C.I. covered a topic very well this morning.
I just want to add a few comments.
Jimmy Carter is, was and will forever be a joke. He used racism in every campaign he ever ran. He was DLC and every other sell out policy. He was the Democratic Party at its worst.
In fact, Red Amy Goodman, that's why Ted Kennedy ran against the then-incumbent Jimmy Carter in 1980 for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination: Because Jimmy Carter was nothing but a sell-out.
He helped with the destruction of unions, he helped destroy the rights of women by making the chipping away at reproductive rights "bi-partisan."
As a president, his racism roamed the globe and, as C.I. notes, the Afghanistan people will tell their story some day and, when they do, it will not be pretty for Jimmy Carter, nor should it be.
Carter has a great deal to answer for. Therefore, it was shocking to watch so many radicals (Socialists, Communists, etc.) rush to get on board with Jimmy today.
As if his past is forgotten?
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Wednesday, September 16, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, Joe Biden's second day in the Green Zone sees a second day of shelling, a shoe tosser is shot dead by US troops, Cindy Sheehan and Dahr Jamail confront realities, the KRG has a new Prime Minister nominee and Twitter and Facebook oh my.
Peace Mom Cindy Sheehan hosts a weekly radio and online broadcast, Cindy's Soapbox. This week's guest is independent journalist Dahr Jamail whose latest book is The Will to Resist: Soldiers Who Refuse to Fight in Iraq and Afghanistan. We'll note a section of their discussion today and a section on the book later in the week (hopefully tomorrow).
Cindy Sheehan: So, you know, many people voted for Barack Obama. And I fully, fully believe that the Democratic base in this country is anti-war. They want the war in Iraq over, the war in Afghanistan over, they want the troops to start coming home. That actually, in reality, hasn't happened. And this week has been -- there's a lot of stuff coming out of Iraq. You know the people in the government in Iraq are afraid that [Nouri al-] Maliki is trying to turn into a quasi dictator. He's ousting some people from the Interior Ministry which has been very corrupt. People I know in Iraq tell me the Interior Ministry is awful. There were 25 Iraqis killed in northern Iraq near Mosul the other day. It seems like things are really heating up in the Kurdish areas. And yesterday, 44 Iraqis were killed and 61 wounded in another Kurdish village. And we had four US soldiers killed not yesterday but the day before. And there was a report that came out that said the US is going to be taking troops out but they're going to be replacing them with mercenaries -- more than 2 to 1, in a 2 to 1 ratio, mercenaries coming from Uganda or Kenya. Dahr, what do you -- I know you have a lot of good contacts there and I know that you've been there a lot -- what's your analysis of what's happening in Iraq?
Dahr Jamail: Well for starters, Maliki is not a quasi-dictator, I mean he already is. He's basically the new Shia Saddam. I mean, there's no question about it. This is a guy that the US put into power. They're maintaining him there and largely through the intelligence services and the Mukhabarat and the Ministry of Interior. I mean, that's how this guy is staying in power. Saddam knew that the glue of his power resided in the intelligence services and Mal -- the US has helped Maliki do the same thing. Let's, let's remember that this is a guy, there was no democratic process involved in him becoming prime minister. He was basically inserted to replace Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari because Condaleeza Rice wanted him there, you know at the beckoning of George W. Bush. So there's that. And we look at the overall situation. Violence is not slowing down. Last month was the single bloodiest month for Iraqi civilians in over a year's time. We are starting to see more and more attacks on US forces. We still have over 131,000 US military personnel there. That number is not decreasing but the generals in charge of the situation are saying that that number will actually -- we'll have well over 100,000 troops in Iraq till at least half-way through next year. So it's a dire situation and when I was there earlier this year, there was a car bomb in Baghdad just about every day I was there for the month that I was there. We're looking at a situation where the country overall has become extremely Balkanized, where literally going from one neighborhood to another is almost like going to a different country. You basically had to embed with a militia to get where ever you wanted to go. So it's a dire situation and it's far, far, far from over. And we're looking at a situation where, I think in the coming months, we should expect it to get worse unfortunately.
Cindy Sheehan: And unfortunately, when we say expect it to get worse, most Americans equate that with US deaths. So there's a -- there's one aspect that has been fortunate for US soldiers is those amounts of deaths have been going down so Iraq has practically disappeared off the radar screen of our media and of public consciousness. One of my friends was in Washington D.C. on March 19th for the sixth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq and he was passing out fliers and one woman told him, "Why are you doing this? The Iraq War is over. Obama's president."
Dahr Jamail: Right. And it's amazing Cindy -- as you know all too well, probably better than anyone -- that the single most challenging thing to those of us trying to wake people up and inform people about what's actually happening in Iraq and what is US policy, the single greatest obstacle at this point is a guy named Barack Obama, where so many people have drunk the Obama Kool-Aid and they wore their t-shirts in November and he was elected and they feel like, "Hey, that's it. It's all good now, right? He's pulling out of Iraq and it's going to take some time -- I'm sure it's a bit complicated -- but things are getting better there, right?" Or "We won" -- quote unquote, "right?" And it could not be further from the truth. I mean we're still loking at anywhere between a dozen and a hundred Iraqis being killed every day and attacks on US troops there continue, the infrastructure's far worse now than it was even a couple of years ago and that that's even possible seems pretty amazing. And it's extremely unstable politically. And I think it's probably just a matter of time before we have another huge explosion and, you know, unfortunately what it really takes for people to pay attention over there is when more and more US troops are being killed but unfortunately that's probably what's going to happen -- not even talking about Afghanistan.
Cindy Sheehan: Well talk about the surge that began in January of 2007, I believe.
Dahr Jamail: Yes.
Cindy Sheehan: And about how the Republicans and the neoconservatives who are still, of course, in Obama's administration, how they term that a "success." What was really the cost of that so-called "success" and why do they even think it's a success?
Dahr Jamail: Well you know it's amazing, it's been another amazing propaganda campaign and a successful one -- the whole so-called "surge" -- because the reality is that what really caused dramatic decrese in American deaths was the buying off of the resistance -- where basically the US instituted a program back in 2006 before they even started sending in these 30,000 additional troops, where they literally found corrupt tribal sheiks and paid them off to get fighters under their control to stop attacking occupation forces. And it was relatively successful so temporarily the US stood up this 100,000 strong Sunni militia comprised mostly of former resistance fighters, paying them $300 a month in US tax payer money and we saw a dramatic decline in US deaths. But now it's-it's really complicated the situation politically because now we have these armed milita men running around and they're not being encorporated into the government forces as was promised and so we're looking at a tinderbox politically where these guys want political power. What's going to happen in the upcoming January elections, which are not far off now, if these guys don't get the political power? Many of them are already talking about going back into the political resistance and we know what that means.
Cindy Sheehan: Right and also what you talked about earlier is the Balkanization of the country has basically -- and I have not been to Iraq myself but I've talked to Iraqis all over the world, I've been to Jordan meeting with them -- and they basically say that neighborhoods that were very diverse are now just the opposite. They're all, like you said, you have to -- you have to pass through checkpoints to get to each neighborhood which had a result of -- and let's just face it Dahr, over one million people are dead and four million people displaced so the country's been decimated in population.
Dahr Jamail: It has. And in addition to those figures, we can add another eight million in need of emergency assistance and who are also living in abject poverty on less than a dollar a day according to OXFAM International. I mean, the situation is not getting any better for the Iraqi people. It's really amazing how bad it got and how it's continued to worsen and yet, of course, so many people -- even so-called anti-war folks in this country -- think, "Oh well it's better." Or, "It's won." Actually, you can't tell that to people in Iraq just trying to survive on a daily basis.
Cindy Sheehan: And it's heartbreaking. And the tragedy is that many of the large anti-war movements were co-opted by the Democratic Party. And I just get so frustrated because, like you, I haven't stopped my activism, I haven't stopped working, war is wrong no matter who's president. But it's really frustrating because these same people who supported Obama even those his Iraq plan was unsatisfactory and even though he promised to send more troops to Afghanistan, he promised to do this cross-border bombing into the tribal regions of Pakistan, they supported him, they raised money for him, they worked for him and they voted for him, they had their followers vote for him and now they write a petition to him to stop it.
Dahr Jamail: Right and, as we know, it's going to take a lot more than signing your name on a petition or wearing a t-shirt or even at this point walking in a street on a weekend. It's really, you know, the only thing that this administration or any other administration is going to understand is when it becomes politically unviable for them to continue forward with the policies that they are engaged in. And it's up to us to show them, look, not only do we disagree with this but we will, we will be your political death if you continue on with this policy that you literally won't be able to stay in power and have any kind of a base whatsoever if you continue forward with this US empire policy. And so that's what it's going to take. It's going to take real mobilization and real sacrifice and, uh, really people throwing their bodies on the front lines to make this stop. Not just signing a petition, not just trying to ask Nancy Pelosi "please," but, you know, clearly these people will only listen to things when they're personal stake -- i.e. their own political power and their own political future -- is at stake. And, again, if we aren't making -- if we aren't pushing them up against that wall, then to think that anything's just going to change? We might as well go to Disneyland.
Cindy Sheehan: Well, you know, we're on a subject -- we' just have like a minute before we have to take a break -- what do you think about these people who support Obama and they don't make any demands on him or political demands? They say, "Well at least he's better than [John] McCain." What do you think about the -- the foreign policy choices Obama's made compared to what -- would McCain have done anything differently?
Dahr Jamail: Yeah, I think that that's a nice rationalization for political sloth for people to say, "Well you know Obama's -- at least he's better than, you know, insert, you know, name of idiot here" -- whether it be McCain or Sarah Palin or George Bush because the reality when we look at the hard facts which are the National Security Strategy of the United States and the Quadrennial Defense Review report these are the exact same reports running US policy now as we had under George Bush. These policies have literally not changed, they haven't been updated, nor were they supposed to be. And, in fact, of course we've maintained Bush's Secretary of Defense in Robert Gates and, as you noted, most of the leading hawks and advisers from [Bill] Clinton's time as well as some that were hung over from George W. Bush. So we've had literally no policy change whatsoever. Instead all we have is, you know, a charasmatic, articulate, intelligent person as president as opposed to a bumbling buffoon. But that's the only thing that's really changed. When we look at the hard policies on the ground we've seen just nothing more but a continuation of George Bush's administration. We are really in George Bush's third term if we're going to get down to the brass tacks.
US Vice President Joe Biden remained in Iraq today continuing meetings with various leaders. Gina Chon (Wall St. Journal) reports that for the second day of his trip, the Green Zone was agains targeted and Biden and Nouri had "to remain inside the building because of the explosions." The building? Nouri's palace. Today is day two of the rocket or mortar attacks aimed at the area the vice president of the United States is in. Day two. Certainly, in the US, all newscasts Tuesday led with that news. Right?
First up, Vice President Joe Biden makes a surprise visit to Iraq. During the trip, he was scheduled to meet the country's leaders and with U.S. troops. But there was a distraction when the International Zone in Baghdad came under fire. A CNN reporter said the vice president wasn't injured, but it wasn't clear whether he was actually near where the attack took place because reporters aren't allowed to discuss the VP's location. That's for security reasons. Mr. Biden arrived in the Middle Eastern nation on Tuesday. He said he made the trip, in part, to show support for the Iraqi government as it takes full control of its country. All U.S. combat troops are scheduled to leave Iraq by next August.
Is that Katie Couric with The CBS Evening News? Is it Brian Williams with NBC Nightly News? Is it Charlie Gibson with ABC World News Tonight? Maybe it's Jim Lehr with PBS' The NewsHour?
Wrong. It's Carl Azuz, the anchor of CNN Student News. It's Carl Azuz doing the newscast aimed at middle and high school students. What a proud moment for the broadcast networks -- commercial and allegedly non-commerical. What a telling moment. Steven Lee Myers (New York Times) reports that 3 suspects were arrested in yesterday's shelling which used "107-millimeter rockets" and not mortars, that 2 Iraqis died and five were injured and that, "Inside the embassy compound, a piercing 'duck and cover' alarm began moments after the American military commander, Gen. Ray Odierno, told reporters traveling with Mr. Biden that security remained at its lowest levels since the war began". The US military issued a statement praising the "quick reaction" of US and Iraqi forces who "recieved small arms fire from a house near the launch site. As elements from the joint patrol maneuvered against the small arms fire, a second element captured three Iraqi males and three rocket rails belevied to have been used in the attack." Tim Cocks and Jon Hemming (Reuters) report that the three suspects were released within hours of their arrest. But don't expect your evening news to tell you or show you that.
Nobody stopped to hear him
Though he played so sweet and high
They knew he had never
Been on their TV
So they passed his music by
-- "For Free," written by Joni Mitchell, from her Ladies of the Canyon album
And the Queen of Panhandle Media, Simply Red Amy Goodman? Not a damn bit interested. Not a damn bit. But, in varying degrees, they all had time for Crazy Ass Jimmy Carter, didn't they? (The White House has again distanced itself from Crazy Ass Jimmy.) You couldn't get Iraq on your TV but you could get nonsense. You could get crazed musing. Dan Simpson spent over 30 years in the US diplomatic service. He's on the editorial boards of both the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Toledo Blade. Today, while adults throw tantrums, he's stuck pretty much alone in the grown up role. In a new column, he argues that the US must leave Iraq regardless of whether violence increases or not and that they shouldn't leave Iraq to be sent to Afghanistan. From his "Leave Iraq to the Iraqis:"
The attitude that the U.S. government should maintain as Iraqis sort out who will rule Iraq after the United States leaves should be clear: The 29 million Iraqis have the right of self-determination, a principle to which Americans attach the utmost importance when it comes to our own country.
