Baquba Hospital), two oil tanker drivers were kidnapped and their tankers bombed "on the road linking between Salahuddin and Mosul," security forces shot dead 1 suspect in Tikrit, the Ministry of the Interior killed 1 "gunmen" entering Iraq from Syria,  and Joint Operations Command shot dead 2 suspects in Mosul.


    All Iraq News adds that a father and son were shot dead in a sheep market in western Mosul and that an attack on Badush prison in Mosul left 1 guard dead, three more injured, 3 prisoners dead and five more injured.


    We've repeatedly noted here the many back stabs from the White House to the Kurdish leadership.  This was tolerated -- embraced -- when the top Kurd was Iraqi President Jalal Talbani.  He's not been heard from in over a year and the rumors of his death or impending death never cease.

    Yes, Senator Joe Biden had a good relationship with the Kurds.

    Vice President Joe Biden, however, thought that good earlier relationship meant he could screw them over.  Let's put this as simply as possible.  Nouri al-Maliki is a spoiled rotten brat who throw one tantrum after another.  Joe Biden spends far too much humoring Nouri (who never keeps a promise) and expecting the Kurds to wait patiently until Nouri's calmed down and Biden can speak with adults.

    But Nouri never calms down.

    And the Kurds get screwed over and over.

    The US worked hard to keep the Barzani family in the shadow of the Talabanis.

    Those days are gone.  By 2011, when Jalal was still in good health, KRG President Massoud Barzani was emerging on the world stage as the Kurdish leader.

    The Kurds have been disrespected -- as they have been historically by the US government.

    And Barzani's not Talabani.  He's not going to be so easily bribed.


    We've gone over this repeatedly here.  The US press never seems to catch on but I can't post a thing on the Kurds here without three State Dept friends calling and asking what I'm basing the analysis on?  And then slowly starting to agree that the US is losing the Kurds.  Too slowly.

    Friday, we noted the latest insult.  And I was told by all three State Dept official referred to in the previous paragraph that I was interpreting it wrongly.  To which I said, "Maybe so, but I don't think so.  We'll just have to wait and see." From Monday's snapshot:


    Friday's snapshot noted US Vice President Joe Biden's phone call to KRG President Massoud Barzani, carried the White House statement and I pointed out, "It's a shame that they [the White House] have more concern over pleasing Nouri than they do over the safety of the Iraqi citizens." Today Rudaw reports:


    Kurdistan Region President Massoud Barzani has postponed a planned visit to Washington this week because of other commitments, said his chief of staff, Fuad Hussein.
    “President Barzani told Joe Biden (the US vice president) that because of some other commitments he couldn’t visit Washington at this time,” Hussein told Rudaw. “That is why the visit was postponed.”



    That's only surprising if you weren't paying attention.  In 2012, Barazni made clear his opposition to the US giving Nouri F-16s.  And today?  Not only are those going to be handed over, helicopters and Hellfire missiles are being provided to Nouri.  And on top of all of that, Joe Biden wants to hold Nouri's hand and reassure him while telling Barzani that concessions (to Nouri) need to be made.

    President Massoud Barzani is a much admired figure in the KRG and he's a leader on the world stage but Biden wants to treat like an errand boy and hand him a grocery list?

    Of course, Barazni's insulted.  And that's before you get to the White House's historic betrayal of Baraniz on the 2010 US-brokered Erbil Agreement that they used Barazni's name and reputation to sell and then refused, after everyone signed the contract, to stand by it.  Yeah, it's about time Barzani put some distance between himself and the US government.

    Maybe even a brief spell will force the White House to take Barzani a little more seriously?



    Again, the three told me I was wrong.  Even faced with the truth, they can't admit it.  They each did make a plea that went something like: 'For the good of everyone, please stop writing about this.'

    The good of who?

    The Kurds?

    They're not helped by the silence.

    Only Nouri is helped by the silence.

    And I also pointed out that I don't work for the US government and I don't take orders from this administration.

    Now apparently the US press does because it was one thing to ignore the growing tensions for months and months but when the visit got killed?  Everyone knew what was going on.

    But it's left to Ayub Nuri and Rudaw to address the topic the US press shies from:

    Many people were baffled this week by the sudden news that Kurdistan Region President Massoud Barzani was not going to Washington. Barzani’s supporters said it was the Kurdish president who had cancelled the visit. Others laughed and said, “Who could cancel on the president of the most powerful country in the world?” From the US there was no explanation, and out of Kurdistan only came conflicting reports.
    But who snubbed who isn’t really the issue. The real question is: How do the Kurds see America today.
    Ten years ago the Kurds saw America as an ally, and America regarded them as friends. The Kurds joined America’s war and contributed to Saddam Hussein’s downfall. Kurdish Peshmarga and security forces offered the Americans intelligence, advice and guidance. Kurdish politicians and ministers went to Baghdad and put into service their two decades of experience to rebuild the Iraqi government.
    What did they expect in return? A democratic Iraq that America had promised everyone. But ten years on, not only have the Kurds not seen a democratic country that respects their rights, they in fact feel it is often America -- not Baghdad -- that is acting against them.


    What kind of 'learning curve' is the White House on because they're on year six and they still don't know what they're doing?
    While you ponder that, be sure to check out Alexandra Di Stefano Pironti's "President Barzani Continues Diplomacy with Key European Partners" (Rudaw) which went up tonight.


    Brett McGurk should have been asked and pressed on how this administration managed to piss off the Kurds?

    We'll continue with the hearing in tomorrow's snapshot.













    stars and stripes




    My favorite nachos in the Kitchen

    $
    0
    0
    My favorite nachos were the ones we made as teenagers in the toaster oven. 

    We'd put chips on the tray lined with foil and top with cheese (peppers if we had them) and I loved them.

    Now days, I don't. 

    Did chips change, did the toaster ovens change, did I change?

    Nachos in the toaster oven no longer taste as good to me.

    What I prefer now is the microwave.

    I put a platter of chips topped with mozzarella cheese and jalapeno peppers into the microwave to melt the cheese.  Then I add some sour cream to the top -- I don't make it a layer, it's more like one center circle and then dabs around.  I then top with chopped tomatoes.

    That's my favorite way to fix nachos these days.

    These days, ObamaCare is revealed as a job destroyer and Democrats spin like crazy to lie.

    My favorite lie is that this is about ObamaCare giving people extra hours of leisure.

    Yeah, losing two to six paid hours a week does provide more leisure, it also results in less take home pay for most Americans.

    Kate Randall (WSWS) reports the latest victims of ObamaCare:

     

    AOL chief executive Tim Armstrong has announced that the company will restructure its 401(k) retirement benefits for employees in a way that will significantly reduce employer-matching contributions. AOL will now provide a 50 percent company match on employees’ pre-tax income only at the end of the year, instead of paying the benefit throughout the year.
    The details surrounding the company’s decision are a telling example of the contempt that such multi-millionaires executives have not only for their own employees, but for the vast majority of the population that must concern itself with daily living expenses and plans for a secure retirement.
    In an interview with CNBC Thursday morning, Armstrong claimed that the Affordable Care Act was forcing the company’s hand. “As a CEO and as a management team,” he said, “we had to decide, do we pass the $7.1 million of Obamacare costs to our employees? Or do we try to eat as much of that as possible and cut other benefits?”
    In a subsequent company-wide conference call, he explained to employees the reasoning behind the 401(k) rollback. “Two things that happened in 2012,” he said, according to a transcript provided by an AOL employee and quoted by capitalnewyork.com. “We had two AOL-ers that had distressed babies that were born that we paid a million dollars each to make sure those babies were OK in general. And those are the things that add up into our benefits cost.
    “So when we had the final decision about what benefits to cut because of the increased health care costs, we made the decision, and I made the decision, to basically change the 401(k) plan.”


    I'm sure this will be spun by the partisan warriors for Barack.

    It's a shame they can't put that same energy into fighting for workers.


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


    Friday, February 9, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, the protests continue in Iraq, there's news on the Jewish archives, we continue to examine how Brett McGurk misled Congress about Iraq, we also note Human Rights Watch's report on the abuse of Iraqi women, and much more.


    January 16th, Senator Pat Toomey introduced Senate Resolution 333 on behalf of himself and Senators Richard Blumenthal, Chuck Schumer, Mark Kirk, Ben Cardin, Marco Rubio, Pat Roberts, Tim Kaine, Barbara Boxer and Robert Menendez:.





