Tuesday, March 14, 2012. Chaos and violence continue, Moqtada orders no
protests during the summit, Iraqi youth continue to be targeted, the State Dept
and White House continue to be silent, the Senate hears about homeless veterans,
and more.
Sandra Strickland: In January 1990, I process out of the Army and
received an Honorable Discharge. With the skills and training that I acquired
from the Army, I set out to live the American dream and become a business
owner. Life happened along the way and in nOvember 2002 I met and married my
husband. We talked about opening up an auto repair shop together, but about 4
months after we were married, he was called back to active duty to assist in
training the soldiers who were being sent to Iraq and Afghanistan, and was
stationed at Ft. Bragg, North Carolina while I stayed at our home in Stafford,
Virginia. In 2006, my spouse was released from active duty and when he returned
home, we opened up our auto repair shop in January 2007. Our marriage suffered
because of the separation, among other things, and we continued to grow apart
and eventually talked about divorce. Two days before Christmas of 2010, when my
spouse picked up our children from school and preparatory academy, he made a
verbal threat to the academy director that he was going to kill me and the
kids. That was the day I took my kids and left -- and ended up living in a
domestic violence shelter with my two younger children in two (ages 6 and 4 at
time). At the time I was working as a temp on a Government contract so I
managed to save enough money to move me and my children into a 1 bedrom with den
apartment in February 2011. Everything was going great until I wakled into work
on Monday, April 25, 2011 and was told that the contract that I was working on
was ending and Friday, April 29, 2011 would be my last day. I became unemployed
on April 29, 2011 and, despite being a veteran, going on countless interviews
and submitting countless resumes and having a wealth of administrative
experience, I remained unemployed until September 2011. Although I received
unemployment compensation for a brief time, my fanances became depleted and the
eviction notices started coming. Also during this time, I was dealing with
custody issues for my children. Although the court awarded joint custody to me
and my spouse, I was awarded temporary physical custody until such time as we
went to court for the final custody hearing. That hearing took place and
although we both maintained joint custody, the judge reversed the order and
awarded physical custody to my spouse because he still had the marital home that
our children grew up in which was in their best interest to stay there and
because my apartment was out of their current school district, it would not be
in their best interest to transition them to a new school for the upcoming
school term. Not only was I in shock by the decision, I felt as though I was
being victimized because I chose to take my children and leave an unhealthy
environment -- regardless of the fact that we were homeless. Not only did I
lose physical custody of my children, I eventually ended up losing my apartment
because I couldn't afford to pay the rent, due to the lack of funds from being
unemployed and not having a full time job. So now, I am homeless and have been
reduced to a "every other weekend" mother because my children no longer live
with me every day.
Sandra Strickland was testifying before the Senate Veterans Affairs
Committee at today's hearing on homeless veterans. Senator Patty Murray is the
Chair of the Committee. During her opening remarks, she explained, "In 2009,
Secretary Shinseki laid out the bold goal of ending homelessness among veterans
in five years. As we reach the halfway point, today's hearing will examine the
progress made to date, as well as the challenges and opportunities moving
forward -- particularly the challenges that homeless women veterans face. As
many in the room know, VA and the Department of Housing and Urban Development
recently announced that the number of homeless veterans dropped by 12% -- to a
little more than 67,000. VA and HUD deserve to be commended for the signficant
progress they have made. But despite this progress, challenges remain."
The number of homelss earlier in the decade was said by the VA to have been
275,000 and now the VA states it has been reduced to 67,494 veterans. While the
overall veterans homeless population has been reduced, there has been an
increase in the number of homeless women veterans. They once made up 2% of the
homeless population but that has increased to 6% by the VA's current numbers.
The VA's Deupty Assistant Inspector General for Audits and Evaluations
Linda Halliday offered anecodtal evidence as to why that number might be
increasing as she discussed the results of a recent audit:
31% of the 26 providers reviewed did not adequately address the
safety, security and privacy risks of veterans, especially female veterans. GPD
prgoram medical facility staff allowed providers to house female veterans in
male-only approved fcailities and multi-gender facilities for which security and
privacy risks had not been assessed and mitigated. For example, we identified
the following risks: bedrooms and bathrooms without sufficient locks, halls and
stairs without sufficient lighting and female and male residents on the same
floor without access restrictions. In addition, some providers housed female
veterans in female-only facilities that had inadequate security measures -- such
as inadequate monitoring and not restricting access to non-residents. We
discovered serious female veteran safety, security and privacy issues at one
site that required immediate VHA management attention. Two homeless femal
veterans were housed in a male-only approved provider facility. The two female
residents shared a bathroom with male residents without an adequate lock and had
sleeping rooms on the same floor as male residents witout adequate barriers
restricting access to the female rooms. We found that since fiscal year 2002,
VA's GPD program staff had placed 22 homeless females in this male-only approved
facility without adequately addressing the safety, security and privacy needs of
the female veterans.