The fact that it will be messy in Iraq, reflecting the history of the country and the different peoples who comprise it, is none of our affair and no justification whatsoever for the U.S. delaying withdrawal or for re-intervention. Nor is the fact that the current structure of the new, post-Saddam Hussein Iraq is in no small part our doing since the invasion of 2003. U.S. withdrawal from Iraq will take place for our own reasons, just as our initial attack on the country did.
But it will be messy. The ethnic and religious make-up of Iraq will lie at the basis of the problems, becoming more intense as the time for full U.S. withdrawal ticks down. The population is approximately 60 percent Shiite Muslim, 20 percent Sunni Muslim and 20 percent Kurdish. Each group wants to rule the country, or at least part of it. And one prize that comes with political power is access to the lion's share of the country's oil revenues, big money.
It will be messy and it is messy. Today's reported violence includes . . .
Bombings?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad sticky car bombing wounded one person, a second one injured another and a third one "destroyed one civilian car," the Green Zone attacks today (with mortars or rockest) resulted in at least two people being injured and unknown assailants blew up the home of a Sahwa leader in Saqlawiyah.
Shootings?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 person (former police officer) was shot dead in Mosul.
Yesterday's snapshot noted the release from a Baghdad prison of Iraq journalist Muntadhar al-Zeidi (also spelled Muntadar al-Zaidi in some outlets) where he'd been sentenced for throwing two shoes at Bully Boy Bush on December 14th. Today, another shoe thrower apparently emerged. The Telegraph of London reports Ahmed Latif was shot dead today by the US military in Falljua after he hurled insults and a shote at them.
Turning to the issue of Camp Ashraf which is made up of Iranian dissidents belonging to the MEK who were given sanctuary by Saddam Hussein and have remained in Iraq for decades. Following the US invasion, the US military provided security for them and the US government labeled them "protected persons" under Geneva. Though Nouri 'promised' he wouldn't move against Camp Ashraf, but July 28th he launched an assault. Over the weekend, Tim Cocks (Reuters) reported that "a six-week-old under strike" continues at Camp Ashraf as a result of the 36 residents who were hauled away and imprisoned by Nouri's forces. Gaelle Faure (Time magazine) observed, "Hunger strikers in Camp Ashraf -- along with those starving themselves in sympathy in Washington D.C., London, Berlin and Ottawa -- are demanding that the U.S. take back protective control of the camp. In the long term, they'd like permanent U.N. protection for the dissidents. Several lawmakers and lawyer groups in Britain are voicing their support. On Sept. 9, London-based law firm Finers Stephens Innocent released a legal opinion calling on Iraq to respect the Geneva Convention in protecting the camp dwellers -- and insisting the U.S. ensure their safety." Today, the Near East Human Rights Initiative (NEHRI) sends a press release to the public account which notes that Iraqi Parliamentarian Saleh Mutlak ("Secretary General of Iraq's National Dialogue Front") has stated, "On behalf of millions of Iraqis, I ask the United States and President Obama to uphold and follow through with US commitment for the safety and security of Ashraf residents in a proper manner. The people and political forces in Iraq an dArab countries are monitoring this situation vigilantly and for Iran to hold the upper hand in Iraq and to even be able to destroy Iranian refugees in Iraq would be a nightmare which we must present." The press release also notes that NEHRI intends "to send a humanitarian fact-finding mission to Camp Ashraf". John Hughes (Christian Science Monitors) terms the issue "a difficult foreign-policy and humanitarian challnge" for the White House:
One solution to the Iranian dissidents' problem would be for the US to give them asylum as political refugees. However, the US can hardly accept them as such while it continues to brand them members of a terrorist organization. Nor would that sit well with the Tehran regime, with which the US seeks engagement on Iran's suspected pursuit of nuclear weaponry. In view of the political implications, an asylum decision would need to take place at the highest official level, at least the secretary of State, if not the president.
The PMOI has raised the prospect of the United Nations dispatching a monitoring force to Camp Ashram. That is even less likely while such Iranian friends as Russia and China sit on the UN Security Council that would have to authorize it.
Clearly, the Ashraf dissidents should not be sent back to Iran against their will. That requires that the US exerts enough pressure on the Iraqi government to keep its word.
Meanwhile Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) reports that Iraq's Shi'ite Vice president, Adel Abdul Mahdi is drawing a line between himself and the Shi'ite Nouri al-Maliki, "In an implicit criticism of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's reluctance to ask for help from the US following the June 30 pullback of combat troops, Dr. Abdul Mehdi called for a re-assesment of the role of US forces here that could result in more involvement for American troops sidelined by what he termed an over-optimistic view of security in Iraq." Abdul Mahdi belongs to the new Shi'ite alliance which Nouri refused to join after he was rebugged for his insistance that wins in January's provincial elections would result in his being named prime minister again. Abudl Mahdi tells Arraf, "Maliki will have his chance, others will have tehir chances, so joing the coalition with balanced rates would be the acceptable equation -- otherwise what is the point of having a coalition?" In a non-related development, Tehran Times states that Iranian pilgrims will not be going to Iraq this month for "the month of Mehr which starts from September 23 to October 23". In other political news, Sherko Raouf, Khalid al-Ansary, Michael Christie, Tim Cocks and Louise Ireland (Reuters) report that Barham Salih has been declared the prime minister of the KRG (Kurdistan Regional Government) and quotes Barham Salih from his, yes, Twitter feed declaring, "Kurdistan Parliament just nominated me for Prime Minister of regional gov. President Barzani will officialy task formation of new KRG." Oops, they didn't include the quote in full: "Kurdistan Parliament just nominated me for Prime Minister of regional gov. Pres Barzani will officially task formation of new KRG after Eid". Salih was formerly Iraq's deptuy prime minister, but he announced his resignation after July provinical elections in three KRG provinces. He currently has 2,734 followers on his Twitter account. While he himself follows such lumanaries as Oprah Winfrey, Thomas Friedman, Ahnuld of California and Stephen Colbert. Getting all with the tech savy 'news,' let's check out US Gen Ray Odierno's Facebook page where he posts nine paragraphs of Becky Pallack's Arizona Daily Star article. Stay away from AP, Ray Odierno, they don't play.
Staying with legal news, Jamie Leigh Jones worked for Halliburton's KBR and was sent to Iraq where, she's revealed, she was gang-raped by co-workers and Halliburton employees "addressed" this by locking her in a pod. Halliburton has attempted to repeatedly prevent Jones from having her day in court. In May of 2008, Maddy Sauer (ABC News) reported Jones latest victory which was that Jones would get her day in court and not be confined to arbitration -- which Halliburton insisted was the correct venue for her case. Sauer reported that District Judge Keith Ellison "wrote in his order Friday that Jones' claims of sexaul assault, battery, rape, false imprisonment and others fall beyond the scope of her employment." Anabelle Garay (AP) reported last night that the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Ellison's finding yesterday and her case will be "tried in open court" and not arbitration.
iraq
cindy sheehan
dahr jamail
the wall street journalgina choncarl azuzcnn student newsthe new york timessteven lee myers
maddy sauer
abc news
tim cocksreuterstime magazinegaelle faure
the christian science monitorjane arraf
joni mitchell
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Rape and other Iraq news
"US warns against forgetting Iraq" (BBC News):
"The endemic corruption within the Iraqi system - not only the security forces, but the system - is still probably the biggest problem facing Iraq.
"I think the ministry of defence and ministry of interior probably are taking more action than most other ministries right now, so I'm confident that they're on the right path."
Those quotes are from US General Ray Odierno, top US commander in Iraq. Joe Biden's visit to Iraq (unannounced ahead of time as usual) appears to have caught Odierno by surprise because the talking point today conflicted with the report he provided to the BBC.
In other Iraq news, David Stringer (AP) reports that Daniel Carey is representing an Iraqi man who asserts that he was raped by two British soldiers in 2003 at a base in Basra and that the investigation into the alleged sexaul assault of "a 14-year-old Iraqi boy at Camp Breadbasket base in Basra in May 2003" continues. Just when you think you're immune to the sickness of it all, having learned of so much already, another item surfaces.
"Kangaroo Justice at Bagram" (Kenneth J. Theisen, World Can't Wait):
Most Americans have heard about the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo. But few are aware of a similar prison in Afghanistan at the Bagram military base. Detainees there have been captured or kidnapped by the U.S. from all over the world. Shortly after he took office, Obama announced that he would close Guantanamo (he has not yet done so). But instead of closing Bagram, he asked Congress for more money to expand its capacity to hold prisoners of the U.S. war of terror. His Department of Justice even went to court to fight the right of Bagram prisoners to challenge their detentions in a U.S. court earlier this year.
On Monday the Department of Defense announced that some 600 prisoners held in Bagram would have the right to challenge their detention. Is this a step forward or merely smoke and mirrors to pretend that the prisoners are being given their basic legal rights, while really denying them these rights?
Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman told reporters, “It's basically a review procedure that ensures people go in front of a panel periodically to give them the opportunity to contest their detention. It's something that we had used in Iraq to help us manage the detainee population and ultimately reduce the detainee population by ensuring that we are only holding those that are the most dangerous threats." According to Whitman the inmates would be “aided” by a uniformed "personal representative" who would "guide them through this administrative process, to help gather witness statements."
But these representatives would not be lawyers and they work for the military, not the prisoners. This is nothing more than a kangaroo procedure. In the early days of military commissions and tribunals at Gitmo a similar useless procedure was followed. Detainees were given the illusion of justice, while being held for years.
So we're going to have for-show 'change' to go with a helping of for-show 'justice'?
For those who are younger (I'm not being sarcastic) and wondering, no, Bush did not get a free pass like this in 2001. By August, he was facing huge criticism and loud criticism. 9-11 gave him a teflon coating that lasted for a bit with those of us on the left. It lasted forever with the media. But, no, this is not natural, this hero worship of Barack.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Tuesday, September 15, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, a journalist is released from prison and says he was tortured in a Baghdad press conference, Alice Fordham reports on Iraqi prison conditions, US Vice President Joe Biden makes a sneak visit to Iraq, Nouri goes "on a charm offensive," and more.
Iraqi journalist Muntadhar al-Zeidi (also spelled Muntadar al-Zaidi in some outlets) has been released from pison today in Baghdad. December 14th, Bully Boy Bush (still occupying the White House at that time) held a press conference in Baghdad with Nouri al-Maliki, prime minister and US-installed thug, where they lied and smiled and signed the treaties Bush pushed through (Strategic Framework Agreement and the treaty masquerading as a Status Of Forces Agreement.). Muntadhar was a journalist attending the press conference."This is a gift from the Iraqis. This is the farewell kiss you dog!" Muntadhar exclaimed hurling a shoe at Bush. And then, hurling a second shoe, "This is from the widows, the orphans and those who were killed in Iraq." Nouri's thugs pounced on Muntadhar and beat him up. He was then whisked away and, for weeks, denied all but one visitation with his family and attorney. In December, many in the press (including the New York Times) ran with a forced confession, presenting it as truth and asking no questions about it. He was sentenced to three years in prison but released today. ITV News (video clip) covers the release here. Alice Fordham and Richard Spencer (Telegraph of London) explain, "The three-year jail term for assaulting a foreign head of state was reduced on appeal to one year, with a three-month remission for good conduct." Martin Chulov (Guardian) states the release "was met with muted celebration in Baghdad but rapturous applause in some corners of the Arab world, where the 30-year-old television journalist is feted as a David and Goliath figure for his act of defiance." BBC describes the scene at al Baghdadiya TV (where Muntadhar works): "Arriving at the al Baghdadiya compound, a trumpeter and two drummers sounded a welcome for Mr Zaidi - and in his honour, three sheep were slaughtered live on his own channel." Richard Spencer (Telegraph of London) adds a list of gifts being offered to the reporter such as, "The Emir of Qatar has offered a godlen statue of a horse."
BBC News reports Muntadhar stated today he was tortured: "Shortly after his release from nine months in a Baghdad prison, Muntadar al-Zaidi demanded an apology - and said he would name the officials later." Ned Parker and Mohammed Arrawi (Los Angeles Times) quote him stating today, ""Here I am free and the country is still a prisoner." Marc Santora (New York Times) adds, "He claimed that he was beaten with pipes, steel cables and electric shocks while in custody. He added that he believed there were many who would like to see him dead, including unnamed American intelligence agencies." Ahmeed Rasheed, Suadad al-Salhy, Khalid al-Ansary, Tim Cocks and Samia Nakhoul (Reuters) quote his bother Uday stating, "I wish Bush could see our happineess. When President Bush looks back and turns the pages of his life, he will see the shoes of Muntazer al-Zaidi on every page." Phillippe Naughton and Richard Kerbaj (Times of London) describe the reporter, "Sporting a thick beard and wearing a sash in the colours of the Iraqi national flag around his shoulders, Mr al-Zaidi was unrepentant after his release from jail after serving nine months of a one-year sentence." McClatchy Newspapers' Sahar Issa provides a full translation of Muntadhar's remarks and this is an excerpt:
Firstly, I give my thanks and my regards to everyone who stood beside me, whether inside my country, in the Islamic world, in the free world. There has been a lot of talk about the action and about the person who took it, and about the hero and the heroic act, and the symbol and the symbolic act. But, simply, I answer: What compelled me to confront is the injustice that befell my people, and how the occupation wanted to humiliate my homeland by putting it under its boot.