    Strongly recommending that the United States renegotiate the return of the Iraqi Jewish Archive to Iraq.
    Whereas, before the mid-20th century, Baghdad had been a center of Jewish life, culture, and scholarship, dating back to 721 B.C.;
    Whereas, as recently as 1940, Jews made up 25 percent of Baghdad’s population;
    Whereas, in the 1930s and 1940s, under the leadership of Rasheed Ali, anti-Jewish discrimination increased drastically, including the June 1–2, 1941, Farhud pogrom, in which nearly 180 Jews were killed;
    Whereas, in 1948, Zionism was added to the Iraqi criminal code as punishable by death;
    Whereas, throughout 1950–1953, Jews were allowed to leave Iraq under the condition that they renounce their citizenship;
    Whereas, as result of past persecution, few Jews remain in Iraq today, and many left their possessions and treasured artifacts behind;
    Whereas the Ba’ath regime confiscated these artifacts, later dubbed the Iraqi Jewish Archive, from synagogues and communal organizations;
    Whereas, on May 6, 2003, members of the United States Armed Forces discovered the Iraqi Jewish Archive, which included 2,700 books and tens of thousands of documents, in the heavily damaged and flooded basement of the Mukhabarat (secret police) headquarters;
    Whereas, under great urgency and before adequate time could be dedicated to researching the history of the Iraqi Jewish Archive, an agreement was signed between the National Archives and Records Administration and the Coalition Provisional Authority on August 20, 2003, stating that the Iraqi Jewish Archive would be sent to the United States for restoration and then would be sent back to Iraq after completion;
    Whereas, the Iraqi Jewish community is the constituency of the Archive and is now represented by the diaspora outside Iraq;
    Whereas, the current Government of Iraq has publicly acknowledged the importance of the Archive and demonstrated a shared respect for the wishes of the Iraqi Jewish diaspora by attending the December 2013 burial of several Torah fragments from the Archive in New York;
    Whereas United States taxpayers have invested $3,000,000 to restore the Iraqi Jewish Archive, and the National Archives and Records Administration has worked diligently to preserve the artifacts;
    Whereas the National Archives and Records Administration is displaying the Iraqi Jewish Archive in Washington, DC, from October 11, 2013, to January 5, 2014, and in New York City from February 4, 2014, to May 18, 2014; and
    Whereas the Iraqi Embassy to the United States has said that the Iraqi Jewish community, like other communities in Iraq, played a key role in building the country, shared in its prosperity, and also suffered exile and forced departure because of tyranny: Now, therefore, be it
    That the Senate—
    (1)
    strongly urges the Department of State to renegotiate with the Government of Iraq the provisions of the original agreement that was signed between the National Archives and Records Administration and the Coalition Provisional Authority in order to ensure that the Iraqi Jewish Archive be kept in a place where its long-term preservation and care can be guaranteed;
    (2)
    recognizes that the Iraqi Jewish Archive should be housed in a location that is accessible to scholars and to Iraqi Jews and their descendants who have a personal interest in it;
    (3)
    recognizes that the agreement between the National Archives and Records Administration and the Coalition Provisional Authority was signed before knowing the complete history of the Iraqi Jewish Archive;
    (4)
    reaffirms the United States commitment to cultural property under international law; and
    (5)
    reaffirms the United States commitment to ensuring justice for victims of ethnic and religious persecution.


    January 27th, other Senators began joining the resolution: Senator Jim Inhofe, Jerry Moran, Bob Casey, Daiel Coats, Orrin Hatch, Ed Markey, Roger Wicker, Chris Murphy, Roy Blunt, John Boozman, James Risch, Tom Coburn, Thad Cochran, Susan Collins, Chris Coons, Ted Cruz, Chuck Grassley, Mike Johanns, Patty Murray and Bill Nelson.  Rebecca Shimonsi Stoil (Times of Israel) reports today, "Late Thursday night, the Senate unanimously adopted the resolution" and that, barring "a re-negotiation of terms, the items are scheduled to be returned to Baghdad in June, a move that many fear will threaten their very existence."
    There is a time issue.  As Josh Robin (Daily Beast) reports today, "A U.S. State Department official, insisting on anonymity, said in an email the Obama administration understands 'the sensitivities surrounding these items,' adding discussions are likely to intensify as the visit of the director of Iraq’s National Library and Archive approaches. The date for his trip hasn't been set."

    Does US President Barack Obama understand "the sensitivities surrounding these items"?

    And if so, why the hell should that reassure anyone.

    What Josh Robin's reporting is not comforting and is, in fact, disturbing.

    It's more foot dragging from Barack and his administration.

    We need to include something right here.



    US House Rep Brad Sherman:  There was bipartisan support for leaving a residual force in Iraq.  That required a Status Of Forces Agreement with the Maliki government.  And the Status Of Forces Agreement would have had to have included immunity for our soldiers so that they would not be subject to Iraqi courts.  We ask our soldiers, Marines, Airmen, etc. to take many risks.  One of them we don't ask them to take is the idea that their actions would be  held up to judgment in a court in Iraq or a court in Afghanistan for that matter.  We didn't get a Status Of Forces Agreement.  Some -- One theory is the administration blew the negotiations.   The other argu -- view is the Maliki government was in place when this government got there.  Maliki didn't have to give immunity to our troops and chose not to. We've seen that these immunity agreements are-are difficult for a host country to provide. [Afghanistan leader Hamid] Karzai isn't providing them.  And there are several elements of Iranian history going back seventy or eighty years when the Shah was held up to great ridicule for providing such immunity agreements.   Did we fail to get a Status Of Forces Agreement because we blew the negotiations or given the political reality starting with Maliki was there simply no way to get the immunity?


    Brett McGurk:  Uh, first, you're keying on the history is really important here.  The history of immunity agreements, particularly in this region, is really what colors the entire debate.  The negotiation in 2007 and 2008 took almost 18 months.  And while we got those two agreements got passed -- the security agreement which allowed our forces to stay for three more years with immunity and a permanent Strategic Framework Agreement -- they barely passed.  And they passed on the last possible day and almost by the skin of their teeth.  And I was working on that issue with Ambassador [Ryan] Crocker for almost 18 months --

    US House Rep Brad Sherman:  This was passing the Iraqi parliament?

    Brett McGurk: Yes, the Iraqi parliament.  Um, our legal requirements in, uh, in 2011 were that another follow up agreement would have to go through the Iraqi parliament.  It was the assessment of the Iraqi political leaders and also of our leadership that it was unlikely to pass and, therefore, the decision was made that our troops would leave by the end of -- by the end of 2011.  But we still have a permanent -- a permanent Strategic Framework Agreement.  That agreement has passed the Iraqi parliament, was ratified in 2008 and it provides us a strong basis for providing security systems to the Iraqis.  It does not provide us the basis for having boots on the ground in a training presence but we do train Iraqi special forces under our Office of Security Cooperation through the [US] Embassy [in Baghdad] and we're also in discussions with regional partners for having a training presence.


    When we objected to McGurk as Barack's (failed) nominee for US Ambassador to Iraq, we pointed out the SOFA and the e-mails from the Cult of St. Barack poured in insisting that McGurk had nothing to do with the SOFA, some idiots even insisted that McGurk hadn't been in Iraq.  Then news emerged of how he cheated on his wife in Baghdad, under the Bully Boy Bush administration, by sleeping with then-reporter for the Wall St. Journal Gina Chon and they dropped that complaint in their e-mails but insisted McGurk hadn't been working on a new SOFA.

    There he is his words.  But more importantly, his words prove (a) that we were right, Nouri is no hero -- suck on it and your lies, Scott Horton of Antiwar Radio -- and did not stop the SOFA and (b) it proves Senator John McCain is right about how it went down.

    On (a), we've had to suffer with Nouri fan bois like Scott Horton.  Desperately immature boys gripping their tiny penises, in search of a Daddy and seizing on Nouri as a hero.  He is a tyrant.  As Leon Panetta made clear in Congressional testimony, Nouri was not the stumbling block.  The stumble was the Parliament.

    Approval would not come from it, not enough to get a winning vote.

    On (b), I'm not a fan of McCain's I have criticized him here many times.  He is a War Hawk and he's mean-spirited. But his argument has been that the current administration failed with the SOFA and he has criticized the way they attempted it.  He also attributes motive -- that Barack wanted to keep a campaign promise so he tanked the SOFA.  I disagree with the motive and I don't know how anyone but Barack proves or disproves the motive.

    But Brett McGurk is talking about two SOFA's.  McCain's complaint was that Barack started late and that the negotiations were not serious.

    That's true.  They started in the summer of 2011.  That was much too late.  As McGurk notes above, they spent almost 18 months -- he, then-US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker and others -- negotiating the first SOFA.

    By contrast, not even six months were spent negotiating on a second SOFA before the October 2011 announcement that it hadn't worked.