Strickland and Halliday were part of the first panel to appear before the
Committee. That panel also included Rev. Scott Rogers (Executive Director of
the Asheville Buncombe Community Christian Ministry), Vietnam Veternas of
America's Marsh Four who chairs the National Women Veterans Committee, National
Coaltion for HOmeless Veterans' John Driscoll. We'll note this exchange.
Chair Patty Murray: You contacted the VA and asked for help.
Obviously, they just said to you nothing. Right? They just said nothing. You
got no response?
Sandra Strickland: No. No, to me, their basic concern was my
mental health. Because I had shared with them everything that was going on with
me and their first question to me was, "Are you mentally
stable?"
Chair Patty Murray: So you weren't assigned a case manager or
referred for employment or training services or anything?
Sandra Strickland: No.
Chair Patty Murray: What do you think they should have said when
you first called?
Sandra Strickland: What do you need? Not what I wanted or what
they wanted for me but what I needed. And if they weren't able to provide the
resources themselves, provide resources that I could reach out too. I wasn't
even given that. They just told me they could give me a list of shelters. I
could do that myself. But I mean, are they -- I just felt that there should be
some type of partnership. If they're not able to assist or provide the
assistance then there should be partners that they work with that they could
refer a veteran too so that they're not just left when they hang up the phone
feeling hopeless because that's how I felt.
Chair Patty Murray: Yeah. Ms. Halliday, your testimony was really
eye opening, I think. Telling someone that they're going to be some place
sleeping without a lock on the door, bathrooms that don't have locks.
Insufficient lighting. Ms. Strickland, what would that type of environment
have meant to you?
Sandra Strickland: An unsafe environment?
Chair Patty Murray: Yes.
Sandra Strickland: I would have stayed in my car. It's -- It's
different when you have children, you know? I mean, of course I think of my
safety but I think of my children as well. There aren't -- There are programs
but it's not enough for women with children. Yes, I could have gone to other
shelters but I wouldn't be able to take my children with me. And then, a
female? Just from being a woman, you want to be able to feel that when you go
to a transitional home or shelter that you do have adequate
safety.
Chair Patty Murray: Basic. Ms. Four, Reverend Rogers, what would
that have meant for the women who live in your facilities?
Marsh Four: Let me just say we do have, that's the agency, a 30 bed
transitional program exclusively for women veterans. And, uhm, I believe in
some cases the women do come there because it is a place that they know is safe,
that they know is secured. We take great attention to that and I think one of
the situations that exists is that there are so few of these programs in the
community that are exclusive to women veterans, that are designed for them, to
address their tremendous needs. That is one of the shortfalls
also.
Chair Patty Murray: Reverend Rogers, what is the importance for
basic security and things like that in your clients?
Rev. Scott Rogers: It is absolutely paramount. We really feel like
it took almost two years for us to earn that trust and making sure that we could
commit the amount of resources that were needed. That's why I asked you'll to
consider some kind of a challenge grant. The community wants to respond but
because of the numbers of women and their children are low, even though we have
them housed separately and they're able to have their own room and facilities,
it's at a much greater cost. With a little bit of extra help from this Committee
and from Congress, we can provide not only that safety and security but that can
also address the professional needs around sexual trauma, having a well trained
staff, being really able to train our volunteers. I've got women who want to
mentor other women but don't always understand the levels and complexities of
that trauma. We would like to be able to have the funding and the support and
we believe we can get it matched by the community with some leadership here
because we don't, again, believe in the entitlement system but we do want to
help you create the incentives but with the funding to overcome the smaller
numbers but dealing with more complex issues.
Chair Patty Murray: And both of the VA's Inspector General and GAO
really made it clear that the VA has to improve their services for homeless
women veterans. But reports that were issued by two organizations and oversight
by my staff have found really disincentives for homeless women veterans to seek
VA's housing programs -- including no minimum standards for gender specific
safety and limitations in available housing options for homeless veterans,
especially with children. So my question to all of you is what would you do --
What would you direct the VA to do today to serve homeless women veterans? Ms.
Strickland, if you had the opportunity to say to the VA, "Do this," what would
it be?