And how it wanted to crush the skulls of (the homeland's) sons under its boots, whether sheikhs, women, children or men. And during the past few years, more than a million martyrs fell by the bullets of the occupation and the country is now filled with more than 5 million orphans, a million widows and hundreds of thousands of maimed. And many millions of homeless because of displacement inside and outside the country.
We used to be a nation in which the Arab would share with the Turkman and the Kurd and the Assyrian and the Sabean and the Yazid his daily bread. And the Shiite would pray with the Sunni in one line. And the Muslim would celebrate with the Christian the birthday of Christ, may peace be upon him. And despite the fact that we shared hunger under sanctions for more than 10 years, for more than a decade.
Our patience and our solidarity did not make us forget the oppression. Until we were invaded by the illusion of liberation that some had. (The occupation) divided one brother from another, one neighbor from another, and the son from his uncle. It turned our homes into neverending funeral tents. And our graveyards spread into parks and roadsides. It is a plague. It is the occupation that is killing us, that is violating the houses of worship and the sanctity of our homes and that is throwing thousands daily into makeshift prisons.
I am not a hero, and I admit that. But I have a point of view and I have a stance. It humiliated me to see my country humiliated. And to see my Baghdad burned. And my people being killed. Thousands of tragic pictures remained in my head, and this weighs on me every day and pushes me toward the righteous path, the path of confrontation, the path of rejecting injustice, deceit and duplicity. It deprived me of a good night's sleep.
Dozens, no, hundreds, of images of massacres that would turn the hair of a newborn white used to bring tears to my eyes and wound me. The scandal of Abu Ghraib. The massacre of Fallujah, Najaf, Haditha, Sadr City, Basra, Diyala, Mosul, Tal Afar, and every inch of our wounded land. In the past years, I traveled through my burning land and saw with my own eyes the pain of the victims, and hear with my own ears the screams of the bereaved and the orphans. And a feeling of shame haunted me like an ugly name because I was powerless.
Again, that is an excerpt. A small one. He outlines many things in speech including the torture he says he experienced. McClatchy's Hannah Allam notes he states "Iraqi guards tortured him with whippings and electric shocks during his nine-month detention. He was missing at least one front tooth. The focus of Zaidi's speech Tuesday wasn't on his own ordeal, however, but the death and destruction that Iraqis have experienced since the U.S.-led invasion of 2003." CNN reports (link has text and video) he's now heading to Greece, citing his brother Dhirgham al-Zaidi, "for medical treatment."
His claims of torture are not surprising and Iraq's prisons were the subject of a report on Sunday by Alice Fordham (writing for the Christian Science Monitor):
In a room thick with heat and sweat, light from a small window falls on rows of squatting prisoners and plastic bags of belongings hung from nails on every inch of the wall. The guard explains that 74 men live in this room, which is roughly 10 by 20 feet. A further 85 are usually in the corridor, he adds, while 12 are kept next to the toilet.
This is Hibhib prison on the outskirts of Baquba, the dusty, volatile capital of Diyala Province roughly 40 miles from Baghdad.
It is just one of the prisons in the province where detainees and US forces allege overcrowding, lengthy pretrial detention, and torture used to extract confessions. While the conditions here may be more severe than elsewhere in the country, Iraq's national detention system as a whole has been harshly criticized by Western human rights organizations.
A December 2008 report by the New York-based watchdog Human Rights Watch (HRW) went as far as to assert a "disturbing continuity" with Saddam Hussein-era detention. A committee set up by the Iraqi government in June is investigating abuses. But a lack of accountability and political will, say human rights workers, are serious impediments to reversing the culture of abuse cultivated under Mr. Hussein.
US Vice President Joe Biden is in Iraq. He landed there today on an unannounced visit. Scott Wilson (Washington Post) reports of his landing, "As he emerged from his C-17 aircraft into a hot dusk about 4:50 p.m. local time, the vice president was greeted by Gen. Ray Odierno, the top U.S. commander in Iraq; U.S. Ambassador Christopher Hill; and Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari. Biden's national security adviser, Tony Blinken, and deputy secretary of State Jim Steinberg followed him through the welcome line." Karen Travers (ABC News) reports he stated he believes a referendum on the Status Of Forces Agreement will take place at some point. Edwin Chen (Bloomberg News) quotes his use of "optimistic" to describe US military leaders on Iraqi security forces abilities to increase security functions in their country and notes the top military commander in Iraq, Gen Ray Odierno, used the term "stable" to describe security in Iraq. Really? Too bad the news cycle already had an Odierno injection today. He'd just spoken to BBC News before the visit and painted a far bleaker picture: "It's important to see this through. I concern myself that people don't forget about Iraq, and what we're trying to accomplish here [. . .]" BBC: "BBC correspondent Andrew North says that Gen Odierno was choosing his words with care. But he was giving a clear message, that with the situation still fragile here, the US cannot leave Iraq early."
Karen Travers ABC news report is text but it does have video of Biden speaking in Iraq to reporters including when he declares, "I've made -- this is my third trip since we've been elected. The second trip since we've been sworn in and I'll be back -- I'll be back again. And, uh, I'm coming back to speak with the Iraq leadership." Iraqi leadership? In last Tuesday's snapshot, The Economist editorial entitled "Iraq's freedoms under threat: Could a police state return" was noted:
In any event, Mr Maliki and his friends are trying to secure as much control as they can over the levers of power in the run-up to a general election in January, all the more feverishly since a rash of big bombings in Baghdad in the past two months has badly dented his reputation as a guarantor of public safety. His government is also seeking to tighten rules to regulate political parties and independent associations (including charities), causing still more alarm. "This is not how you build a democracy," says Maysoon al-Damluji, a liberal member of parliament.
Chris Floyd (Empire Burlesque) weighs in on the editorial and notes a 2008 piece he wrote:
The 2008 post goes on to detail just some of the vast amount of information, readily available in mainstream newspapers and magazines, about the American use of death squads and "paramilitaries" to carry out "extrajudicial killings" of people accused -- by someone, somewhere, for some reason or no reason at all -- of being "terrorists" or "insurgents," or "bad guys," to use the playground parlance so favored by our high priests and their media acolytes. These killings, these "dirty squads," have been part of the occupation of Iraq since the beginning, as has the systematic use of torture and the unlawful detention of innocent people. That al-Maliki is carrying on the practices and policies of those who put him into power should come as no surprise -- not even to the Economist.
Last Thursday, Oliver August (Times of London) reported, "The Iraqi opposition accused Nouri al-Maliki, the Prime Minister, yesterday of purging the American-trained security apparatus so that he could attain quasi-dictatorial powers. Mr al-Maliki, who is facing a tough election battle, has dismissed three high-profile members of the Ministry of Interior, which oversees the fight against insurgent groups. He has also forced the resignation of the head of the intelligence service and replaced several police and army commanders in the last few weeks. The moves provoked outrage among political opponents, who worry about the rise of a new police state and accuse the Prime Minister of using the aftermath of last month's massive bomb attack in Baghdad to make a power grab." Gina Chon (Wall St. Journal) reports today that Nouri's "embarked on a charm offensive agmong Shiites in the south of the country, a crucial but fickle electorate, in his bid to hold on to power in Iraq's January parliamentary vote." The voters he is hoping to woo complain about public services including the water -- or lack of -- which lead Nouri to promise a multi-million dollar project that will provide Basra with potable water. Suddenly, that's an issue. It's funny how when Nouri hits the campaign trail he appears to 'discover' that not everyone lives in the lap of luxury he does.
On Al Jazeera's latest Inside Iraq (which began airing Friday night), the topic was the political situation in Iraq with an emphasis on what the death of Abdel Aziz al-Hakim may mean. Joining host Jassim Azzawi for the discussion were Iraqi Parliamentarians Kassim Daoud and Adnan Pachachi along with National Dialogue Front leader Saleh al-Mutlaq.
Jassim Azzawi: And now we are joined from Dubai by Kassim Daoud, the leader of the Solidarity Bloc, and from Baghdad Saleh al-Mutlaq, leader of the National Dialogue Front in Iraq and from London by Iraq's elder statesman Adnan Pachachi who is also a member of Iraq's Parliament. Gentlemen, welcome to Inside Iraq. Kassim, let me start with you. al-Maliki has refused to join the new bloc that has been created and you are a member of that bloc, the Iraqi National Alliance primarily because of the presence of Ibrahim al-Jaafari and perhaps because of Moqtada al-Sadr. Can Maliki win without your bloc?
Kassim Daoud: Well that's a very difficult question. I mean it's premature to answer the question like this to comment that the Alliance, actually, is still open to everybody. We announced it as a bloc which has to be the foundation for the national mandate or the national enterprise. We cannot say that Maliki didn't join us so far, the negotiation is still going on.
Jassim Azzawi: Kassim Daoud, it seems to me that his answer is final. He wanted to be the sole candidate to run for the premiership as well as he wanted a limitation on to Ibrahim al-Jaafari and Moqtada al-Sadr blocked. That has become amply clear.
Kassim Daoud: Well the problem before you is clear but for me since I'm an insider, actually, I'm not looking at the situation as it is. The guy having sort of a political mandate, he would like to pursue with his mandate. The Alliance would like to -- their own mandate so I cannot say the negotiation terminated. I think still we have room although the room is probably slim but I think that we cannot give such a sharp answer till we have to wait for probably too more weeks.
Jassim Azzawi: Slim indeed it is. Adnan Pachachi, as politicians with your finger on the pulse of the Iraqi body politics, how much distrust is there among the political parties?
Adnan Pachachi: Well we feel that the present government has not done its duty properly. We still have corruption, the security situation is still very fragile, incompetence in many departments of state is very clear and, of course, sectarianism still plays a very important role. And the security forces have been heavily infiltrated and they don't seem able to manage the affairs of security of the country. As you know, I personally, and many others -- from the very beginning -- of the invasion of Iraq, we were against sectarianism as a basis for political activity and that's why I joined the National Iraqis' list which has no sectarian color, which includes the people from various sects and nationalities and we feel that this is what the Iraqi people want. As it was very clear in the provincial elections some months ago.
Jassim Azzawi: Since you mentioned the Iraqi National List which is headed by the former Iraqi Prime Minister, Iyad Allawi, who if I am not mistaken, Saleh Mutlaq, you are right now in negotiations with him as well as a few other parties to create a balancing power against this Iraqi National Alliance. Can you tell us how far have you gone with this negotiation? Can we expect an announcement soon?
Saleh al-Mutlaq: Well with Dr. Allawi, we are very new to each other. We have been negotiating with each other for quite a long time and we don't see that big difference is between us actually so the possibility of having an alliance between us, which gather us, is quite high and it's probably going to be after the 8th that we're going to announce something. Anyway, we think, Mr. Jassim, there are about seventy percent of Iraqis who did not participate in the election before. Those are the people who are against the political process or they are not satisfied with this political process and they are against the existing government and the existing parties who are running the government now. We look forward to joining those people and to encourage them to participate in the election. The problem --
Jassim Azzawi: And they want leadership, Saleh Mutlaq? I understand that you are also negotiating with three, four other parties. What we have heard from the media right now, it is a question of the leadership: Who's going to head that list and whether it's going to be a collective leadership or not?
Saleh al-Mutlaq: Well I don't think we should disagree on the leadership. I think that the image that we are trying to put is that the competition is who is going to participate in saving the country? Not in leading the country at this time -- leading the country or being the prime minister or president without doing something to Iraq which is now in a very serious situation is not going to do much. What I heard from Dr. Allawi is that he's not interested in having the power if he cannot do the change in Iraq. And this is also my belief too -- that it is not a matter of having the pulse of this government, it is a matter of saving the country which is going to fall apart unless there is a group of elite people who can lead the country to a safe place. Otherwise, this country is going to be run again by the Islamists for another four years, by extremists, by sectarian people, then the country is going to face a very serious and difficult situation which is going to be even more difficult for the people to whom are going to come after those people who are going to correct the mistakes and damage which is gong to happen if the Islamists --
Jassim Azzawi: Indeed.
Saleh al-Mutlaq: -- are going to run the country for another four years.
Jassim Azzawi: Indeed, Saleh al-Mutlaq, it's gong to be a vicious circle. Since we talked about the Islamists and the leadership, let me go back to Kassim Daoud. Right now the new alliance that has been created, Ammar [C.i. note: wrong name dropped in between] al-Hakim is going to be the new leader of that alliance. He's a young man, he's the son of Abdel Aziz al-Hakim. Surely, he does have the experience in order to carry the mantle of his father?
Kassim Daoud: Well first of all let me just say some comments on Dr. Mutlaq's statement. Unfortunately he gave a figure that 70% of the Iraqis didn't participate in the elections. I'm really surprising from where he got this percent or this data.
Saleh al-Mutlaq: This is, this is the reality. Apart from the --
Kassim Daoud: Come on, come on --
Saleh al-Mutlaq: -- that has been published --
Kassim Daoud: -- Iraq announced their statistic and the United Nations [. . .] their statistics. Nothing like this at all. The participation was in the first election around 79% and in the provincial election 54% --
Jassim Azzawi: And yet you must agree, Kassim Daoud,
Kassim Daoud: -- these things.
Jassim Azzawi: -- there was a large segment, a big swarth of the Iraqis, they were disenfranchised simply because of what they have seen up to the election of 2005 and then they
Kassim Daoud: -- this is, this is a different issue.
Jassim Azzawi: -- decided to boycott the election.
Kassim Daoud: -- is a different issue. No, no, no. This is a different issue. But what did he say really --
Saleh al-Mutlaq: I'm talking about, Mr. Jassim, I am talking about the last election --
Jassim Azzawi: The provincial election.