    The inept administration (and I'm glad they were inept with attempting a SOFA) still hasn't learned a damn thing.  Four months from now, the documents are scheduled to leave.  You can't postpone these talks.

    But that's what the administration has done yet again.

    Connolley questioned McGurk Wednesday at the House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.  The sole witness appearing before the Committee  was US State Dept's Deputy Assistant Secretary for Iraq and Iran Brett McGurk.  Committee Chair Ed Royce and Ranking Member Eliot Engel were among those noted in Wednesday's snapshot. with an emphasis on the Congress' opinion of Nouri (not good) and Camp Ashraf. Thursday's snapshot covered the hearing with regards to the Jewish archives.  This time, we'll report on a few other aspects and we may report on the hearing in at least one more snapshot.

    Let's stay with Connolly and note this exchange.


    US House Rep Gerry Connolly:  Elections in April?  Still on schedule?

    Brett McGurk:  Uh, we, our team at the Embassy, is talking every day to the United Nations Assistance Mission-Mission in Iraq and the Iraqi High Electoral Commision which are planning the elections and the information I have received most recently is that we have tens of thousands of displaced families from Anbar Province.  We have been assured by those planning the elections that displaced people will still be able to vote and their vote will count as if they were in their home province.  So we are still confident the elections will be held on April 30th.  And our consistent position, our firm position, is that those elections have to be held on April 30th.  There should not be a delay.


    Some fear a delay.  I'm fearful that Nouri's going to again prevent Anbar and Nineveh from voting -- as he did in the 2013 provincial elections.  Yes, after international pressure, they were allowed to vote in June.  The other provinces -- except for the KRG which votes on its own schedule in provincial elections and Kirkuk which Nouri prevented from voting -- voted in April.

    Yesterday, we noted this from last month's "Will Nouri call off elections in provinces he's unpopular in?" (January 25th):


    Duriad Salman and Ammar al-Ani (Alsumaria) report al-Nujaifi gave two interviews today, the first to Sky News and the second to Alsumaria.  Osama al-Nujaifi noted Nouri cannot continue to act unilaterally, that there are checks and balances in the system and he was concerned that Nouri thinks he's "singular" when it comes to decision making and that this could lead Nouri to attempt to postpone the upcoming election citing "poor security." Nouri did just that last year.  And he wasn't supposed to.  He ruled that Anbar and Nineveh could not vote.  Under pressure from the US, specifically Secretary of State John Kerry, Nouri relented and, months later, allowed the two provinces to vote.
    He never should have been allowed to postpone them.  He doesn't have that power.  The Independent High Electoral Commission is the only one that does and, as their name notes, they are supposed to be "independent."
    If Nouri tries to keep provinces from voting, it will be worse than last time and it will be worse then cancelling the election all out.  It will be corrupt.
    He penalized the two provinces he was most disliked in last year.  Those were provincial elections, citizens were voting on who to represent them in their provincial governments (think state governments if you're in the US and confused).  These parliamentary elections are like federal elections.  And if Utah wasn't allowed to vote to send people to the House and Senate, it wouldn't be a real election in the US.
    In a later report, Duriad Salman and Ammar al-Ani report that the 'independent' commission is now saying that one or more provinces could be prevented from voting in the parliamentary elections.



    The idea is being floated.  Twice, Brett McGurk was asked about elections.  We noted one in yesterday's snapshot and another today.  Never once did McGurk inform Congress that this idea was being floated -- let alone that the IHEC declared that it could possibly happen.

    There will not be free or fair elections unless everyone votes on the same day.

    Today, All Iraq News reports that Iraqiya MP Salim Dali declared the attack on Anbar Province was Nouri's attempt to delay the parliamentary elections.  He tells All Iraq News:
    The government is trying to disturb the situation such as the situation in Anbar starting from arresting MP, Ahmed al-Alwani, which will negatively affect holding the elections.

    More than 200 thousand refugees have left Fallujah city which raises the question about the way of holding the elections in this city and the other cities of Anbar. 
    Witnessing the same situation of the former elections where they were postponed in Nineveh and Anbar provinces.


    Iraqiya, for those who don't know or forgot, defeated Nouri's State of Law in the 2010 elections which should have resulted in Iraqiya leader Ayad Allawi being the prime minister.  But Nouri refused to step down after losing -- for eight months he refused to step down bringing the government to a halt (this is known as the "political stalemate" and set a record at the time for the longest period in any country between elections and the forming of a government) and he had Barack's backing so he got away with it.  Barack ordered US officials to negotiate a legal contract (The Erbil Agreement) that went around the Constitution and the Iraqi voters (and any notion of democracy) which decreed a second term for Nouri.


    In this year's planned elections, it is the post of prime minister, Mustafa Habib (Niqash) reports, that is the supreme prize:


    The ultimate goal for almost all parties competing in the elections, due to be held at the end of April, is clear though:  the Prime Minister’s chair. After eight years of leadership from current prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki it is clear to most ordinary Iraqis, and therefore also to their politicians, that this is the most powerful position in the country. Over the past decade the executive branch of Iraq’s government has shown that it seems to have more power over what goes on in the country than Iraq’s parliament.

    And how will the next Iraqi Prime Minister be chosen? Doubtless the person will be chosen by the members of political alliances that form after the upcoming federal elections. Right now the shape of those alliances are far from clear cut. Additionally the fact that Iraq’s current Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is so deeply unpopular and that his mostly Shiite Muslim political alliance has been crumbling, alongside the differences in opinion among Iraq’s Sunni Muslim politicians, means that voters will definitely see some new alliances formed.


    Analysts inside and outside the country are already coming up with a number of scenarios they believe may occur.


    If Brett McGurk were honest, not only would he have informed the Congress on Wednesday about the IHEC stating it would be acceptable to deny a province the right to vote in the parliamentary elections, he would have also noted that in the two previous parliamentary elections, the desires and wishes of the Iraqis were ignored as the White House imposed Nouri as prime minister in 2006 and again in 2010.

    Brett's not an honest man.  As his ex-wife can probably attest, he struggles with the truth.  But turns out, he's got a sense of humor.  Warped, yes, but a sense of humor.  We'll note this long exchange but, believe me, the set up pays off, you will howl.


    US House Rep Juan Vargas: I personally am very concerned about the Christian community.  The Christian community has been slaughtered.  I mean the Christians that we saw killed on Christmas. You know, very unified attacks on Christians, 37 murdered.  The Chaldean community  before the war was about a million Chaldean Christians.  Now I think there's less than half, maybe a third of that,.  We're very thankful in San Diego that many Chaldeans have been able to come to San Diego and a great community is forming there and continues to form. I'd like to hear from you what we can do and what we should do and what we're not doing to help not only the Christian community, but especially the Christian community, but other communities as well.  I mean, what-what else should we be doing?

    Brett McGurk: Uh, Congressman, thank you.  I-I've visted the Chaldean community in Michigan.  I would welcome the opportunity to come to your district to visit the community there.  Uhm --

    US House Rep Juan Vargas: You're invited then.

    Brett McGurk: Uh, extremist groups, as I've mentioned, are threatening Christians, Muslims, everybody in the region.  It is a phenomenon throughout the region, this is a regional problem. And one thing we're trying to do is work with the Christian leaders in Iraq is make sure that they have the resources they need from the central government and also the Kurdish Regional Government and making sure that there areas are as secure as possible.  In Iraq, the Chaldeans and other Christian minority groups are located in the Ninewah Plains.  Uhm, there is an al Qaeda extremist presence south of there.  We are working to try to make sure that local people, Christians in that community, have the resources they need to protect themselves and to police their own communities.  And we've made some progress there in that area over the last six months.  In the north, in Erbil and the Kurdish Region, uhm, when I was in Iraq a few months ago, I spoke to, as I mentioned earlier, with Archbishop [Bashar] Warda of the community there and linked him up with the Prime Minister so that they could talk about schools for the community and making sure that they're getting the resources that they need from the Kurdish Regional Government.  What we can do is a neutral group in Iraq with relationships between everybody because we've been there for ten years and are seen as a neutral player, one of the very few, is try to make sure that the connections are made between the governments provincial, regional and national. so that the Christian and minority communities have the resources they need to protect themselves but also for schools and for children and for everything else.

    US House Juan Vargas:  Now I do have to say that I've heard from many that the central government, they claim that the central government is not doing much of anything at all to help the Christians.  In fact, just the opposite, that they leave them exposed, that their churches are exposed, that the schools are exposed.  I mean could you comment on that?  That they haven't been doing enough, not nearly enough, to protect the Christian community and especially the churches?