Sandra Stickland: Provide adequate programs that can deal with the
unique needs of female veterans.
Chair Patty Murray: The basics.
Sandra Strickland: The basics.
Chair Patty Murray: Safety, security, locks,
privacy.
Sandra Strickland: Yes. And then resources to help us get back on
our feet, to help us become self-sufficient, so that we don't become
--
Chair Patty Murray: Chronic homeless?
Sandra Strickland: Correct.
Chair Patty Murray: Ms. Four?
Marsha Four: One I think would be that certainly the issue of the
security really impacts their ability to focus on the programs that they have to
work in. I think it's very important that the VA truly does some oversight of
what they have in order to remold and work with some of the opportunities they
have in front of them. I think that the addition of some extra funding through
the special needs grants for those programs that want to do the work with women
veterans -- it can be quite costly because the staff that's needed and the
support that that grant allowed for assistance to the families who took care of
the children while the women were attending to some very specific and some very
important work to go into the mental health filed, I think that's another
important place. And also to really make an evaluation of how many military
sexual trauma specific residential treatment programs there are in this country
and the fact that, if they are a far distance, how do they expect the homeless
women to get into those programs and travel there.
Chair Patty Murray: Reverend Rogers?
Rev. Scott Rogers: First, I want to say thank you, Ms. Strickland
for your courage and I'm sorry for your experience. We-we simply ask the VA to
be right there with us. And what we say and what Charles George VA Medical
Center does is they train their staff. There staff is with us as much as three
and four days a week in our facility working with both our women and our men.
But they're also there saying they're going to be the advocate, the ombudsman
right alongside us as a faith-based and other community based providers. I
think it's when they exhibit and put in place men and women, professionals, with
that same passion that it really makes the difference because nobody can
understimate the power of saying, "Welcome home, veteran."
Chair Patty Murray: Ms. Halliday, final comment?
Linda Halliday: We'd like to say that we'd like to see the VA
transition away from the reliance of providing these services in multi-gender
facilities. We'd like to see incentives put in place for special needs to
ensure that female veterans needs are met, just as it was said before. And I
think you would also have to possibly explore using contracts outside of the
grant and per diem program to fit the unique needs of female veterans especially
when they don't represent a large number and it would be smaller and get better
economical solutions
Michelangelo Signorile: What has the US State Dept done? And
certainly, in light of [Secretary of State] Hillary Clinton's strong statements
about countries around the world -- she gave a speech in Geneva speaking out
about the brutality [against] gay people and said the US would be, you know,
pulling funding even in some cases for countries, foreign aid would be in
jeopardy, that were pushing an anti-gay agenda. Is the US State Dept just
trying to look the other way?
Ali Hili: They have been looking the other way and it's a shame on
the international world community that this genocide is happening under the eyes
of the world and the gay community in particular. No one is doing anything to
help support their brothers and sisters inside Iraq and this is on the conscious
-- this is on the conscious of everyone who's been responsible to post
it.
Michelangelo Signorile: What do you think people listening right
now should be doing? Americans listening. Should they be putting pressure on
the State Dept and Hillary Clinton?
Ali Hili: Of course. People should stand up. Stand up against
this. this administration in Iraq, this establishment of killing that has been
prosecuting sexual minorities, minorities and groups like even the Emos. Nobody
ever did anything to stop these killings, these atrocities. The media is going
to pick up on it for a period of time and then it's going to slow down and
disappear. But those victims who are living there in fear, who's going to help
them who's going to support them?
Michaelangelo Signorile: Has there been any official statement
from the State Dept or Hillary Clinton?
Ali Hili: No. Nothing. Nothing. We haven't heard
anything.
And no statment again today. Victoria Nuland handled the State Dept
briefing. She came out joking ("Only the early birds here today!") and did
everything but called for someone to bump up the lights as she asked, "So, what's on
your minds?" Tomorrow, Victoria does the Tarzan yell.
Who is going to stand up for the Iraqi youth? The State Dept? The White
House? Anybody? Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?
While the so-called adults in government cut class, the tragedy continues
for Iraqi youths. Peter Graff (Reuters) reports the way some Iraqi
youths are dealing with the targeting:
Hafidh Jamal, 19, who works in a shoe
store in the upscale Karrada neighbourhood, said he used to dress in black with
his hair long in the back, but he fled his home in Sadr City this week and cut
his hair. Two friends were killed for dressing in the emo style, he
said.
"Let them kill me. They killed
my close friends," he told Reuters. "I support emo. I love this
phenomenon."