Saleh al-Mutlaq: -- I was on the ground in many areas, the participation was 20 to 25% only and what was published --
Kassim Daoud: This is not true. The participation 54 [percent] and this is an official figure which was supported by the representative and the monitoring of the United Nations. Anyway.
Jassim Azzawi: The percentage aside, Kassim Doud, let's- let's go back to this Islamist tinge of the National Iraqi Alliance. I'm the first to recognize that there are some secular parties, very small one, in this new National Alliance and yet the Islamist tinge, so to speak, covers everybody inside it.
Kassim Daoud: Well again, Mr. Jassim, let me correct something. Regarding to Abdel Aziz al-Hakim's son, he's Ammar al-Hakim not [C.I. note: wrong name] al-Hakim, just to correct this information. Regarding to the alliance actually, yes indeed it includes many names, many secular blocs besides the Islamist and the aim of this alliance as I mentioned at the beginning that our vision, that we would want to create or establish the foundation of the bloc or National Alliance headed or leaded by a clear political mandate and this is what I wish to get over from the sectarian or sectarianims. Plus, as Dr. Pachachi said, that we are now lookng for many things. And the philosophy of the alliance, one of these alliances, that we are not anymore governed toward the -- we are governed toward the competence.
That's an excerpt of the discussion. Richard Kerbaj (Times of London) notes that Joe Biden's trip into the Green Zone today took place as the Green Zone was shelled with mortars. CNN reports, "CNN's Cal Perry said he heard four loud 'booms.' Warning alarms were sounded, and security was stepped up". Reuters adds the Baghdad mortar attack resulted in 2 Iraqis being killed and five injured ("They fell shortly after U.S. Vice President Joe Biden flew into Iraq for talks with Iraqi leaders.").
In other reported violence today . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Kirkuk roadside bombing which injured two police officers and one civilian. Reuters notes a Falluja roadside bombing which left three people injured and, dropping back to Monday, a Baghdad roadside bombing which injured one person.
Stabbings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 person stabbed to death in Kirkuk.
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 police officer wounded in a machine gun attack outside his home. Reuters drops back to Monday to note 1 Iraqi soldier shot dead in an attack on a Mosul checkpoint.
Today, David Finkel's The Good Soldiers is released -- his book about embedding with the US military in Iraq. Ann Scott Tyson (Washington Post) reports the book "provides a graphic, second-by-second description of the U.S. military's 2007 killing of two Reuters journalists" Namir Noor-Eldeen and Saeed Chmagh in Baghdad July 12, 2007. She quotes the wire agency's attorney Thomas Kim, "We continue to have questions whether or not the actions taken by the soldiers in the area that led to the deaths of the two Reuters journalists were necessary and appropriate. My goal is to understand the basic on which the military concluded that the shooting was justified." As far back as July 16, 2007, Dean Yaters (Reuters) was reporting that the wire agency was asking for a full inquiry into the killings. At the time of their deaths, the US military was asserting that they had encountered 'insurgents' and gunfire was exchanged. Ann Scott Tyson reports Finkel's article backs up the claim that 'insurgents' were present and firefights had taken place. The cameras were apparently mistaken for weapons according to Finkel's account: The gunner tracked Noor-Eldeen as he fled into a pile of trash and fired three more bursts with the cannon, killing him as he could be seen trying to stand in a cloud of dust. Chmagh was wounded and began trying to push himself up on his knees and crawl away, but could move only a few inches. The crew saw that Chmagh was alive, but initially did not shoot him because he was unarmed. However, when a van drove up and two men tried to pick up Chmagh, the crew requested permission to fire and received it. The gunner opened fire, killing Chmagh and the two men, and injuring two children who were inside the van.
Staying with US reporters, last Friday a Democracy Now! segment with Jeremy Scahill was finally aired. (It was a taped segment.) It was Iraq-related so it wasn't 'pressing'. Too bad. On that segment, Jeremy called out Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid for his silence over the death by electrocution in Iraq of one of Reid's own constituents. Las Vegas' KTNV reports that yesterday Reid suddenly became interested in the death of Adam Hermanson and wants an investigation. We highlighted Jeremy's report in The Nation last week but if you're late to the story -- or confused because there have been so many deaths by electrocution in Iraq -- click here. Today Scahill reports at The Nation on Reid's call for an investigation and notes, "In interviews with The Nation, the Hermanson family alleged that Triple Canopy initially misled them about the circumstances surrounding Adam Hermanson's death. Patricia Hermanson, Adam's mother, says she was told her son was found collapsed by his bed, not in a shower. The family also says that they were told Adam had no marks on his body only to discover later that he had wounds up and down his left arm. The Hermansons also say that a Triple Canopy representative told them a few days after Adam's death the company stripped his living quarters and removed the plumbing, water heater, electrical wiring and other equipment. If true, this could make determining the circumstances of Hermanson's death--and what role, if any, faulty wiring may have played--more difficult. Triple Canopy says it will not comment while an investigation is still pending." Staying on the subject of contractors, we'll note the opening of Sherwood Ross' "2 GOP-APPOINTED JUDGES SHAME AMERICA" (Veterans Today):The federal Appeals Court decision to toss a lawsuit claiming contractors tortured detainees in Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison is what you'd expect from a tyranny.The new ruling brushes off the charges by 212 Iraqis who said they or their late husbands were abused by U.S. personnel at Abu Ghraib. The suit charged private security firm CACI International Inc., of Arlington, Va., of crimes inside the Baghdad hellhole. But in a 2-1 ruling, the D.C. Court of Appeals said CACI "is protected by laws barring suits filed as the result of military activities during a time of war," the Associated Press reported. This opinion was written by Judge Laurence Silberman, a Reagan appointee, and supported by Judge Brett Kavanaugh, a Bush appointee. "During wartime, where a private service contractor is integrated into combatant activities over which the military retains command authority, a tort claim arising out of the contractor's engagement in such activities shall be pre-empted," Silberman wrote. If so, with about as many U.S.-led contract mercenaries as regular army involved in the Iraq conflict, this decision preposterously exempts some 150,000 fighters from legal action for any crimes they commit. It gives a shoot-to-kill pass to privateers such as Blackwater, whose operatives on one occasion are said to have gunned down 17 unarmed Iraqi civilians. "This abuse and torture of these prisoners detained during war time constituted war crimes and torture in violation of the Geneva Conventions of 1949, the U.S. War Crimes Act, the Convention against Torture, and the U.S. Federal Anti-torture Statute---felonies, punishable by death if death results as a violation thereof," said Francis Boyle, an international law authority at the University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana. "Judges Silberman and Kavanaugh have now become Accessories After the Fact to torture, war crimes and felonies in violation of United States federal law and international criminal law," Boyle asserted. (See if they are ever prosecuted!)
Finally, independent journalist David Bacon explores the intersection of labor and immigration in "Photos: Labor Camps in Hollister, Calif." (Political Affairs):The Campo Quintero (Quintero Camp) is a labor camp for farmworkers, operated by labor contractor Hope Quintero. Most of the workers living in this camp are also Mixtec, Triqui or other indigenous migrants from southern Mexico, although workers from other parts of Mexico also live here. The signs at the camp entrance say: "Drunks and scandalous people will absolutely not be admitted. Those who disobey will be thrown out of the camp." and "It is strictly prohibited to rob or take things without permission." Ramon Valadez Tadeo, a migrant from Guadalajara, shares his room with four other men, as does Jesus Ramon from Tijuana.Labor camps are gradually disappearing in California. Up through the 1960s and 70s, growers maintained camps where migrant workers could live while they were employed at the ranch. In some labor camps, single workers without families lived year around. This was especially true for Filipinos, who came from the islands as single men, and who were forbidden by antimiscegenation laws from marrying women of other nationalities and starting families.When the United Farm Workers grew strong in the 1970s and early 1980s, growers began tearing down the camps, disclaiming any responsibility for housing for the farm workers they employed. As a result, today many California farm workers sleep in cars, crowded in motels or apartments, or even under the trees.
David Bacon's latest book is Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press) which just won the CLR James Award. Bacon is also on KFPA's The Morning Show today (each Wednesday) discussing labor and immigration issues.
iraq
the los angeles timesned parkermohammed arrawithe new york times
marc santora
the times of london
the telegraph of londonalice fordhamahmeed rasheedsuadad al-salhykhalid al-ansarytim cockssamia nakhoul
mcclatchy newspapershannah allemsahar issabbc news
andrew north
martin chulov
abc newsjake tapperkaren travers
the wall street journalgina chon
chris floyd
oliver augustthe washington postann scott tyson
the economist
reutersdean baker
jeremy scahill
david baconsherwood ross
"The endemic corruption within the Iraqi system - not only the security forces, but the system - is still probably the biggest problem facing Iraq.
"I think the ministry of defence and ministry of interior probably are taking more action than most other ministries right now, so I'm confident that they're on the right path."
Those quotes are from US General Ray Odierno, top US commander in Iraq. Joe Biden's visit to Iraq (unannounced ahead of time as usual) appears to have caught Odierno by surprise because the talking point today conflicted with the report he provided to the BBC.
In other Iraq news, David Stringer (AP) reports that Daniel Carey is representing an Iraqi man who asserts that he was raped by two British soldiers in 2003 at a base in Basra and that the investigation into the alleged sexaul assault of "a 14-year-old Iraqi boy at Camp Breadbasket base in Basra in May 2003" continues. Just when you think you're immune to the sickness of it all, having learned of so much already, another item surfaces.
"Kangaroo Justice at Bagram" (Kenneth J. Theisen, World Can't Wait):
Most Americans have heard about the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo. But few are aware of a similar prison in Afghanistan at the Bagram military base. Detainees there have been captured or kidnapped by the U.S. from all over the world. Shortly after he took office, Obama announced that he would close Guantanamo (he has not yet done so). But instead of closing Bagram, he asked Congress for more money to expand its capacity to hold prisoners of the U.S. war of terror. His Department of Justice even went to court to fight the right of Bagram prisoners to challenge their detentions in a U.S. court earlier this year.
On Monday the Department of Defense announced that some 600 prisoners held in Bagram would have the right to challenge their detention. Is this a step forward or merely smoke and mirrors to pretend that the prisoners are being given their basic legal rights, while really denying them these rights?
Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman told reporters, “It's basically a review procedure that ensures people go in front of a panel periodically to give them the opportunity to contest their detention. It's something that we had used in Iraq to help us manage the detainee population and ultimately reduce the detainee population by ensuring that we are only holding those that are the most dangerous threats." According to Whitman the inmates would be “aided” by a uniformed "personal representative" who would "guide them through this administrative process, to help gather witness statements."
But these representatives would not be lawyers and they work for the military, not the prisoners. This is nothing more than a kangaroo procedure. In the early days of military commissions and tribunals at Gitmo a similar useless procedure was followed. Detainees were given the illusion of justice, while being held for years.
So we're going to have for-show 'change' to go with a helping of for-show 'justice'?
For those who are younger (I'm not being sarcastic) and wondering, no, Bush did not get a free pass like this in 2001. By August, he was facing huge criticism and loud criticism. 9-11 gave him a teflon coating that lasted for a bit with those of us on the left. It lasted forever with the media. But, no, this is not natural, this hero worship of Barack.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Tuesday, September 15, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, a journalist is released from prison and says he was tortured in a Baghdad press conference, Alice Fordham reports on Iraqi prison conditions, US Vice President Joe Biden makes a sneak visit to Iraq, Nouri goes "on a charm offensive," and more.
Iraqi journalist Muntadhar al-Zeidi (also spelled Muntadar al-Zaidi in some outlets) has been released from pison today in Baghdad. December 14th, Bully Boy Bush (still occupying the White House at that time) held a press conference in Baghdad with Nouri al-Maliki, prime minister and US-installed thug, where they lied and smiled and signed the treaties Bush pushed through (Strategic Framework Agreement and the treaty masquerading as a Status Of Forces Agreement.). Muntadhar was a journalist attending the press conference."This is a gift from the Iraqis. This is the farewell kiss you dog!" Muntadhar exclaimed hurling a shoe at Bush. And then, hurling a second shoe, "This is from the widows, the orphans and those who were killed in Iraq." Nouri's thugs pounced on Muntadhar and beat him up. He was then whisked away and, for weeks, denied all but one visitation with his family and attorney. In December, many in the press (including the New York Times) ran with a forced confession, presenting it as truth and asking no questions about it. He was sentenced to three years in prison but released today. ITV News (video clip) covers the release here. Alice Fordham and Richard Spencer (Telegraph of London) explain, "The three-year jail term for assaulting a foreign head of state was reduced on appeal to one year, with a three-month remission for good conduct." Martin Chulov (Guardian) states the release "was met with muted celebration in Baghdad but rapturous applause in some corners of the Arab world, where the 30-year-old television journalist is feted as a David and Goliath figure for his act of defiance." BBC describes the scene at al Baghdadiya TV (where Muntadhar works): "Arriving at the al Baghdadiya compound, a trumpeter and two drummers sounded a welcome for Mr Zaidi - and in his honour, three sheep were slaughtered live on his own channel." Richard Spencer (Telegraph of London) adds a list of gifts being offered to the reporter such as, "The Emir of Qatar has offered a godlen statue of a horse."