    Brett McGurk:  Uhm, since a series of church bombings if I recall correctly in 2009 or 2010, uh, the Iraqis have really buttressed the Christian sites in Iraq.  Uhm, but as you mentioned, there are still attacks --

    US House Rep Juan Vargas:  The Christian attacks, I believe, killed 37 --

    Brett McGurk:  That's right

    US House Rep Juan Vargas:  Christians.

    Brett McGurk:  I have found the prime minister, when you discuss this issue with him, fairly emotional about wanting to protect Christians just like everyone else in his country.

    Just like everyone else in his country?

    Oh, that Funny Man Brett McGurk.

    The killers of journalists go unpunished.  I will assume Congress is noting their own disdain for the press by refusing to cover that reality in any of the last five Congressional hearings on Iraq.

    Yesterday, Human Rights Watch issued their 105-page report (PDF format warning) "‘No One Is Safe’: Abuses of Women in Iraq’s Criminal Justice System,"  Does Brett want tell us how much Nouri cares about women in Iraq?

    Before he preps that joke, he might want to read the report.  If that's too much work for him, he can just start with the opening of the report's summary:




    In May 2012, Hanan al-Fadl (not her real name) was grocery shopping in a market in central Baghdad when security forces dressed in civilian clothing seized her, bundled her into a car, and drove her to the office of a state institution, she told Human Rights Watch. 
    There, she said, they beat her, shocked her with electric cables, and drenched her in cold water in an effort to force her to admit that she had taken a bribe. Hanan, a manager at a state-affiliated company that approves construction projects, said she realized she was paying the price for refusing to waive through a project in which the contractor had used sub-standard materials. “I made a mistake,” she said. “I didn’t know someone important in the government had a stake in the project.” Beaten and tortured for hours, Hanan said she refused to confess—until her interrogators threatened her teenage daughter. 

    They pulled up her picture on my mobile, and said, “Is this [name withheld]?” They knew her name, where she went to school, everything. They said “We can take her just like we took you.” I would have said anything at that point. 

    After holding her for more than a day, security forces took her to a judge, who refused to acknowledge bruises and swelling on her face, she said. She did not have a lawyer. Four months later, a Baghdad court convicted her of forgery and sentenced her to three years in prison, based solely on her “confession” and the testimony of a “secret informant.” When Human Rights Watch visited Hanan, she had been detained in Baghdad’s Central Women’s prison for more than a year. 
    Hanan is one of thousands of Iraqis imprisoned by a judicial system plagued by torture and rampant corruption. Last April, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay issued a scathing indictment of Iraq’s “not functioning” justice system, citing numerous convictions based on confessions obtained under torture and ill-treatment, a weak judiciary, and trial proceedings that fall far short of international standards.



    Or maybe Funny Brett would prefer to dive deeper into the report?  Say page 19 through 22?


    Human Rights Watch found that security officials in the Interior and Defense ministries round up women, especially family members of male suspects, without an arrest warrant, deny women access to a lawyer, and fail to bring detained women before an investigative judge according to Iraq’s Code of Criminal Procedure. At least 15 female detainees, their families, and lawyers told Human Rights Watch that they were detained as a part of a round-up of an entire family or village. Security officers conducted warrantless raids in neighborhoods and detained some residents for several days.  
    Ten women reported that security forces questioned them not about their activities, but about their relatives. 34 Security forces released some of the women without ever charging them, and charged others with “covering up ” for their husbands or other male family members, effectively punishing them for familial associations rather than any wrongdoing. 
    A former judge, who asked not to be identified, said: 

    If someone is arrested as part of an emergency operation, no matter how urgent, an investigative judge must still issue an arrest warrant.  In exceptional cases, where there is an explosion, for example, the arresting unit can collect testimonies at the scene while they await the issuance of arrest warrants. But what happens in fact is that they arrest them and later have a judge provide a warrant that justified the arrest.  

    He added that security forces “often arrest a large number of people in an area where an incident occurs without an arrest warrant.” 
    A lawyer, who asked not to be identified, said that this practice was especially frequent in arrests of women. “They arrest the women just to get at one person – their husband, or their brother,” he said.  Another lawyer who also requested anonymity said: 

    Individual officers have taken the law into their own hands to arrest the wife and children to put pressure on the husband, but the wife is not responsible.  ...If a man is arrested and won’t confess, they bring his wife in. 


    Arrests of women because of their relationships to suspects, without any evidence that they have committed a crime, amount to collective punishment, and violate international human rights law’s guarantee of the rights to liberty of person and the right to a fair trial.  These prohibit arbitrary detention and require that detention only be in accordance with clear domestic law, that detainees be in formed immediately of the reason for their detention and are promptly brought before a judge and charged with a criminal offense. Such arrests also violate Iraqi laws protecting these rights, including provisions of Iraq’s Constitution and Code of Criminal Procedure.  
    On November 3, 2012, federal police invaded 11 homes in the town of al-Tajji, 20 kilometers north of Baghdad, and detained 11 women and 29 children overnight in their homes. The lawyer representing the women told Human Rights Watch that people were detained from every house in the village.  
    After detaining 12 of the women and girls, aged 11 to 60, for several hours in their homes, police took them to a police station where they held them without charge for four days.  Throughout their detention, police put plastic bags over each of their heads until they began to suffocate, and electrocuted and beat some of them, according to the women’s accounts. 
    Majida Obeidi, 22, detained as part of the Tajji operation, told Human Rights Watch that at around midnight on November 3, a large number of security forces raided the village and invaded the house where she was staying with her four young children and her husband’s 12-year-old second wife.  Some wore the uniform of the National Guard, others were Special Forces, and some wore civilian clothes, she said. 


    I think there were about 10 or 15 soldiers. Zahra [the second wife] and I were alone in the house with my children. They blew open the doors and streamed in. They demanded to know where my husband was, but they didn’t know his name, and they asked where we kept the weapons. They looked for the weapons under the floor and ripped bricks off the house but they didn’t find anything. 

    They held them overnight in her home, and then took Majida and her children, along with 11 other women and 25 of their children, to the federal police brigade headquarters in the Kadhimeyya compound, also known as Camp Justice, in Baghdad. Police held them there for four days, and then transferred them to the al-Shaaba al-Khamsa detention facility in the same compound. Police released the children after three days, but detained 12 of the women for a month before bringing them before an investigative judge. Majida said the officers repeatedly questioned her about her husband, and then accused her of being a terrorist.

    Why don’t you show us the bodies of the Shia you slaughtered -- where have you hidden them?” They said horrible things to me.... I don’t want to repeat them. They called me daughter of a bitch, daughter of a whore. 

    The judge charged the women with terrorism under article 4 of the Anti-Terrorism Law for “covering up” for their husbands. 
    A high-level government official confirmed the details of the women’s detention and added that according to the brother of one woman, a colonel in Kadhimeyya offered to release his sister if he paid him US$6,500.  The statements of dozens of officials, lawyers, detainees, and their families indicate that bribery of this nature is common. The brother paid, but the colonel did not release his sister.

    Nouri's 'concern' for Iraqi women isn't just appalling, it's criminal and the US government is in violation of the law by providing him with financial aid and weapons.

    Do you wonder about the US press?  Not one member has bothered to ask the State Dept (which is over Iraq, in the executive branch) about this report or the legal implications of it.

    Not one.

    Ali Mamouri (Al-Monitor) notes the report:


    A separate HRW report, released Feb. 6, 2014, documented cases of abuse against Iraqi women— both Shiite and Sunni — during detention. The report revealed that thousands of Iraqi women have been arrested and detained illegally, and many have suffered torture and been raped. The report concluded that corruption was rampant in the Iraqi judiciary, for a number of convictions based on confessions under duress have been recorded. Moreover, the documents demonstrate that international laws and conventions are not followed in Iraqi courts.
    Surprisingly, Iraqi officials accusrd HRW of relying on false and biased information, even though they referred to HRW reports when Saddam Hussein was in power and they were in opposition to the regime.
    In the latest developments on such matters, Iraq's Court of Publishing and Media issued two arrest warrants in early February 2014: the first against Judge Munir Haddad, who approved the death sentence of Saddam Hussein; and the second against Iraqi journalist Sarmad al-Tai, a known critic of the government’s political and economic performance.
    The warrants charged them with “defaming” Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. In the instance of Tai, it was the first time the defamation charge has been used since 2003. Tai was even charged based on laws issued under the former regime. 
    Maliki’s media adviser, Ali al-Moussawi, defended the warrants, saying, “The prime minister is an Iraqi citizen, and like anyone he may defend himself through legal and judicial means. … That would strengthen the role of law and the judiciary because everyone is subject to them.” 



    Let's go back to Wednesday's hearing.