Tim Marshall (Sky News) notes the work of the
Organization of Women's Freedom In Iraq to call out the murders:
The OWFI documents some of the crimes
here (be aware this link leads to a
graphic image) and says the current
wave of killings began on February 6th. Gays have always been persecuted in
Iraq, but two things happened after the 2003 invasion of the country which led
to the wave of anti gay killings in 2009 and now again.
Ali Hussein (Al Mada)
notes Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi's condemnation of the killing
of Iraqi youths for being or thought to be Emo and Hussein notes that the
targeting brings back memories of the Saddam Hussein regime when innocent people
were behead and tossed into the garbage. Al Rafidayn
quotes Speaker Osama al-Nujaifi stating that the liquadation of youths on
the pretext of reforming Iraqi society is about embracing violence and terror
and that they killers are in violation of the law. Another Al Mada article notes
that while Nujaifi has spoken out against the killing, the Ministry of the
Interior has remained silent except to deny that any targeting is taking place.
MP Chuan Mohammed Taha serves on the Security and Defense Committee and notes
that that governmental indifference to these killings is a new form of terrorism
and that the Ministry of the Interior is a participant in the killings if only
due to the fact that they know about the murders and they hide them from the
public. Taha also declares that Emo is the expression of a personality and the
law guarantees Iraqis the right to freely express their opinions.
Abe Greenwald (Commentary) offers his thoughts on the
subject:
In a Contentions post, I noted that the
initiative allowed Obama to shirk America's unique role in actually securing
human rights around the world, while earning praise from identity-politics
activists. The administration's failure (and disinclination) to maintain an
American presence in Iraq after 2012 meant that anti-gay barbarians such as
al-Qaeda and Iranian proxies would stay behind and prey upon Iraq's homosexuals
without fear of American influence. If Obama really wanted to protect gay rights
from history's most vicious anti-gay forces, I wrote, he'd keep America in Iraq
(and Afghanistan) instead of issuing memos and giving speeches. And if the
progressives singing his praises really felt that gay rights were human rights
they'd have been more inclined to support George W. Bush's freedom agenda and
less eager to cut and run in our wars abroad. How tragic to have been proven so
right so soon.
So even Commentary -- a right-wing periodical -- can weigh in publicly but
elected and appointed officials in the US all have a case of Vegas throat?
Last night, Turkey launched another wave of air strikes on northern Iraq.
Reuters
notes Turkish Col Hussein Tamr states the assault -- supposedly targeting
the PKK -- lasted over "an hour." Yesterday David Petraeus, the Director of the
CIA, was visiting Turkey and speaking with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
RTT
reports that they discussed "escalating sectarian strife in Iraq." Press TV
tries to cover it and opens with:
The director of
the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), David Petraeus, has expressed concerns
about the possible trial of Iraqi Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi on charges of
involvement in terrorist activities.
Al Sabaah reports that
three "followers" of Tareq al-Hashemi were sentenced in Dhi Qar's Criminal court
for possession of prohibited weapons and conspiracy terrorism charges. Al Rafidayn
reports the three were sentenced to life imprisonment.
Meanwhile Baghdad prepares to go on lockdown. March 29th the Arab Summit is
scheduled to be held in the capital and Al Sabaah reports that
the Baghdad Operations Command has declared approximately 100,000 security
officers will provide protection during the summit. In addition, Chen Zhi (Xinhua) reports that starting
March 26th, Baghdad International Airport will be shut down. Mu Xuequan (Xinhua) notes that Moqtada
al-Sadr has issued a statement announcing protests will not take place during
the summit. So much for free expression in Iraq and, if any violate the edict
of Moqtada, which of his deadly militias will he use for slaughter? Dar Addustour
notes that the Cabinet has agreed to foot the bill for the Summit which,
according to Nouri's spokesperson Ali al-Dabbagh, will cost $100 billion dinars.
That would be $86,073,447.54 in US dollars. As so many Iraqis remain unemployed
and in poverty, it will be interesting to see how the costs play out among the
people.
Nouri is stalling on the national conference to address Iraq's political
crisis and his latest stalling attempt is insisting that it take place after the
Arab summit. Al Rafidayn
notes that Iraqiya leader Ayad Allawi and KRG President Massoud Barzani are
both calling for the conference to take place this month before the Arab Summit
(scheduled to kick off March 29th). Al Mada adds that
after all the prep meetings for the national conference (there have been at
least five), it was decided Monday to create a small committee that would set
the agendy and that this committee is scheduled to meet today. For those who've
forgotten, those prep meetings? They were also supposed to determine the agenda.
| 