BBC News reports Muntadhar stated today he was tortured: "Shortly after his release from nine months in a Baghdad prison, Muntadar al-Zaidi demanded an apology - and said he would name the officials later." Ned Parker and Mohammed Arrawi (Los Angeles Times) quote him stating today, ""Here I am free and the country is still a prisoner." Marc Santora (New York Times) adds, "He claimed that he was beaten with pipes, steel cables and electric shocks while in custody. He added that he believed there were many who would like to see him dead, including unnamed American intelligence agencies." Ahmeed Rasheed, Suadad al-Salhy, Khalid al-Ansary, Tim Cocks and Samia Nakhoul (Reuters) quote his bother Uday stating, "I wish Bush could see our happineess. When President Bush looks back and turns the pages of his life, he will see the shoes of Muntazer al-Zaidi on every page." Phillippe Naughton and Richard Kerbaj (Times of London) describe the reporter, "Sporting a thick beard and wearing a sash in the colours of the Iraqi national flag around his shoulders, Mr al-Zaidi was unrepentant after his release from jail after serving nine months of a one-year sentence." McClatchy Newspapers' Sahar Issa provides a full translation of Muntadhar's remarks and this is an excerpt:
Firstly, I give my thanks and my regards to everyone who stood beside me, whether inside my country, in the Islamic world, in the free world. There has been a lot of talk about the action and about the person who took it, and about the hero and the heroic act, and the symbol and the symbolic act. But, simply, I answer: What compelled me to confront is the injustice that befell my people, and how the occupation wanted to humiliate my homeland by putting it under its boot.
And how it wanted to crush the skulls of (the homeland's) sons under its boots, whether sheikhs, women, children or men. And during the past few years, more than a million martyrs fell by the bullets of the occupation and the country is now filled with more than 5 million orphans, a million widows and hundreds of thousands of maimed. And many millions of homeless because of displacement inside and outside the country.
We used to be a nation in which the Arab would share with the Turkman and the Kurd and the Assyrian and the Sabean and the Yazid his daily bread. And the Shiite would pray with the Sunni in one line. And the Muslim would celebrate with the Christian the birthday of Christ, may peace be upon him. And despite the fact that we shared hunger under sanctions for more than 10 years, for more than a decade.
Our patience and our solidarity did not make us forget the oppression. Until we were invaded by the illusion of liberation that some had. (The occupation) divided one brother from another, one neighbor from another, and the son from his uncle. It turned our homes into neverending funeral tents. And our graveyards spread into parks and roadsides. It is a plague. It is the occupation that is killing us, that is violating the houses of worship and the sanctity of our homes and that is throwing thousands daily into makeshift prisons.
I am not a hero, and I admit that. But I have a point of view and I have a stance. It humiliated me to see my country humiliated. And to see my Baghdad burned. And my people being killed. Thousands of tragic pictures remained in my head, and this weighs on me every day and pushes me toward the righteous path, the path of confrontation, the path of rejecting injustice, deceit and duplicity. It deprived me of a good night's sleep.
Dozens, no, hundreds, of images of massacres that would turn the hair of a newborn white used to bring tears to my eyes and wound me. The scandal of Abu Ghraib. The massacre of Fallujah, Najaf, Haditha, Sadr City, Basra, Diyala, Mosul, Tal Afar, and every inch of our wounded land. In the past years, I traveled through my burning land and saw with my own eyes the pain of the victims, and hear with my own ears the screams of the bereaved and the orphans. And a feeling of shame haunted me like an ugly name because I was powerless.
Again, that is an excerpt. A small one. He outlines many things in speech including the torture he says he experienced. McClatchy's Hannah Allam notes he states "Iraqi guards tortured him with whippings and electric shocks during his nine-month detention. He was missing at least one front tooth. The focus of Zaidi's speech Tuesday wasn't on his own ordeal, however, but the death and destruction that Iraqis have experienced since the U.S.-led invasion of 2003." CNN reports (link has text and video) he's now heading to Greece, citing his brother Dhirgham al-Zaidi, "for medical treatment."
His claims of torture are not surprising and Iraq's prisons were the subject of a report on Sunday by Alice Fordham (writing for the Christian Science Monitor):
In a room thick with heat and sweat, light from a small window falls on rows of squatting prisoners and plastic bags of belongings hung from nails on every inch of the wall. The guard explains that 74 men live in this room, which is roughly 10 by 20 feet. A further 85 are usually in the corridor, he adds, while 12 are kept next to the toilet.
This is Hibhib prison on the outskirts of Baquba, the dusty, volatile capital of Diyala Province roughly 40 miles from Baghdad.
It is just one of the prisons in the province where detainees and US forces allege overcrowding, lengthy pretrial detention, and torture used to extract confessions. While the conditions here may be more severe than elsewhere in the country, Iraq's national detention system as a whole has been harshly criticized by Western human rights organizations.
A December 2008 report by the New York-based watchdog Human Rights Watch (HRW) went as far as to assert a "disturbing continuity" with Saddam Hussein-era detention. A committee set up by the Iraqi government in June is investigating abuses. But a lack of accountability and political will, say human rights workers, are serious impediments to reversing the culture of abuse cultivated under Mr. Hussein.
US Vice President Joe Biden is in Iraq. He landed there today on an unannounced visit. Scott Wilson (Washington Post) reports of his landing, "As he emerged from his C-17 aircraft into a hot dusk about 4:50 p.m. local time, the vice president was greeted by Gen. Ray Odierno, the top U.S. commander in Iraq; U.S. Ambassador Christopher Hill; and Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari. Biden's national security adviser, Tony Blinken, and deputy secretary of State Jim Steinberg followed him through the welcome line." Karen Travers (ABC News) reports he stated he believes a referendum on the Status Of Forces Agreement will take place at some point. Edwin Chen (Bloomberg News) quotes his use of "optimistic" to describe US military leaders on Iraqi security forces abilities to increase security functions in their country and notes the top military commander in Iraq, Gen Ray Odierno, used the term "stable" to describe security in Iraq. Really? Too bad the news cycle already had an Odierno injection today. He'd just spoken to BBC News before the visit and painted a far bleaker picture: "It's important to see this through. I concern myself that people don't forget about Iraq, and what we're trying to accomplish here [. . .]" BBC: "BBC correspondent Andrew North says that Gen Odierno was choosing his words with care. But he was giving a clear message, that with the situation still fragile here, the US cannot leave Iraq early."
Karen Travers ABC news report is text but it does have video of Biden speaking in Iraq to reporters including when he declares, "I've made -- this is my third trip since we've been elected. The second trip since we've been sworn in and I'll be back -- I'll be back again. And, uh, I'm coming back to speak with the Iraq leadership." Iraqi leadership? In last Tuesday's snapshot, The Economist editorial entitled "Iraq's freedoms under threat: Could a police state return" was noted:
In any event, Mr Maliki and his friends are trying to secure as much control as they can over the levers of power in the run-up to a general election in January, all the more feverishly since a rash of big bombings in Baghdad in the past two months has badly dented his reputation as a guarantor of public safety. His government is also seeking to tighten rules to regulate political parties and independent associations (including charities), causing still more alarm. "This is not how you build a democracy," says Maysoon al-Damluji, a liberal member of parliament.
Chris Floyd (Empire Burlesque) weighs in on the editorial and notes a 2008 piece he wrote:
The 2008 post goes on to detail just some of the vast amount of information, readily available in mainstream newspapers and magazines, about the American use of death squads and "paramilitaries" to carry out "extrajudicial killings" of people accused -- by someone, somewhere, for some reason or no reason at all -- of being "terrorists" or "insurgents," or "bad guys," to use the playground parlance so favored by our high priests and their media acolytes. These killings, these "dirty squads," have been part of the occupation of Iraq since the beginning, as has the systematic use of torture and the unlawful detention of innocent people. That al-Maliki is carrying on the practices and policies of those who put him into power should come as no surprise -- not even to the Economist.
Last Thursday, Oliver August (Times of London) reported, "The Iraqi opposition accused Nouri al-Maliki, the Prime Minister, yesterday of purging the American-trained security apparatus so that he could attain quasi-dictatorial powers. Mr al-Maliki, who is facing a tough election battle, has dismissed three high-profile members of the Ministry of Interior, which oversees the fight against insurgent groups. He has also forced the resignation of the head of the intelligence service and replaced several police and army commanders in the last few weeks. The moves provoked outrage among political opponents, who worry about the rise of a new police state and accuse the Prime Minister of using the aftermath of last month's massive bomb attack in Baghdad to make a power grab." Gina Chon (Wall St. Journal) reports today that Nouri's "embarked on a charm offensive agmong Shiites in the south of the country, a crucial but fickle electorate, in his bid to hold on to power in Iraq's January parliamentary vote." The voters he is hoping to woo complain about public services including the water -- or lack of -- which lead Nouri to promise a multi-million dollar project that will provide Basra with potable water. Suddenly, that's an issue. It's funny how when Nouri hits the campaign trail he appears to 'discover' that not everyone lives in the lap of luxury he does.
On Al Jazeera's latest Inside Iraq (which began airing Friday night), the topic was the political situation in Iraq with an emphasis on what the death of Abdel Aziz al-Hakim may mean. Joining host Jassim Azzawi for the discussion were Iraqi Parliamentarians Kassim Daoud and Adnan Pachachi along with National Dialogue Front leader Saleh al-Mutlaq.
Jassim Azzawi: And now we are joined from Dubai by Kassim Daoud, the leader of the Solidarity Bloc, and from Baghdad Saleh al-Mutlaq, leader of the National Dialogue Front in Iraq and from London by Iraq's elder statesman Adnan Pachachi who is also a member of Iraq's Parliament. Gentlemen, welcome to Inside Iraq. Kassim, let me start with you. al-Maliki has refused to join the new bloc that has been created and you are a member of that bloc, the Iraqi National Alliance primarily because of the presence of Ibrahim al-Jaafari and perhaps because of Moqtada al-Sadr. Can Maliki win without your bloc?
Kassim Daoud: Well that's a very difficult question. I mean it's premature to answer the question like this to comment that the Alliance, actually, is still open to everybody. We announced it as a bloc which has to be the foundation for the national mandate or the national enterprise. We cannot say that Maliki didn't join us so far, the negotiation is still going on.
Jassim Azzawi: Kassim Daoud, it seems to me that his answer is final. He wanted to be the sole candidate to run for the premiership as well as he wanted a limitation on to Ibrahim al-Jaafari and Moqtada al-Sadr blocked. That has become amply clear.
Kassim Daoud: Well the problem before you is clear but for me since I'm an insider, actually, I'm not looking at the situation as it is. The guy having sort of a political mandate, he would like to pursue with his mandate. The Alliance would like to -- their own mandate so I cannot say the negotiation terminated. I think still we have room although the room is probably slim but I think that we cannot give such a sharp answer till we have to wait for probably too more weeks.
Jassim Azzawi: Slim indeed it is. Adnan Pachachi, as politicians with your finger on the pulse of the Iraqi body politics, how much distrust is there among the political parties?
Adnan Pachachi: Well we feel that the present government has not done its duty properly. We still have corruption, the security situation is still very fragile, incompetence in many departments of state is very clear and, of course, sectarianism still plays a very important role. And the security forces have been heavily infiltrated and they don't seem able to manage the affairs of security of the country. As you know, I personally, and many others -- from the very beginning -- of the invasion of Iraq, we were against sectarianism as a basis for political activity and that's why I joined the National Iraqis' list which has no sectarian color, which includes the people from various sects and nationalities and we feel that this is what the Iraqi people want. As it was very clear in the provincial elections some months ago.
Jassim Azzawi: Since you mentioned the Iraqi National List which is headed by the former Iraqi Prime Minister, Iyad Allawi, who if I am not mistaken, Saleh Mutlaq, you are right now in negotiations with him as well as a few other parties to create a balancing power against this Iraqi National Alliance. Can you tell us how far have you gone with this negotiation? Can we expect an announcement soon?
Saleh al-Mutlaq: Well with Dr. Allawi, we are very new to each other. We have been negotiating with each other for quite a long time and we don't see that big difference is between us actually so the possibility of having an alliance between us, which gather us, is quite high and it's probably going to be after the 8th that we're going to announce something. Anyway, we think, Mr. Jassim, there are about seventy percent of Iraqis who did not participate in the election before. Those are the people who are against the political process or they are not satisfied with this political process and they are against the existing government and the existing parties who are running the government now. We look forward to joining those people and to encourage them to participate in the election. The problem --
Jassim Azzawi: And they want leadership, Saleh Mutlaq? I understand that you are also negotiating with three, four other parties. What we have heard from the media right now, it is a question of the leadership: Who's going to head that list and whether it's going to be a collective leadership or not?
Saleh al-Mutlaq: Well I don't think we should disagree on the leadership. I think that the image that we are trying to put is that the competition is who is going to participate in saving the country? Not in leading the country at this time -- leading the country or being the prime minister or president without doing something to Iraq which is now in a very serious situation is not going to do much. What I heard from Dr. Allawi is that he's not interested in having the power if he cannot do the change in Iraq. And this is also my belief too -- that it is not a matter of having the pulse of this government, it is a matter of saving the country which is going to fall apart unless there is a group of elite people who can lead the country to a safe place. Otherwise, this country is going to be run again by the Islamists for another four years, by extremists, by sectarian people, then the country is going to face a very serious and difficult situation which is going to be even more difficult for the people to whom are going to come after those people who are going to correct the mistakes and damage which is gong to happen if the Islamists --
Jassim Azzawi: Indeed.
Saleh al-Mutlaq: -- are going to run the country for another four years.
Jassim Azzawi: Indeed, Saleh al-Mutlaq, it's gong to be a vicious circle. Since we talked about the Islamists and the leadership, let me go back to Kassim Daoud. Right now the new alliance that has been created, Ammar [C.i. note: wrong name dropped in between] al-Hakim is going to be the new leader of that alliance. He's a young man, he's the son of Abdel Aziz al-Hakim. Surely, he does have the experience in order to carry the mantle of his father?