    US House Rep Gerry Connolly: And if I understand your testimony correctly, we're now relying on tribal support to dislodge the occupying forces in Falluja.  How in the world -- Isn't that an indictment of the investments we've made in the Iraqi military  and its inability to hold its own territory secure?

    Brett McGurk:  Well the Iraqi military would have the equipment and the numbers to go into Falluja tomorrow and clean out the streets.  Uh, we believe that were they to do an assault like that would actually exaserbate the problem --

    US House Rep Gerry Connolly:  I guess, excuse me a second, Mr. McGurk, I don't mean -- But before you get there, how did it happen in the first place?  How is it that the Iraqi government was not able to secure something as symbolically important if not really important as Falluja?

    Brett McGurk:  Uhm, Congr -- As I tried to explain in my testimony, there was a series of incidents throughout 2013 including a protest movement which kind of added to the political instability in the -- in the region.  And in Falluja in particular, it is an area, as we know, any outsiders coming in to Falluja are resisted and that includes the Iraqi army, it includes us, wit includes, we hope now, these al Qaeda extremists.  All I can say is we are where we are right now and we're helping the Iraqis develop a plan right now developing a plan -- one that will lead -- I say, "tribal fighters" but what I really mean is that the local people, local population who know the street are able to actually identify the foreign elements and push them out.  But right now in Falluja, it's a mix of al Qaeda, former insurgent groups and former Ba'athists networks who are in control of the streets there.  It has always been a difficult place.  And, uh, so it's always been a difficult territory.

    US House Rep Gerry Connolly:  The tribal support we're relying on, what is their attitude toward the Maliki government?  I mean because doesn't some of that support, cooperation, isn't some of that a reflection of how they view the central government?

    Brett McGurk:  Yes.  There's certainly -- there's tremendous mistrust in the area of Falluja towards the central government, there's no question about that.

    US House Rep Gerry Connolly:  And does that impede our work to try to dislodge the occupation forces in Falluja?

    Brett McGurk: Uh, it does.  It makes -- it makes it harder.  As I said,  some tribes are actually working with the extremists, some are now working to oust them, many others are on the fence.  And that's why it is incumbent  on the central government, through resources and through dialogue and communication to mobilize the population against them.

    Brett says the protest movement -- which was sparked by the torture and rape of women and girls in Iraqi prisons and detention centers -- "kind of added to the political instability."

    The protest against the torture of women contributed?

    You have to be pretty ____ dumb and a real whore -- and we all know Brett's a whore -- to get away with that one with a straight face.

    No, Nouri's treatment of women absolutely added to the political instability.



    Even in the face of  Norui calling them "terrorists," in the face of Nouri's assaults, in the face of the violence, nothing can stop the ongoing demonstrations that kicked off December 21, 2012 and have continued ever since.  Including today.



    1. الجمعة الموحدة في منطقة العامرية غرب العاصمة بغداد.



    Protesters turned out in Amiriya today.  Yes, they do protest in that section of Baghdad and let's all just pretend that Nouri ordering two mosques raided in Amirya today had nothing to do with that.

    Iraqi Spring MC notes that protests also took place in Baiji, Jalawla, Baquba and Rawa.


    For 'fun,'Nouri ordered the military to also raid two mosques in western Baghdad (Amiriya).

    No where is sacred in Nouri's Iraq, everyone is a victim and everyone is a target.

    There is no respect for anything, certainly not for human life.  Nouri makes that clear every day.

    Nouri's forces conducted 110 bombings in Anbar today, NINA notes.

    It didn't always turn out the way tyrant Nouri al-Maliki hoped.  But when does it ever?

    Even so he must be licking his paws in sorrow because, while he's happy to bomb and kill civilians, it's hard to picture him humping someone's leg excitedly when he heard the news that, as Iraqi Spring MC reports, Nouri's helicopters accidentally bombed some of Nouri's forces to the north of Falluja -- bombed and killed.


    As if he wasn't already having enough problems recruiting volunteers for his killing squads.

    That's not all he bombed.  Iraqi Spring MC reports he bombed the power station in Falluja and the city is now without electricity.

    That qualifies as a War Crime as well.  But he's gotten away with collective punishment (a War Crime) because so many have been too stupid or too scared to call him out.

    The death and dying continue.


    National Iraqi News Agency reports Falluja General Hospital received 5 dead and twenty-injured people as a result of Nouri's shelling of the city (the dead and wounded included children and women),  Nouri's military shot dead 4 people in eastern Ramadi, a Sadr City car bombing left 2 people (one a police member) dead and seven more injured, 1 person was shot dead in Muqdadiyah, a Hammam al-Aleel roadside bombing left the brother of the area's police chief injured, an armed clash in Garma left 6 rebels dead and four Sahwa injured, Joint Operations Command declared they shot dead 2 suspects in Mosul, a Baiji car bombing targeted Maj Gen Hamid Mohammed Kemer didn't harm the officer but left three soldiers injured, 1 candidate with the Ahrar bloc was assassinated in Baghdad (Ghazaliya area), and clergy members Sheik Shehab Mahmoud al-Hamdani and Sheikh Abu Noah al-Hamdani were shot dead in Hamman al-Aleel. All Iraq News adds a Tuz Khurmato bombing killed 4 people and left twenty-three more injured.



    One of the  only ones to really confront Brett and his lies on Wednesday was US House Rep Dana Rohrabacher.


    US House Rep Dana Rohrabacher:  Let me just say that the idea that -- we're talking about Camp Ashraf -- it just seems to me that fundamentally you're suggesting that our approach to stop the massacre, the ongoing massacre of the people at Camp Liberty that we basically have to go to the Maliki government and ask them?  The problem is they're not providing enough security.  The Maliki government is responsible for these deaths.  I don't understand.  The military -- the Iraqi military invaded Camp Ashraf and murdered people.  These are the people under Maliki's command did that.  They recently went into the fifty or so that were left at Camp Ashraf, tied their hands behind their back and shot them in the back of the head. And it was Maliki's own military, we know, who did that.  We know that the Camp Ashraf and these people were attacked numerous times by the Iraqi military.  This isn't rather Maliki and his people are not protecting the MEK.  This is a crime against humanity.  These are unarmed refugees and which Maliki's own troops are murdering.  And I'm not talking about rockets we don't know where they come from, we're talking about actual -- by the way, I would suggest  that they probably know about those rockets as well -- Maliki, let's make it very clear, as far as I'm concerned and as far as many people in Washington are concerned,  Maliki is an accomplice the murders that are going on.  And as an accomplice, we should not be treating him as begging him to have a residual force of US troops in order to help his regime?  I don't understand why the United States feels -- why we feel compelled to be part of all of this?  Why do we feel compelled that we have to go in and be in the middle of this fight between people who are murdering each other?  Thirty to forty suicide bombers a month? Thousands of people are losing their lives to this insanity.  Why should the United States, tell me, this is my question, why does the United States feel that we need to become part of this insanity?  And does that not instead turn both of the parties against us?

    Brett McGurk:  Uh, Congressman, the suicide bomber, uh , phenomenon is complete insanity.  Uh, I agree with you.  When you look at Iraq and look at the region and you define our interests -- and I don't go to any leader and beg for anything.  We protect and advance US interests as we define them.  And in Iraq, whether you like it or not, oil, al Qaeda, Iran, vital US interests are at stake in Iraq.


    Note where Brett went first: Oil.

    It's always oil with the War Hawks.

    Let it be noted that unlike so many of his colleagues, Rohrabacher didn't ply Brett with compliments, gushing of how he informed he was (he wasn't and neither were they or they would have asked better questions) or thank him for his service, etc.

    Brett's a whore.  A whore knows how to seduce.  And from the distance, for example, the members of Congress mistake smarmy for charm and fail to notice that the forelock in the front is now separated from the rest of the hair on Brett's head by a deep island of scalp or the bald spot in the back.

    Dreaming of all the pleasure I'm going to have
    Watching you hairline recede 
    My vain darling
    -- "Just Like This Train," written by Joni Mitchell, first appears on her Court & Spark

    Joni was singing of the supremely vain -- so vain, he might think the song was about him, might he?, might he? -- James Taylor; however, it also applies to Brett.













    Feminism and other issues

    $
    0
    0






    As you should know Isaiah did two The World Today Just Nuts this week.  The first was "The Joker" and the second was  "Success" (which is above).

    Tonight, I'm highlighting a comment.

    Ms. magazine's blog did a stupid article, I think, on child abuse which had to open with the ridiculous Dylan Farrow.  The 29-year-old's claims were rejected by the court.

    You may find Woody Allen "icky" and that's fine.

    But quit taking the little whining Dylan's said when nothing backs her up.

    So I wrote a comment but decided not to leave it. 

    I'm sharing it here:

    To this post I say, Blah, blah, blah.
    Can we be feminists?  As opposed to Inside Edition?
    At what point does Ms. plan to write about the Human Rights Watch report?
    Does it have to be Mia Farrow for Ms. to give a damn?
    The report is entitled "'NO ONE IS SAFE: Abuses of Women in Iraq's Criminal Justice System."  NPR has ignored the report.  So has Ms.
    I don't know which I'm more upset with right now.
    Iraqi women's lives matter.
    No one knows what happened to Dylan Farrow.  She's 29-years-old and in the US.  I'm sure she'll make it through.
    But the Human Rights Watch report?
    You'll find that one woman was cleared by the judge but wasn't released from prison.  The judge found she was tortured into signing a false confession and dropped all charges.  But she didn't get released like she was supposed to.  No, she got executed.
    Then there's the female journalist who was tortured and finally gave in because they threatened to go after her daughter.
    There are the women who were raped in the prisons, there are the women who got pregnant from the rapes.
    Iraqi women are suffering and Ms. repeatedly ignores it over and over every damn year.
    It's disgusting.
    The Iraqi women?  As feminists, we should be focused on them.  We should be outraged by how they are being treated.  Our government created these problems for the Iraqi women, how dare we close our eyes to what takes place now.
    I would really love it if Ms. could grow the hell up and stop with the celebrity crushes because there are real issues in this world. 
    The inability these days of Ms. to cover any serious issue without a celebrity face divorces this website from most of our lives.   I don't know if the bloggers are too young or too shallow or both but women have real issues to deal with and the celebrity gossip angle degrades us all.


     I want to be really clear that this new Ms. approach of finding a celebrity before writing about an issue.

    Feminism is supposed to be grassroots, not worship. 

    As Ms. rushes to serve up entertainment, it leaves a community unserved.


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


    Monday, February 10, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, there's an assassination attempt on the Speaker of Iraq's Pariament, beastly gas bags weigh in flaunting their ignorance, NPR is delighted by 'fun' bombing victims, NPR is among the many outlets that failed to cover Human Rights Watch's report on the abuse of Iraqi women, feminist or 'feminist' outlets in the US also ignored the report (Women's e-News did cover it), the assault on Anbar continues, and much more.


    Let's start with the gas bags.  Former US Ambassador to Iraq James Jeffrey insists the US didn't fail and didn't lose Iraq and blah blah blah.  You know what, Foreign Policy pimps war.  They hire idiots like Thomas E. Ricks (oh, we'll to him, just wait) and when they seek outside views, the views are never outside.

    Everyone in the US did not support Bully Boy Bush trying to destroy Iraq.  But the only voices Foreign Policy wants to offer are the voices of war.  James Jeffrey pushed for war on Iraq.  He just needs to sit his ass down.  He's an embarrassment.  He writes today yet somehow ignores last week's Human Rights Watch report.

    Then there's the breasty Thomas E. Ricks who wants to quote Toby Dodge.  I don't have time to track down what Ricks is quoting.

    Here's reality, if Dodge said what Ricks says Dodge said, he's not just a little wrong, he's damn stupid.

    First off, Dodge is quoted stating that Nouri said any changes to the (2008) Status Of Forces Agreement would have to go through the Iraqi Parliament.  No, that's not the issue and it wasn't an issue.  This was not about approval for amendments.

    The stumbling block for the administration was the issue of immunity.  It was present in the 2008 SOFA.  If only amendments to it required a vote, then the State Dept's Brett McGurk lied to Congress last week.

    If Toby Dodge said or wrote what Man Boobs Ricks repeated, Dodge doesn't know a damn thing.

    I've never heard of anything so stupid from a supposed expert before.

    The Status Of Forces Agreement was a three year contract which governed 2009, 2010 and 2011.  The Parliament voted on it Thanksgiving Day 2008.

    For 2011?  Nouri and other political leaders told the US that Parliament would not vote for a continued US presence so -- and McGurk testified to this just last week -- US government gave up.

    As portrayed by Ricks, Dodge also doesn't grasp the argument Senator John McCain has presented.

    This is more crap from Thomas E. Ricks -- the blogger who makes Thomas Friedman come off timely and relevant.

    From the gas bags to the journalists, if you're ever trying  to figure out just how worthless NPR can be, they demonstrated it today as Mark Memmott made clear he wants to be the new Hedda Hopper.

    As he makes clear here, he never learned about reporting.  He spent his time instead on the phone gossiping.

    At least 21 people died in a bombing today.  We noted it, we noted the death toll.

    We didn't note that they were suicide bombers or suicide bombers in training.

    But Memmott does.  He 'backs it up' by linking to AP, for example.

    AP had no one present at the bombing.

    It's hearsay.

    It's already been established -- thought not for Memmott or any of the US press because they're so stupid and so they're deceitful -- but it's already been established that the 'terrorists' killed in an assorted aireal bombings carried out by the Iraq military were often not terrorists.

    In the Arabic world, they've been more than fine with doing journalism.  Visiting the areas, speaking to the people involved, documenting it with video.

    Journalism is not presenting as fact one side's claims.  Those of us old enough to remember Vietnam, are fully aware that the government -- the US government -- repeatedly lied about who got killed and the numbers killed.  It's no different than The Drone War today and all the lies US President Barack Obama and others in the administration tell about 'terrorists' -- who apparently stopped to attend a wedding, for example.

    What may be known is that 20 or 21 or 22 people died in a bombing.  Who those people were?

    That's the slutty US press which can never stop whoring.  Women in Baghdad die, they're "prostitutes." That's the sort of the US press does (AFP has picked it up as well).  Dead women who can't defend themselves are labeled prostitutes and the US press treats it as gospel.

    There have always been prostitutes in Iraq -- male and female.  And many outlets know it.  Certainly the Go-Go Boys of the Green Zone were frequenting Baghdad prostitutes in 2003 and 2004.

    But they couldn't report on the prostitution.  One denied it.

    Off Our Backs was the only US publication to treat the prostitution in Baghdad issue seriously.

    NPR didn't take it seriously.  But then they rarely take issues that impact women seriously.

    The disgusting Mark Memmott finds it 'cute' that people died.  He'd insist he finds it cute that 'terrorists' died.  But he can prove they were terrorists.  The only source for that is the Iraqi government.  The same government that labels peaceful protesters as "terrorists."

    Memmott's never felt the need to report that either -- even though Nouri's been labeling protesters as "terrorists" since 2011.

    In Iraq, a lot of people get labeled as 'terrorists.' An Iraqi female journalist, for example, was falsely labeled as one.  And the police knew it was false.  They tortured her anyway.  Because they didn't like her articles, they didn't like her reporting on the government's short comings.

    Mark Memmott has a case of the giggles today and amuses himself with Iraq.

    I guess he couldn't laugh last week when Human Rights Watch's released their report entitled (PDF format warning) "'NO ONE IS SAFE: Abuses of Women in Iraq's Criminal Justice System"?

    That must be the explanation for his failure to write about that.  No one at NPR wrote about it for the website.  None of NPR's national programs covered it.

    But let Little Marky have the opportunity to giggle over the-gang-who-couldn't-shoot-straight 'terrorists' and he's ready to run with it.  (Strangely, when Nouri's air forces bombed and killed a group of men at the end of last week -- a group of men who turned out to be Iraqi soldiers --  Mark Memmott had no interest in writing about that.)

    Mark Memmott takes the Iraqi government on their word despite the fact that journalists are supposed to question and to present claims they can't verify as claims.

    I don't trust Nouri's government because, unlike Mark Memmott, I pay attention.  This is from HRW's report released last week:


    The report finds that security forces carry out illegal arrests and other due process violations against women at every stage of the justice system, including threats and beatings. Israa Salah (not her real name), for example, entered her interview with Human Rights Watch in Iraq’s death row facility in Baghdad’s Kadhimiyya neighborhood on crutches. She said nine days of beatings, electric shocks with an instrument known as “the donkey,” and falaqa (when the victim is hung upside down and beaten on their feet) in March 2012 had left her permanently disabled. A split nose, back scars, and burns on her breast were consistent with her alleged abuse. Israa was executed in September 2013, seven months after we met her, despite lower court rulings that dismissed charges against her because a medical report documented she was tortured into confessing to a crime. 



    Do you get what happened there?  Mark Memmott can't because he's so stupid.

    But most of us can read that paragraph above and note that Israa Salah was not only tortured by Nouri's forces, she was also put to death "despite lower court rulings that dismissed charges against her."


    That should outrage most people.

    She was executed even after a court had determined she had been tortured to give a false confession.