Kassim Daoud: Well first of all let me just say some comments on Dr. Mutlaq's statement. Unfortunately he gave a figure that 70% of the Iraqis didn't participate in the elections. I'm really surprising from where he got this percent or this data.
Saleh al-Mutlaq: This is, this is the reality. Apart from the --
Kassim Daoud: Come on, come on --
Saleh al-Mutlaq: -- that has been published --
Kassim Daoud: -- Iraq announced their statistic and the United Nations [. . .] their statistics. Nothing like this at all. The participation was in the first election around 79% and in the provincial election 54% --
Jassim Azzawi: And yet you must agree, Kassim Daoud,
Kassim Daoud: -- these things.
Jassim Azzawi: -- there was a large segment, a big swarth of the Iraqis, they were disenfranchised simply because of what they have seen up to the election of 2005 and then they
Kassim Daoud: -- this is, this is a different issue.
Jassim Azzawi: -- decided to boycott the election.
Kassim Daoud: -- is a different issue. No, no, no. This is a different issue. But what did he say really --
Saleh al-Mutlaq: I'm talking about, Mr. Jassim, I am talking about the last election --
Jassim Azzawi: The provincial election.
Saleh al-Mutlaq: -- I was on the ground in many areas, the participation was 20 to 25% only and what was published --
Kassim Daoud: This is not true. The participation 54 [percent] and this is an official figure which was supported by the representative and the monitoring of the United Nations. Anyway.
Jassim Azzawi: The percentage aside, Kassim Doud, let's- let's go back to this Islamist tinge of the National Iraqi Alliance. I'm the first to recognize that there are some secular parties, very small one, in this new National Alliance and yet the Islamist tinge, so to speak, covers everybody inside it.
Kassim Daoud: Well again, Mr. Jassim, let me correct something. Regarding to Abdel Aziz al-Hakim's son, he's Ammar al-Hakim not [C.I. note: wrong name] al-Hakim, just to correct this information. Regarding to the alliance actually, yes indeed it includes many names, many secular blocs besides the Islamist and the aim of this alliance as I mentioned at the beginning that our vision, that we would want to create or establish the foundation of the bloc or National Alliance headed or leaded by a clear political mandate and this is what I wish to get over from the sectarian or sectarianims. Plus, as Dr. Pachachi said, that we are now lookng for many things. And the philosophy of the alliance, one of these alliances, that we are not anymore governed toward the -- we are governed toward the competence.
That's an excerpt of the discussion. Richard Kerbaj (Times of London) notes that Joe Biden's trip into the Green Zone today took place as the Green Zone was shelled with mortars. CNN reports, "CNN's Cal Perry said he heard four loud 'booms.' Warning alarms were sounded, and security was stepped up". Reuters adds the Baghdad mortar attack resulted in 2 Iraqis being killed and five injured ("They fell shortly after U.S. Vice President Joe Biden flew into Iraq for talks with Iraqi leaders.").
In other reported violence today . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Kirkuk roadside bombing which injured two police officers and one civilian. Reuters notes a Falluja roadside bombing which left three people injured and, dropping back to Monday, a Baghdad roadside bombing which injured one person.
Stabbings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 person stabbed to death in Kirkuk.
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 police officer wounded in a machine gun attack outside his home. Reuters drops back to Monday to note 1 Iraqi soldier shot dead in an attack on a Mosul checkpoint.
Today, David Finkel's The Good Soldiers is released -- his book about embedding with the US military in Iraq. Ann Scott Tyson (Washington Post) reports the book "provides a graphic, second-by-second description of the U.S. military's 2007 killing of two Reuters journalists" Namir Noor-Eldeen and Saeed Chmagh in Baghdad July 12, 2007. She quotes the wire agency's attorney Thomas Kim, "We continue to have questions whether or not the actions taken by the soldiers in the area that led to the deaths of the two Reuters journalists were necessary and appropriate. My goal is to understand the basic on which the military concluded that the shooting was justified." As far back as July 16, 2007, Dean Yaters (Reuters) was reporting that the wire agency was asking for a full inquiry into the killings. At the time of their deaths, the US military was asserting that they had encountered 'insurgents' and gunfire was exchanged. Ann Scott Tyson reports Finkel's article backs up the claim that 'insurgents' were present and firefights had taken place. The cameras were apparently mistaken for weapons according to Finkel's account: The gunner tracked Noor-Eldeen as he fled into a pile of trash and fired three more bursts with the cannon, killing him as he could be seen trying to stand in a cloud of dust. Chmagh was wounded and began trying to push himself up on his knees and crawl away, but could move only a few inches. The crew saw that Chmagh was alive, but initially did not shoot him because he was unarmed. However, when a van drove up and two men tried to pick up Chmagh, the crew requested permission to fire and received it. The gunner opened fire, killing Chmagh and the two men, and injuring two children who were inside the van.
Staying with US reporters, last Friday a Democracy Now! segment with Jeremy Scahill was finally aired. (It was a taped segment.) It was Iraq-related so it wasn't 'pressing'. Too bad. On that segment, Jeremy called out Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid for his silence over the death by electrocution in Iraq of one of Reid's own constituents. Las Vegas' KTNV reports that yesterday Reid suddenly became interested in the death of Adam Hermanson and wants an investigation. We highlighted Jeremy's report in The Nation last week but if you're late to the story -- or confused because there have been so many deaths by electrocution in Iraq -- click here. Today Scahill reports at The Nation on Reid's call for an investigation and notes, "In interviews with The Nation, the Hermanson family alleged that Triple Canopy initially misled them about the circumstances surrounding Adam Hermanson's death. Patricia Hermanson, Adam's mother, says she was told her son was found collapsed by his bed, not in a shower. The family also says that they were told Adam had no marks on his body only to discover later that he had wounds up and down his left arm. The Hermansons also say that a Triple Canopy representative told them a few days after Adam's death the company stripped his living quarters and removed the plumbing, water heater, electrical wiring and other equipment. If true, this could make determining the circumstances of Hermanson's death--and what role, if any, faulty wiring may have played--more difficult. Triple Canopy says it will not comment while an investigation is still pending." Staying on the subject of contractors, we'll note the opening of Sherwood Ross' "2 GOP-APPOINTED JUDGES SHAME AMERICA" (Veterans Today):The federal Appeals Court decision to toss a lawsuit claiming contractors tortured detainees in Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison is what you'd expect from a tyranny.The new ruling brushes off the charges by 212 Iraqis who said they or their late husbands were abused by U.S. personnel at Abu Ghraib. The suit charged private security firm CACI International Inc., of Arlington, Va., of crimes inside the Baghdad hellhole. But in a 2-1 ruling, the D.C. Court of Appeals said CACI "is protected by laws barring suits filed as the result of military activities during a time of war," the Associated Press reported. This opinion was written by Judge Laurence Silberman, a Reagan appointee, and supported by Judge Brett Kavanaugh, a Bush appointee. "During wartime, where a private service contractor is integrated into combatant activities over which the military retains command authority, a tort claim arising out of the contractor's engagement in such activities shall be pre-empted," Silberman wrote. If so, with about as many U.S.-led contract mercenaries as regular army involved in the Iraq conflict, this decision preposterously exempts some 150,000 fighters from legal action for any crimes they commit. It gives a shoot-to-kill pass to privateers such as Blackwater, whose operatives on one occasion are said to have gunned down 17 unarmed Iraqi civilians. "This abuse and torture of these prisoners detained during war time constituted war crimes and torture in violation of the Geneva Conventions of 1949, the U.S. War Crimes Act, the Convention against Torture, and the U.S. Federal Anti-torture Statute---felonies, punishable by death if death results as a violation thereof," said Francis Boyle, an international law authority at the University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana. "Judges Silberman and Kavanaugh have now become Accessories After the Fact to torture, war crimes and felonies in violation of United States federal law and international criminal law," Boyle asserted. (See if they are ever prosecuted!)
Finally, independent journalist David Bacon explores the intersection of labor and immigration in "Photos: Labor Camps in Hollister, Calif." (Political Affairs):The Campo Quintero (Quintero Camp) is a labor camp for farmworkers, operated by labor contractor Hope Quintero. Most of the workers living in this camp are also Mixtec, Triqui or other indigenous migrants from southern Mexico, although workers from other parts of Mexico also live here. The signs at the camp entrance say: "Drunks and scandalous people will absolutely not be admitted. Those who disobey will be thrown out of the camp." and "It is strictly prohibited to rob or take things without permission." Ramon Valadez Tadeo, a migrant from Guadalajara, shares his room with four other men, as does Jesus Ramon from Tijuana.Labor camps are gradually disappearing in California. Up through the 1960s and 70s, growers maintained camps where migrant workers could live while they were employed at the ranch. In some labor camps, single workers without families lived year around. This was especially true for Filipinos, who came from the islands as single men, and who were forbidden by antimiscegenation laws from marrying women of other nationalities and starting families.When the United Farm Workers grew strong in the 1970s and early 1980s, growers began tearing down the camps, disclaiming any responsibility for housing for the farm workers they employed. As a result, today many California farm workers sleep in cars, crowded in motels or apartments, or even under the trees.
David Bacon's latest book is Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press) which just won the CLR James Award. Bacon is also on KFPA's The Morning Show today (each Wednesday) discussing labor and immigration issues.
iraq
the los angeles timesned parkermohammed arrawithe new york times
marc santora
the times of london
the telegraph of londonalice fordhamahmeed rasheedsuadad al-salhykhalid al-ansarytim cockssamia nakhoul
mcclatchy newspapershannah allemsahar issabbc news
andrew north
martin chulov
abc newsjake tapperkaren travers
the wall street journalgina chon
chris floyd
oliver augustthe washington postann scott tyson
the economist
reutersdean baker
jeremy scahill
david baconsherwood ross
Monday, September 14, 2009
Isaiah, Shamus Cooke, Ava and C.I.
Kat's "Kat's Korner: Get Under The Covers" is wonderful and I'm enjoying the album which I just downloaded. Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "He's Going To Scare You To Death" is also wonderful.
"Wall Street Under Obama" (Shamus Cooke, CounterPunch):
Obama is treating financial regulation in the same manner he confronted health care: radical language was used to please public opinion with little action attached. The financial system is similar to health care in another way as well, prompting Obama into minimal action: Just like skyrocketing health care costs cut into the profits of many corporations, the shoddy financial system is a threat to corporations in general. This is the reason that some kind of reform is being pursued by the White House.
Well who could have guessed that someone who ran a campaign based not on ideals or needs but on empty words would have a problem if elected? Who would have thought that pretty words wouldn't be enough to solve all the world's problems?
In other words, we all should have seen this coming.
"TV: The Suckers" (Ava and C.I., Third Estate Sunday Review):
Legal agreement to get out? There's no such thing. And it's hilarious to hear Bill Moyers misrepresent what a contract binds you to and what it doesn't -- Bill Moyers of all people (our CBS friends are laughing out loud right now). The United Nations did not authorize the Iraq War. They did do an authorization of the occupation -- after the invasion -- and that authorization is what gave the legal cover for foreign forces (including US troops) to be on the ground in Iraq. That expired twice with Nouri al-Maliki renewing it (over the objections of the Parliament). He was faced with renewing it for the third year in a row but the White House (Bully Boy Bush administration) decided to bypass the UN. Staying under UN authorization bound the United States to certain obligations (which the US was not living up to). Bypassing the UN to create a treaty between Iraq and the US was the way the White House elected to go. That treaty replaces the UN mandate. It can be replaced with another treaty, it can be extended or renegotiated as any contract can be.
And Nancy grasps that. She'd have to be brain dead (or Bill Moyers) not to. If the contract means the US leaves (that's not what it means) then why even talk about the possibility that increasing violence might result in the US remaining in Iraq? If the contract means the US leaves, that's what the contract means. But that's not what it means and the public has been repeatedly lied to about this.
And liars and fools like Tom Hayden are the problem. Barack's been hailed as a man of peace. Really? His Iraq 'plan' is not what he promised in those crowd pleasing campaign speeches. Ten months, he said in Houston, Texas in February 2008, ten months after being sworn in, US troops would be out of Iraq! It's nine months after he was sworn in. Over 130,000 US troops remain on the ground in Iraq.
And his 'plan' that Nancy and Bill and so many others discuss? That's Bush's plan.
Now what the treaty (Status Of Forces Agreement) does is what it was meant to, ease heat in the US over the illegal war. It's done that. It's led to so many fools and liars proclaiming the Iraq War over or almost over: Tom Hayden, CODESTINK, Raed Jarrar, throw a dart at the fringe radical and you'll draw blood from a fool swearing the Iraq War is over or about to be.
A few people grasp that. One who does is US Senator Russ Feingold. On Thursday, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee heard from US Ambassador to Iraq Chris Hill. From his exchange with Feingold (see Friday's snapshot for full exchange), we'll note this section:
Russ Feingold: The Iraqi government intends to hold a nation-wide referendum on the bi-lateral Status Of Forces Agreement and while there's been a lot of speculation about how this could impact a redeployment timetable, I'd like to also point out that both the Iraqi Parliament and the Iraqi people will have had a chance to vote on the agreement even though the US Senate has not. Can you assure us that any potential modifications to the Security Agreement will be submitted to the Senate for ratification?
Chris Hill: Uh, the issue of Senate ratification goes beyond my write but I will certainly take that question to the State Department and get you an official answer on that. I can give you my personal opinion on that.
Russ Feingold: Would you please?
Chris Hill: -- that you would not want to be changing this uh we would not engage in changing this security agreement without uh considerable consultation but as for the actual relationship between the Senate and the executive [branch] on this, I'd like to defer to our lawyers at the State Department.