    She was executed even after a court dismissed all charges against her.

    Most people can grasp that the woman shouldn't have been executed but instead should have been immediately released.

    Mark doesn't want to tell that story because it doesn't let him giggle or suck up to Nouri al-Maliki and others in power.

    It's an uncomfortable story, not a chuckle.

    And more and more -- especially with their ludicrous on air 'recipe' segments -- NPR can't offer anything but breezy nonsense.

    Morning Edition did not report on Human Rights Watch's investigation.  Terry Gross did not invite HRW onto Fresh Air to discuss the findings.  All Things Considered?  Nothing was considered when it came to the Human Rights Watch report because All Things Considered ignored it as well.  Diane Rehm had a whole hour Friday to fill, her so-called 'international hour' -- and yet she served up nonsense and crap and didn't even touch on Iraq.  Why do you have radio programs, public radio, when you refuse to cover investigations and human rights abuses.


    Let's go to the report again:

    For example, Fatima Hussein (not her real name), a journalist accused of involvement in the murder of a parliamentarian’s brother and of being married to an Al-Qaeda member, described physical and sexual torture in early 2012 at the hands of one particular interrogator in Tikrit, Colonel Ghazi. She described Ghazi tying her blindfolded to a column and electrocuting her with an electric baton, hitting her feet and back with cable, kicking her, pulling her hair, tying her naked to a column and extinguishing cigarettes on her body, and later handcuffing her to a bed, forcing her to give him oral sex, and raping her three times. “There was blood all over me. He would relax, have a cigarette, and put it out on my buttock, and then started again,” she said. 
    Women who spoke with Human Rights Watch, who all explicitly denied involvement in alleged crimes, also described being pushed towards confessions by interrogators threatening to hurt loved ones. Fatima described Ghazi passing her the phone, with her daughter at the end of the line, before threatening: "I'll do to your daughter what I did to you." 



    Again, the Human Rights Watch's report is entitled (PDF format warning) "'NO ONE IS SAFE: Abuses of Women in Iraq's Criminal Justice System." Ramzy Baroud (Arab News) notes the report:

    “No One is Safe” presented some of the most harrowing evidence of the abuse of women by Iraq’s criminal “justice system.” The phenomenon of kidnapping, torturing, raping and executing women is so widespread that it seems shocking even by the standards of the country’s poor human rights record of the past. If such a reality were to exist in a different political context, the global outrage would have been so profound. Some in the “liberal” western media, supposedly compelled by women’s rights would have called for some measure of humanitarian intervention, war even. But in the case of today’s Iraq, the HRW report is likely to receive bits of coverage where the issue is significantly deluded, and eventually forgotten.
    In fact, the discussion of the abuse of thousands of women -- let alone tens of thousands of men -- has already been discussed in a political vacuum. A buzzword that seems to emerge since the publication of the report is that the abuse confirms the “weaknesses” of the Iraqi judicial system. The challenge then becomes the matter of strengthening a weak system, perhaps through channeling more money, constructing larger facilities and providing better monitoring and training, likely carried out by US-led training of staff.
    Mostly absent are the voices of women’s groups, intellectuals and feminists who seem to be constantly distressed by the traditional marriage practices in Yemen, for example, or the covering up of women’s faces in Afghanistan. There is little, if any, uproar and outrage, when brown women suffer at the hands of western men and women, or their cronies, as is the situation in Iraq.


    Is that fair?  Are feminists ignoring the report?

    Feminism is global.  I can't speak for what all of the world is doing.  But for Third, we did "Editorial: War Crimes against women and the outlets that ignore them" and it notes the US coverage - or lack of it -- including:

    Ms. magazine's blog never noted the report.
    While Women's Media Center has a campaign which insists "Don't Let Women's Voices Be Silenced in 2014," they have thus far let Iraqi women be silenced by refusing to write an article or even a Tweet about the HRW report (and they've 28 Tweets since the report was released).
    B-b-but the report just came out!
    Last Thursday.  And Women's e-News has managed to cover it. Sarah Sheffer covered it for The NewsHour (PBS).
    By contrast, NPR refused to cover it -- on air or at the website.
    They did 'tax' themselves by re-running an AP report.
    Women are tortured and raped, disappeared into prisons, their children threatened and this isn't news to Women's Media Center?
    WMC makes time on their awful Twitter feed to whore for the daughter of celebrities  but they can't do a damn thing for Iraqi women?


    So, yeah, in the US, there is a need to call out.

    Trina was on the phone earlier and she's addressing this at her site tonight because of something she saw online -- something covered by a feminist outlet that wasn't really news but the feminist outlet still can't cover the Human Rights Watch report.

    The silence in the US -- whether from the feminist press or the mainstream press -- is shameful.

    Today the European Union's Foreign Affairs Council issued a statement which includes:

    The EU considers that internal political divisions and sectarian tensions have significantly contributed to the deterioration of the security situation inside Iraq, to which a security response alone cannot be sufficient. The EU renews its call on all of Iraq's political and religious leaders to engage in dialogue and to speak out against sectarianism and violence. It encourages the Government of Iraq to reinforce the rule of law and take decisive  measures to promote inclusiveness and advance reconciliation, as Iraq's long term security and stability depend on an inclusive political process. 

    The EU is closely following the developments in Anbar province, including in the cities of Ramadi and Fallujah, and encourages the Government of Iraq to strengthen cooperation between its security forces and local Anbar tribes. The EU is deeply concerned by the large numbers of Internally Displaced Persons fleeing the conflict zones and emphasises the importance of protecting civilians. The EU also encourages efforts by the Government of Iraq to ensure the provision of essential services as well as access by humanitarian agencies to areas affected by the fighting.


    Let's move to violence and then we'll come back to the elections.

    In today's big news, know it's not the gossip, it's that the Speaker of Parliament survived an assassination attempt.   Reuters notes, "The speaker of Iraq's parliament narrowly escaped death on Monday when a roadside bomb exploded near his convoy close to the northern city of Mosul, his office said." Mu Xuequan (Xinhua) offers, "In the northern province of Nineveh, a roadside bomb went off near the convoy of Speaker Osama al-Nujaifi and Governor Atheel al- Nujaifi, also brother of Osama, south of the provincial capital of Mosul, a local police source told Xinhua." NINA notes the bombing left six security guards injured,  AFP adds, "Mosul and the surrounding Nineveh province, where Nujaifi’s brother Atheel is governor, is one of Iraq’s most violent areas, with attacks regularly targeting security forces, government officials and civilians."

    The US State Dept issued the following statement today:


    Press Statement
    Marie Harf
    Washington, DC
    February 10, 2014





    The United States strongly condemns today’s attack on the convoy of the Speaker of the Iraqi Council of Representatives, Osama al-Nujaifi, in Ninewa province. Speaker Nujaifi has been a strong partner of the United States’ efforts in Iraq and we are grateful that he was unharmed in the attack.
    Today’s attack exemplifies the danger terrorist groups pose to all Iraqis, and the importance of Iraqi leaders from all communities working together to isolate militant groups from the broader population. The United States stands with the Iraqi people and will continue to work closely with Iraqi political and security leaders to combat those who commit such senseless acts.


    Osama al-Nujaifi is a Sunni, a group persecuted and targeted by Nouri.  In doing so, Nouri has allowed Shi'ite militias to operate in Iraq -- this after militias were supposedly outlawed.  But more than just allowing them to operate, Nour  is supporting Shi'ite militias.  In September, Tim Arango (New York Times) broke the story:



    In supporting Asaib al-Haq, Mr. Maliki has apparently made the risky calculation that by backing some Shiite militias, even in secret, he can maintain control over the country’s restive Shiite population and, ultimately, retain power after the next national elections, which are scheduled for next year. Militiamen and residents of Shiite areas say members of Asaib al-Haq are given government badges and weapons and allowed freedom of movement by the security forces.


    Loveday Morris (Washington Post) picked up the topic on Sunday and reported:

    Members of Asaib Ahl al-Haq, an Iranian-backed Shiite group responsible for thousands of attacks on U.S. forces during the Iraq war, admit they have ramped up targeted killings in response to a cascade of bomb attacks on their neighborhoods.
    “We’ve had to be much more active,” said an Asaib Ahl al-Haq commander who goes by the nom de guerre Abu Sajad. “Those who are trying to incite sectarianism, we have to deal with them,” he said, drawing his hand over his throat like a knife.

    Again, it's Loveday Morris and the Washington Post -- not AP as some outlets have wrongly credited the article.  Although the credit on this reposting of Loveday Morris' article may seem the most incorrect and brazen.

     Over the weekend, NINA reported:

    The Arab Political Council in Kirkuk expressed on Saturday 8 Feb. its surprise at the unjustified silence of the parliamentary political blocks, parties and organizations towards the humanitarian tragedy in Anbar province, and especially the city of Fallujah.
    Chairman of the Council , Sheikh Abdul Rahman Munshed al- Assi told the National Iraqi News Agency / NINA / : "We are very concerned for the effects and consequences of the current crisis, humanly and politically, a matter that requires everyone to stand and think to find an urgent solution to stop the bloodshed now ongoing in al-Anbar.


    Sunday, NINA reported that Sheikh Ali Hatem al-Suleiman -- a Sahwa leader -- declared that "the solution of the crisis in Anbar lies in a neutral third party and implementing the legitimate demands of the protesters." and that "the government should prove its good faith by stopping the shelling of cities and sending food and medical supplies as well as oil , in addition to the full response to the legitimate demands of the protesters."Motahedoon coalition MP Salman al-Jumaili stated Sunday that solutions were being ignored as the government continued to attempt a "military solution" and that  "any initiative to resolve the crisis in Anbar cannot succeed if it does not include stop shelling and air strikes on Fallujah and other neighborhoods first, and the return of displaced people , as well as keeping the army out of the areas of contact with citizens and then re local authorities to enforce security." NINA also reported on Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq:


    Al-Mutlaq said in a meeting with ambassadors of EU countries in the Greek Embassy in Baghdad on the occasion of handing over Greece EU presidency , that the military operations in Anbar province, left behind thousands of displaced families facing harsh conditions due to the extreme cold and lack of food and medical supplies , not to mention the other families still besieged and exposed to bombardment , threats and very difficult humanitarian situations.
    Al-Mutlaq discussed , according to a statement by his press office , with a number of ambassadors from the European Union, visions to resolve the crisis of Anbar and restore security and stability to its cities, and be quick in taking positions that would lead to compensate the displaced families and ease their coming back and repair the physical damage to their properties.


    Not everyone speaks out against violence.  Press TV speaks with history professor Ali al-Nashmi about the assault:


    Press TV: Do you think the government will win in this battle against such forces?

    al-Nashmi: No... I think the government... I don’t know, I think there is every opportunity for the Iraqi government they can win very easily when they attack Fallujah because Fallujah is a city, they are just some houses - then they can attack the extremists there using tanks or airplane or by jets.
    I am surprised. They lost that opportunity because most of extremists they have escaped from al-Fallujah to other places like Baghdad and in other places they are increasing the violence.

    I think if the Iraqi forces and the Iraqi government attacked the places they would achieve many things: they would achieve a military win because they would destroy those people – and they have killed many extremists; and it would be a political win because it would mean in any place in Iraq it would not be safe for al-Qaeda or al-Dasht.


    NBC journalist Richard Engel  notes al-Nashmi  in his book A Fist in the Hornet's Nest: On the Ground In Baghdad Before, During and After the War, al-Nashmi was a history professor when the US invaded Iraq.  Engel reports meeting al-Nashmi in a building being remodeled:

    A highly ambitious man, he gave me a tour of the new office space -- stepping over a workman scraping droplets of paint off the stone floor -- explaining the layout of the future headquarters of his new political part (the Union of Independent Intellecutals), socialist newspaper (The Dawn of Baghdad), magazine for children (as yet unnamed) and, he hoped, local television station. 
    [. . .] al-Nashmi was bursting with pent-up political desires.  Twenty years earlier, al-Nashmi had been arrested and tortured by Saddam's regime for starting a movie club in his home, where about a dozen of his friends would gather in secret every week to watch and discuss foreign films.  Al-Nashmi was first accused of founding an illegal communist cell and later of being an Islamic militant, a charge that seemed especially ill-suited, considering his secular views, Western dress and polished English.


    All the assault has done is add to the already intense violence.  Today?   National Iraqi News Agency reports a Kirkuk car bombing claimed 1 life, a Kirkuk sticky bombing claimed 1 life, a central Baghdad bombing (Bab aal-Muadham area) left a colonel injured, an attack on Judge Saadoun al-Hesniyani's residence left 2 security guards injured, a Falluja bombing left 3 people dead and six injured, an Aliyadhiyah roadside bombing left two Iraqi soldiers injured, a Musayyib sticky bombing claimed 1 life and left three injured, a southwest Baghdad roadside bombing (Baya area) left five people injured, a Shirqat roadside bombing left two Iraqi soldiers injured, a Hit roadside bombing left 1 police member dead and three more injured, an al-Shi'lar sticky bombing left three people injured, a suicide bombing near al-Sidikiyah bridge (near Ramadi) left 2 Iraqi soldiers and 2 police members dead with seven more injured, Falluja General Hospital was again shelled (by Iraqi military) and 1 person was killed with fourteen more left injured ("including a doctor and three nurses"),  a Nasiriyah roadside bombing left four people injured, a Baghdad home invasion left five people injured, a Samarra car bombing killed 21 people, a Mosul car bombing left eleven people injured (relatives of Nineveh Police Chief Khalid al-Hamdani), a central Baghdad sticky bombing left six people injured, a Baghdad attack (al-Obeidi area) left 1 person dead and another injured,  a Sadr City bombing left one person injured, a Mahmudiya bombing left 1 person dead and two more injured, and 1 corpse (bullet wounds) was found dumped in Abu Ghraib.

    Through yesterday, Iraq Body Count counts 269 violent deaths.  Now let's move over to the issue of elections.  April 30th, parliamentary elections are supposed to be held in Iraq.  World Bulletin reports:

    Iraq's Independent High Election Commission asserted on Sunday that parliamentary elections will be held on schedule countrywide, including in the western volatile Anbar province.
    "The elections will not be postponed anywhere in Iraq, including in Anbar," spokesman Safaa al-Musawi told Anadolu Agency.
    "The commission has finalized preparations for the elections everywhere in Iraq, including in Anbar," he added.


    Last week, the Justice and Accountability Commission excluded 69 candidates from the expected April 30th parliamentary elections.   In 2010, the Justice and Accountability reared its ugly head surprising many -- including Saleh al-Mutlaq. Well the Justice and Accountability Commission is back.

    February 2, All Iraq News reported Nouri al-Maliki has nominated Basim al-Badri to head the Justice and Accountability Commission.  al-Badri is both Nouri's freind and a member of Nouri's Dawa political party. In 2010, the commission eliminated many candidates ahead of the parliamentary elections.  They eliminated Saleh al-Mutlaq, for example -- the current Deputy Prime Minister.  A few token Shi'ites were eliminated from running -- most of which were steadfast and vocal opponents of Nouri.  However, the bulk of the disqualified were Sunni politicians.  In all, they eliminated 511 candidates from running.

    Now the commission is back and Iraq Times reported Friday that they had banned 69 of the 379 candidates they had so far checked.   Mohammad Sabah (Al Mada) reported that many politicians are nervous such as Saleh al-Mutlaq.

    Back to Sabah who reports that the UNHCR has pointed out that, thus far, the JAC has not checked the names of prominent candidates.  (That would most likely mean Saleh al-Mutlaq's name has not yet been checked which would explain why he's worried.)   Sabah reveals they will be checking the names of 10,293 candidates in all.   He notes many observers fear the JAC is being used again as a net to remove the political rivals of Nouri.

    Looking at an early list -- small list of under 300 -- initially sent to JAC, you've got a list where the only thing that really stands out is the oldest candidate on that subset was born in 1940 and the youngest in 1982.  And then if you apply a little logic, why is anyone born in 1982 someone requiring a 'Ba'athist' check.  They were 20 years old in 2002.  If their birthday was in April or later, how close could they be connected to Saddam Hussein?

    Today,  National Iraqi News Agency notes they excluded 6 more candidates today.

    Zooming in on one person running in the elections, Rudaw notes:

    Berivan Navkhosh, the assistant head of the Akre health department in Duhok, is one of only two women hopefuls running in Iraq’s upcoming parliamentary elections. 
     Running on an independent slate, Navkhosh says, “It is to show the public that there are independent individuals running for the parliament and to show that political parties are not the only ones who nominate candidates.” 
    Navkhosh was once a member of the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), the largest party in the Kurdistan Region, but says she has quit her membership in order to maintain her independence. 
    "I used to be a member of KDP, but it has been a while since I resigned from the party," she says. "My family is KDP, but people who know me know that I am no longer a member of the KDP."


    Changing topics, community member Marci e-mailed to inform I'd forgotten to note the new content at The Third Estate Sunday Review in of the other entries.  She is correct.  To make up for my oversight, we'll close by noting that content:



    Thank you, Marci, for catching that.


    npr











    Viewing all 2752 articles
    Browse latest View live