Wow. If that treaty is the end of the Iraq War Treaty, Russ Feingold must have just wanted to waste time. But Feingold doesn't waste time. He doesn't speak just to enjoy his own voice. A contract that prolongs your presence (the SOFA prolonged the US presence by three years) does not mean that you leave.
Let's make it real simple. Paul Wesley, for example, may have signed a five-year contract with The Vampire Diaries. That doesn't mean he leaves in year six. If the show lasts that long (and it may -- its attempts at pathos will irk functioning adults but pre-teens and the overgrown pre-teens will lap it up), he may be smart enough to grasp that he's really got nothing in the works after this show. So he may decide to sign on for another year. Or two. Or three.
The SOFA only says the US will stay in Iraq for three years. The 'withdrawal' everyone pretends is an obligation is the same thing that was inherent in the UN mandate. If the UN mandate was not renewed, US forces had to leave Iraq.
Unless . . .
A new agreement of some form was reached. Enter the SOFA. But to read that mandate, you would think that when it was scrapped, the US and all other foreign forces had to leave.
When will The Vampire Diaries leave? It's a really bad show. But parents are non-existent and the trauma-drama dial has been turned to broil. As awful as it is to anyone who's already lived through the first 90210 or Dawson's Creek, for unformed minds, it's fresh. And for undeveloped minds who do remember the earlier shows, it's simple enough for them to handle. Sarah Jessica Parker's character breaks it down in the film Strangers With Candy when she says, "My point is, Gerri, somebody's always got it worse." That's what shows like The Vampire Diaries (or, for that matter, Bill Moyers Journal) sell. And for four years, as its core audience navigates real life high school, the melodrama swirling around Mystic Falls should make the audience grateful for what they see as their own comparatively dull lives. Shows like these don't run out of things to do or lose their steam, their audience just grows up.
I know that's a lengthy excerpt but I really loved Ava and C.I.'s article. I loved all three they did Sunday. I bailed on Third after about an hour. It was obvious to me that nothing would be accomplished. That wasn't the fault of anyone, it was just a vibe.
Reading Jim's "A note to our readers," it was obvious I had made the right decision. They ended up working and working and producing nothing. That's why Ava and C.I. ended up doing three articles. Dona also did a really wonderful piece called "Pet Peeve (Dona)." The three of them produced but, otherwise, as Jim details, it was not productive at all. Which, again, is why he ended up asking Ava and C.I. to go to bat three times. They normally do one article a week and that's really more than enough for them. If you read all three, you will see they worked like crazy and covered so much.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
"Wall Street Under Obama" (Shamus Cooke, CounterPunch):
Obama is treating financial regulation in the same manner he confronted health care: radical language was used to please public opinion with little action attached. The financial system is similar to health care in another way as well, prompting Obama into minimal action: Just like skyrocketing health care costs cut into the profits of many corporations, the shoddy financial system is a threat to corporations in general. This is the reason that some kind of reform is being pursued by the White House.
Well who could have guessed that someone who ran a campaign based not on ideals or needs but on empty words would have a problem if elected? Who would have thought that pretty words wouldn't be enough to solve all the world's problems?
In other words, we all should have seen this coming.
"TV: The Suckers" (Ava and C.I., Third Estate Sunday Review):
Legal agreement to get out? There's no such thing. And it's hilarious to hear Bill Moyers misrepresent what a contract binds you to and what it doesn't -- Bill Moyers of all people (our CBS friends are laughing out loud right now). The United Nations did not authorize the Iraq War. They did do an authorization of the occupation -- after the invasion -- and that authorization is what gave the legal cover for foreign forces (including US troops) to be on the ground in Iraq. That expired twice with Nouri al-Maliki renewing it (over the objections of the Parliament). He was faced with renewing it for the third year in a row but the White House (Bully Boy Bush administration) decided to bypass the UN. Staying under UN authorization bound the United States to certain obligations (which the US was not living up to). Bypassing the UN to create a treaty between Iraq and the US was the way the White House elected to go. That treaty replaces the UN mandate. It can be replaced with another treaty, it can be extended or renegotiated as any contract can be.
And Nancy grasps that. She'd have to be brain dead (or Bill Moyers) not to. If the contract means the US leaves (that's not what it means) then why even talk about the possibility that increasing violence might result in the US remaining in Iraq? If the contract means the US leaves, that's what the contract means. But that's not what it means and the public has been repeatedly lied to about this.
And liars and fools like Tom Hayden are the problem. Barack's been hailed as a man of peace. Really? His Iraq 'plan' is not what he promised in those crowd pleasing campaign speeches. Ten months, he said in Houston, Texas in February 2008, ten months after being sworn in, US troops would be out of Iraq! It's nine months after he was sworn in. Over 130,000 US troops remain on the ground in Iraq.
And his 'plan' that Nancy and Bill and so many others discuss? That's Bush's plan.
Now what the treaty (Status Of Forces Agreement) does is what it was meant to, ease heat in the US over the illegal war. It's done that. It's led to so many fools and liars proclaiming the Iraq War over or almost over: Tom Hayden, CODESTINK, Raed Jarrar, throw a dart at the fringe radical and you'll draw blood from a fool swearing the Iraq War is over or about to be.
A few people grasp that. One who does is US Senator Russ Feingold. On Thursday, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee heard from US Ambassador to Iraq Chris Hill. From his exchange with Feingold (see Friday's snapshot for full exchange), we'll note this section:
Russ Feingold: The Iraqi government intends to hold a nation-wide referendum on the bi-lateral Status Of Forces Agreement and while there's been a lot of speculation about how this could impact a redeployment timetable, I'd like to also point out that both the Iraqi Parliament and the Iraqi people will have had a chance to vote on the agreement even though the US Senate has not. Can you assure us that any potential modifications to the Security Agreement will be submitted to the Senate for ratification?
Chris Hill: Uh, the issue of Senate ratification goes beyond my write but I will certainly take that question to the State Department and get you an official answer on that. I can give you my personal opinion on that.
Russ Feingold: Would you please?
Chris Hill: -- that you would not want to be changing this uh we would not engage in changing this security agreement without uh considerable consultation but as for the actual relationship between the Senate and the executive [branch] on this, I'd like to defer to our lawyers at the State Department.
Wow. If that treaty is the end of the Iraq War Treaty, Russ Feingold must have just wanted to waste time. But Feingold doesn't waste time. He doesn't speak just to enjoy his own voice. A contract that prolongs your presence (the SOFA prolonged the US presence by three years) does not mean that you leave.
Let's make it real simple. Paul Wesley, for example, may have signed a five-year contract with The Vampire Diaries. That doesn't mean he leaves in year six. If the show lasts that long (and it may -- its attempts at pathos will irk functioning adults but pre-teens and the overgrown pre-teens will lap it up), he may be smart enough to grasp that he's really got nothing in the works after this show. So he may decide to sign on for another year. Or two. Or three.
The SOFA only says the US will stay in Iraq for three years. The 'withdrawal' everyone pretends is an obligation is the same thing that was inherent in the UN mandate. If the UN mandate was not renewed, US forces had to leave Iraq.
Unless . . .
A new agreement of some form was reached. Enter the SOFA. But to read that mandate, you would think that when it was scrapped, the US and all other foreign forces had to leave.
When will The Vampire Diaries leave? It's a really bad show. But parents are non-existent and the trauma-drama dial has been turned to broil. As awful as it is to anyone who's already lived through the first 90210 or Dawson's Creek, for unformed minds, it's fresh. And for undeveloped minds who do remember the earlier shows, it's simple enough for them to handle. Sarah Jessica Parker's character breaks it down in the film Strangers With Candy when she says, "My point is, Gerri, somebody's always got it worse." That's what shows like The Vampire Diaries (or, for that matter, Bill Moyers Journal) sell. And for four years, as its core audience navigates real life high school, the melodrama swirling around Mystic Falls should make the audience grateful for what they see as their own comparatively dull lives. Shows like these don't run out of things to do or lose their steam, their audience just grows up.
I know that's a lengthy excerpt but I really loved Ava and C.I.'s article. I loved all three they did Sunday. I bailed on Third after about an hour. It was obvious to me that nothing would be accomplished. That wasn't the fault of anyone, it was just a vibe.
Reading Jim's "A note to our readers," it was obvious I had made the right decision. They ended up working and working and producing nothing. That's why Ava and C.I. ended up doing three articles. Dona also did a really wonderful piece called "Pet Peeve (Dona)." The three of them produced but, otherwise, as Jim details, it was not productive at all. Which, again, is why he ended up asking Ava and C.I. to go to bat three times. They normally do one article a week and that's really more than enough for them. If you read all three, you will see they worked like crazy and covered so much.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
| Monday, September 14, 2009. Chaos andence continue, Barack finds a new apologist, the US military announces another death, Nouri fails to disclose income, a contractor is killed in Iraq, Chris Hill 'forgot' a few things when testifying to Congress, and more. As the world watches, a surprisig member of the Cult of St. Barack emerges. Jonathan Adams (Christian Science Monitor) reports a new tape, allegedly from alleged 9-11 ringleader Osama bin Laden has been released, maintains that US President Barack Obama has made George W. Bush's Iraq and Afghanistan Wars his own because Barack is "powerless" and, apparently, controlled by a some nefarious, worldwide Jewish lobby. Oooooh. He so scary. And so original. I mean, no one's ever attempted to allege a Jewish conspiracy before, right? No one ever mistook him for a brain but, even for him, this is something. The president of the United States is one of the most powerful positions in the world. In the last 100 years, it's pretty much been the most powerful position in the world. Whether Barack Obama uses the power wisely, poorly or not at all remains to be seen but he's not some lowly backbencher in the British Parliament. Claiming otherwise is as insane as insisting there's some international world conspiracy. Insane's really doesn't capture it. It's beyond insane, it's hate-riddled. It's a hatred for others that makes you insist there's some Jewish cabal and it's a hatred for others that makes you insist someon's preventing Barack Obama -- a grown man with a mind of his own -- from doing exactly what he wants to. Osama bin Laden's so insane, he should get his own Pacifica Radio program. From the Firehouse Studio. James Carroll (Boston Globe) writes of Barack's Wednesday speech: "The elephants in the congressional chamber last week were not the scowling Republicans, but Iraq and Afghanistan, neither of which was mentioned. [. . .] In Iraq, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is headed toward his own dubious election, coming in January, as his Shiite coalition crumbles, Sunnis openly sympathize with insurgents, and Kurdish alienation adds to the decentralized chaos. Meanwhile, Iraqi security forces are overwhelmed by renewed violence and the US determination to keep the three blocs together in one nation is overseen by Vice President Joe Biden, who spent the two years of his presidential campaign passionately denouncing the idea." Today the Defense Department announced Duane A. Thornsbury died in Baghdad on Saturday from "injuries sustained during a vehicle roll-over." Like so many service members' deaths, DoD adds, "The circumstances surrounding the incident are under investigation." If you look for the Multi-National Force announcement, you'll be looking in vain. They never announced the death -- the most important duty they are tasked with is announcing the deaths, DoD is responsible for putting a name to the fallen after families have been notified. They made five announcements on Saturday and two on Sunday but the death just wasn't important enough for them. The announcement brings the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4344. Maria St. Louis-Sanchez (Colorado Springs Gazette) reports Duane Thornsbury was no his third deployment to Iraq and had previously served there in 2003 and 2007. Jessika Lewis (State Journal) adds that he "enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserves back in April 1996 and came onto active duty service in September 2002". In the United States on Sunday there was a memorial service for seven soldiers who died September 17, 2008. From the September 18th snapshot: Turning to Iraq, last night CNN reported that a helicopter has crashed in Iraq claiming the lives of 5 US service members. Sameer N. Yacoub (AP) said the death toll is "seven U.S. soldiers" and cites M-NF as the source. M-NF updated it today announcing: "Seven U.S. Soldiers were killed when a CH-47 Chinook crashed about 100 km west of Basra at approximately 12:01 a.m. Thursday. The Chinook was part of a four-aircraft aerial convoy flying from Kuwait to Balad. The seven Soldiers were the only ones onboard the Chinook at the time of the crash. A British Quick Reaction Force team was dispatched from Basra to assist at the site. A road convoy in the vicinity was also diverted to the scene. The names of the deceased are being withheld pending notification of next of kin and official release by the Department of Defense The incident is under investigation, however enemy activity is not suspected." The Washington Post notes, "There was no word on the cause of the crash or whether hostile fire was involved." Camilla Hall and Michael Heath (Bloomberg News) report that the military is now publicly stating that this should be considered "an accident" on their 'initial' information but that the US military added, "At this time we are uncertain of the cause, but hostile fire has been ruled out." Sudarsan Raghavan (Washington Post) observes, "In total, that means 11 U.S. service members have died since Sunday for non-combat-related reasons" while noting the helicopter crash itself "was the deadliest U.S. helicopter accident in Iraq since Aug. 22 of last year, when a Black Hawk helicopter crashed in the northern part of the country, killing 14 U.S. soldiers." Joseph Giordono (Stars & Stripes) notes, "The AP reported that an aide to U.S. Rep. Mary Fallin, R-Okla., said four Texans and three from Oklahoma were among the seven National Guardsmen killed in [the helicopter crash[ . . . Fallin's spokesman Alex Weintz says the four Texans killed were soldiers from the Texas National Guard." ICCC lists 4168 as the number of US service members killed since the start of the illegal war with 17 for the month thus far. The seven who died in the September 2008 helicopter crash were Corry A. Edwards, Robert Vallejo II, Anthony Luke Mason, Brady J. Rudolf, Julio Ordonez, Daniel Eshbaugh and Michael E. Thompson. Chris Vaughn (Fort Worth Star-Telegram via Houston Chronicle) reports on yesterday's Texas ceremony, "Under a constant and soaking rain, the last of their remains were buried in a single battleship-gray casket at the top of a hill in the Dallas-Fort Worth National Cemetery, a fitting end, some said, because of their close relationship while alive." Jeffrey Weiss (Dallas Morning News) explains of the Army National Guard's 2-149 General Support Aviation Battalion's ceremony, "Ten weeks after their tour of Iraq formally ended, they assembled to celebrate their successes and surivavl -- and to mourn seven members of the unite who died in a helicopter crash weeks after arriving in Iraq. [. . .] More than 500 people -- family, freinds, comrades and fellow citizens -- braved Sunday's downpour for a brief graveside service at Dallas-Fort Worth National Cemetery then gathered for a set of prayers inside a hangar at the National Guard base where the unit is headquartered." Yesterday's ceremony for the seven who died in the helicopter crash took place on the same day a US helicopter came under fire in Mosul. Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports "the U.S. military returned fire killing one insurgent. The police responded to the situation and engaged the insurgents in a fire fight killing two more insurgents and captured another. Two policemen were killed during this confrontation." In other reported violence . . . Bombings? Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing which injured three people (including one police officer), another Baghdad roadside bombing which injured one person, a Baquba car bombing whcih wounded four people (two Iraqi service members), a Baquba roadside bombing which killed 1 man and injured his son, a Mosul roadside bombing which claimed the life of 1 police officer and left seven more wounded and another Mosul roadside bombing which claimed the life of 1 woman and wounded her daughter. Shootings? Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports an armed attack on an Iraqi military checkpoint which resulted in the death of 1 Iraqi soldier. Reuters notes a Jurf al-Sakhar home invasion in which the family of a police officer were ordered to leave the home, the police officer was shot dead and the house was set on fire and they drop back to last night to note an attack on a Jurf al-Sakhar police checkpoint which resulted in the death of 1 police officer and two more being injured. Kidnappings? Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a woman studying at the Institute of Technology in Kirkuk was kidnapped yesterday. The Jurf al-Sakhar home invasion today recalls another assault on a police officer's home yesterday. Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reported a home invasion in which four members of a family were killed (assailants used silencers) and David Rising (AP) added the home belonged to a police officer (Sgt Omed Abdul-Hamid) who was not home and his wife and three kids were killed "execution-style" in their sleep. Ned Parker and Ali Windawi (Los Angeles Times) explain the children were ages 2, 4 and 6 and quote the father stating, "I was astonished when I found my family, my wife and three children were killed while they were in their bed. Oh my God, may you take revenge on the killers . . . What is the guilt of my son Mohammed and he is an infant! What is the guilt of my small daughters?" The four deaths were among the 22 reported Sunday (26 people were reported injured). Yesterday, at The Third Estate Sunday Review, we noted the reported deaths for last week were 136 (230 reported wouned) ("On Sunday, there were 24 reported deaths and 7 reported wounded, Monday 26 dead and 44 wounded, Tuesday 27 dead and 42 wounded, Wednesday 13 dead and 38 wounded, Thursday 31 dead and 75 wounded, Friday 4 dead and 7 wounded and Saturday 11 dead and 27 wounded."). In Iraq, politicians are supposed to disclose all income. Despite that requirement, few do. The following positions have not made their financial disclosures (from 2006 through today, no disclosure): President, both Vice Presidents, Prime Minister, both Deputy Prime Ministers, Speaker of Parliament, Second Deputy of the Speaker, Minister of the Interior, Minister of Defense, Minister of Finance, Minister of Planning and the Governor of the Iraqi Central Bank. All have ignored the law demanding disclosures. An Iraqi correspondent for McClatchy reports on the failure to disclose and also explains, "The 2008 report of the Iraqi integrity commission, the governmental anti-corruption watchdog body, said that corruption cases totaling $1.3 billion were pardoned, and most of it came from the Iraqi ministry of defense. The $1.3 billion is the value of only 11% of the corruption cases that were pardoned in 2008 -- the others didn't have a dollar value given -- and the number of defendants involved in corruption cases who were pardoned in 2008 is 2,772 defendants." Nouri al-Maliki would be the prime minister who has refused to report his income. Last week, US Ambassador to Iraq Chris Hill testified to Congress (see Thursday's snapshot here, Friday's here and Kat's post here). Appearing Thursday afternoon before the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, Hill faced questions from the Committee Chair John Kerry. John Kerry: Mr. Ambassador, Syria and Iraq had indicated a willingness to try to cooperate on the borders and deal with the foreign fighter issue which is very much in our interest and we've been pushing that on both sides. But the bombings on August 19th have now seen, you know sort of an explosion between the two countries, they've pulled their ambassadors and uh traded recriminations so where do we stand on that? What if anything can be done to end that? Will Turkish mediation make a difference? Is that the thing that we should be advocating at this point? And what do you think is the process for getting back to the place that we'd hoped to be. Chris Hill: Well, I uh think we would like to see Iraq and uh Syria have a good relationship and it was rather ironic that on August 18th -- that is one day before the bombing -- Prime Minister [Nouri al-] Maliki was in Damascus and they signed a number of economic agreements. Uh, obviously, things are -- things are in a difficult state and things are frankly on hold right now through this uh, through this uh down turn n the relationship. The Iraqis are very concerned about the fact that some senior Ba'athist leaders went and found refuge in Syria and remain in Syria. And the Iraqis have understandably called for their return to-to Iraq. That issue needs to be, frankly, needs to be worked through. No, he doesn't know the meaning of "irony," nor does he know how to tell the truth. There was nothing "ironic" about Nouri's visit to Damascus and, in fact, his actions in Damascus were exactly his actions following August 18th. What Chris Hill couldn't get honest about, David Ignatius (Washington Post) explained yesterday: An example of the tricky regional dynamic is Syria. The Obama administration has been working carefully to rebuild U.S.-Syrian relations. Representatives of Central Command made two visits to Damascus this summer to discuss security cooperation on Iraq. This led to a tentative agreement that U.S. and Syrian military representatives would meet Aug. 20 on the Iraq-Syria border. U.S. officials proposed including Iraq, as well. Not so fast, protested Maliki. He warned Chris Hill, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, that policing Iraq's border was an issue for Iraq, not America. When Maliki visited Damascus on Aug. 18, he told President Bashar al-Assad that he opposed the Syrian-American plan to discuss Iraqi security and would boycott the Aug. 20 session. Maliki also demanded that Assad turn over Baathist leaders who were living in Syria. Assad refused, saying that these Baathists had opposed Saddam Hussein's regime and posed no threat. The Maliki-Assad summit meeting "was a failure," says one Arab official. US tax payers paid for Chris Hill to return to the US and appear before Congress. They paid Congress' electricity bill for the lights and air conditioning as Hill tesitified. It would have been a lot more productive and a lot less expensive if they'd just hired a limo to bring David Ignatius to Congress and let him testify. August 18th, Nouri was blustering and threatening Syria. He's continued to do so. AFP reports that Nouri plans to send a delegation to Turkey tomorrow with alleged evidence of Syria's involvement in the August 19th bombings. Turkey rules Syria? No. But Nouri's gotten no where with bullying Syria and now he wants to run to a third-party like a little tattle-tale. Tattle-tales are usually cowards and Nouri is a coward. He's one of the exiles the US installed. Nouri fled Iraq like a little coward many, many years ago. He was part of the group calling for the US to invade and, after they did, 'brave' Nouri put a little concealer over the yellow streak down his back and tip-toed back into Iraq. Chris Hill explained to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that Nouri considers himself an expert on Syria because he hid out there for 18 years. AP reports that Nouri is actually demanding that Syria hand over 179 people. Though he lives to bully Syria, Nouri won't lift a finger to stop the targeting of Iraq's LGBT community. The criminals Nouri claims to be unable to find are part of a major report by Afif Sarhan and Jason Burke (The Observer): Sitting on the floor, wearing traditional Islamic clothes and holding an old notebook, Abu Hamizi, 22, spends at least six hours a day searching internet chatrooms linked to gay websites. He is not looking for new friends, but for victims. "It is the easiest way to find those people who are destroying Islam and who want to dirty the reputation we took centuries to build up," he said. When he finds them, Hamizi arranges for them to be attacked and sometimes killed. Hamizi, a computer science graduate, is at the cutting edge of a new wave of violence against gay men in Iraq. Made up of hardline extremists, Hamizi's group and others like it are believed to be responsible for the deaths of more than 130 gay Iraqi men since the beginning of the year alone. The deputy leader of the group, which is based in Baghdad, explained its campaign using a stream of homophobic invective. "Animals deserve more pity than the dirty people who practise such sexual depraved acts," he told the Observer. "We make sure they know why they are being held and give them the chance to ask God's forgiveness before they are killed." Over the weekend Nouri did get some news to please him. Khalid al-Ansary, Tim Cocks and Matthew Jones (Reuters) report that Nouri's cabinet "approved a draft law paving the way for national elections" which would allow voters to select individual candidates and "not just parties" -- a major gift to Nouri who has been excluded from the new (and largest) Shi'ite coalition. Meanwhile, AP reported yesterday that KBR contractor Lucas Vinson was shot dead on Camp Speicher (US base in Iraq) and a US soldier stands accused of the shooting. Tim Cocks and Ralph Boulton (Reuters) added the unnamed US soldier has been arrested in the shooting. ". . . in Iraq the bombings continue, the electricity is still out a lot of the time, most of the millions of refugees have yet to return, the internally displaced remain internally displaced, and the political equation is very much up in the air." That's David Finkel, author of the new book The Good Soldiers, from an online discussion at the Washington Post website today. Here's one exchange: Boston: In reading your heartwrenching story about 2-16 and the death of Joshua Reeves, I am saddened by the juxtaposition of that story (and thousands more like it) with the detached and seemingly breezy decision by Cheney/Rumsfeld/Bush to pursue war in Iraq in the days and months after 9-11 (as chronicled by other Post writers' books), using that American tragedy as an opportunity to initiate this war of choice. That being said, and given the reality of our presence in Iraq, what factors will historians look at to determine if the surge was successful strategically instead of putting a temporary band-aid on an inevitable civil war at great cost of lives and treasure to the US and lack of strategic flexibility in Afghanistan during this time? David Finkel: Thanks for this comment and question, Boston. I wish I knew the answer. Did the surge work? Was it the addition of troops that seems to have made a difference? Was it the fact that most neighborhoods had been pretty well cleansed by the time the surge began? Was it the effort, especially in the Sunni areas west of Baghdad, by Iraqis who turned against al-Qaeda? In eastern Baghdad, was it the cease fire announced by Muqtada al-Sadr? Some day, I hope, historians will be able to tease all this apart. What I can tell you from what I saw between April 2007 and April 2008 is that a lot of soldiers went there believing they would be the difference and by the end -- when everything collapsed around them in the worst week of war they endured -- a lot of them didn't think that at all. The Good Soldiers is released tomorrow and you can read an excerpt of it right now at the Washington Post. While Finkel attempts to report some of what he saw, David M. Tafuri (Business Week) is whoring to the point that you find yourself longing for a vice raid. Tafuri tries to convince people to hop the plane and head off to Iraq with Doing business in Iraq does not have to be scary. In July, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki visited the U.S., and part of his mission was to convince American companies to invest in his country. He made the case that security has improved substantially. By any measure, he is correct. By any measure, Nouri is wrong. By any measure he was wrong in July, by all measures he is wrong today and someone might want to purchase a subscription to a daily paper for Tafuri but then we'd still have to find someone to read it to him. August was the deadliest month for Iraqis in the last 13 months. Tafuri should be ashamed but business whores are very good at burying their shame and turning it into violence aimed at others. Independent journalist David Bacon reviews a new book, Solidarity Divided co-written by Fernando Gapasin, at Monthly Review: Through the 1980s I was a union organizer and activist in our Bay Area labor anti-apartheid committee. As we picketed ships carrying South African cargo, and recruited city workers to support the African National Congress (then called a terrorist organization by both the U.S. and South Africa), I looked at South African unions with great admiration. The South African Congress of Trade Unions, banned in the 1950s, had found ways to organize African and Colored workers underground, to support a liberation struggle in a broad political alliance. Heroic SACTU leaders like Vuysile Mini gave their lives on the scaffold for freedom. Then, as apartheid tottered and eventually fell, SACTU unions became the nucleus of a new federation, the Congress of South African Trade Unions. With roots in that liberation war, it declared socialism as its goal, and still does today. COSATU unions prize rank-and-file control over their elected leaders, and engage members in long and thorough discussions of the country's development plans. The labor federation has the most sophisticated political strategy of any union in the world today - balanceing a leading role in the tripartite alliance that governs South Africa with independence of program and action, even striking to force policies that put the needs of workers before the neoliberal demands of the World Bank. Jacob Zuma owes his election as president of South Africa today to South African labor. As an organizer during the same period I worked with many others to force our own labor movement to recognize that organizing new members and changing our politics was necessary for survival at home. If we could double our size (at least), I thought, we'd have more power, while the streetheat generated by the intense conflict organizing creates would set the stage for political transformation. Needless to say, that transformation process turned out to be much more complicated than I expected. David Bacon's latest book is Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press) which just won the CLR James Award. Bacon is also on KFPA's The Morning Show today (each Wednesday) discussing labor and immigration issues. |
the washington post
sudarsan raghavan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)