"Donors got access to bowling alley, WH movies, Messina" (Glen Thursh, Politico):
Matthew Mosk of the Washington Times sifts the records and finds that President Obama's high-rolling donors got access to a ten-pin alley, the White House movie theater and the Oval.
The Web version of the story includes the above photo of Obama -- wearing 3-D glasses -- watching a movie with family and, presumably, donors.
A White House aide, commenting on the photo, emails: "The 'donors' watching a movie in the theater were John Rogers and Eric Whitaker – among the President’s longtime closest friends from Chicago, whose relationships with him predate his career in public service. Whitaker met the President when they were grad students at Harvard. Rogers played basketball with the First Lady’s brother Craig at Princeton."
So you pay and you get to play. Imagine that. (No, I'm not surprised. For a variety of reasons.)
The issue arose at today's White House briefing.
Q On another subject, The Washington Times is reporting today that the President has awarded big donors to the Democratic National Committee with various access to senior officials here at the White House. One donor got a birthday visit to the Oval Office. Obviously I know other White Houses, Democrats, Republicans, have done things like this. But the President last year promised to clean this up. What went wrong?
MR. GIBBS: Well, Ed, I think understanding what this President has done is institute the very toughest ethics and transparency rules of any administration in history. We're the first administration in history that will soon provide a list of each and every person that visits the White House, something that's never been done before.
The Democratic National Committee does not accept contributions from registered federal lobbyists or political action committees and hasn't done so since President Obama became the party's nominee last year. I think as the statement that we issued said, a contributor -- contributing doesn't guarantee a visit to the White House, nor does it preclude it.
Q It appears that people are getting special access because of these donations. If you've taken --
MR. GIBBS: Hundreds of --
Q -- those other positive steps, why not shut off access?
MR. GIBBS: Hundreds of thousands of people have visited this White House since the President came in, and I think the President has returned to a stance of transparency and ethics that hasn't been matched by any other White House.
Q The RNC is calling for the White House to release the names of donors who have gotten special access to White House advisors and perks like the bowling alley. Will you release those names?
MR. GIBBS: Every name of every person that comes to this White House will be released.
Q In the past, too?
MR. GIBBS: I think there soon will be some look-back list that will be released. But again, Chip, this -- this is something, again, that for the first time in any administration at any point in our history, we've undertaken releasing publicly those names. I would remind -- let me just also -- the Republican National Committee -- there's two political parties, two major political parties in this country. One party doesn't accept contributions from registered federal lobbyists. That same party doesn't accept contributions from political action committees. It's not the committee with which you just asked me the question on.
Q Are you saying the White House will release the names of any donors who come in, and then, say did they meet with particular White House advisors as -- in exchange for those contributions?
MR. GIBBS: Through an agreement that we announced in August, the names of people that come to the White House will be released, and any contributor's name --
Q But will we know what they did --
MR. GIBBS: -- is released as per the forms on the FEC.
Q Will it simply be a name on a list, or will we know that they came here to meet with a senior White House official in exchange for a contribution?
MR. GIBBS: Chip, as we did this briefing in August, I'll remind you that the WAVES records will denote who that person is, when they came, how long they were here, and who they met with -- again, a standard not met by any other previous White House.
Q We will know if they used the White House bowling alley, for example?
MR. GIBBS: There are only a couple of people that I know that have used the residence bowling alley.
Q -- bowling alley also.
MR. GIBBS: I can report to you that Ethan Gibbs, with the bumpers down, bowled a couple of games while eating some chicken fingers.
Q Was there a quid pro quo here?
MR. GIBBS: No, of course not.
Q Well, the DNC documents actually say those who raise $300,000 before the 2010 midterm elections get quarterly meetings with senior members of the Obama administration.
MR. GIBBS: I'll point you to the DNC on that.
Q But they're with White House officials.
MR. GIBBS: Again, I'll point you to the DNC.
Q How can you point us to them when it's White House officials who the meetings are with? Can I have one other? Do you know if any of these donors have had a night in the Lincoln Bedroom -- reminding of an earlier controversy?
MR. GIBBS: Not that I'm aware of.
I hate the Butterball turkey that is Robert Gibbs. For those who've forgotten, he was behind the effort to call Indians "P**jabs." He is really just an offensive man. No surprise, Gibbs dances around the question. It really is amazing how much this White House has hidden from the public.
"White House Faces Questions on Big Donor Maintenance Programs" (Jake Tapper, Political Punch, ABC News):
One donor was given a birthday visit to the Oval Office. UBS Americas CEO Robert Wolf, the president’s top New York City “bundler” -- a contributor who raises hundreds of thousands of dollars -- golfed with him at Martha's Vineyard vacation in August. White House deputy chief of staff Jim Messina gave briefings on health care reform to top donors in San Francisco and Los Angeles.
Other big Democratic donors celebrated St. Patrick’s Day, Cinco de Mayo, and the 4th of July at the White House; the White House has not released the names of those who visited for those celebrations at the White House.
“It’s just the same as everybody else,” said Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW. The story, she said, is “not suggesting a quid pro quo -- it didn’t say Mr. Obama is offering regulatory help for donors. It says donors are getting meetings with White House insiders to tell them what’s going on. That’s not any different from what happens in Congress, where big donors get briefings with Barney Frank, or Barbara Boxer. Top donors always get access to politicians.”
It is also really amazing how Melanie Sloan is such a joke. The joke that kept Jack Murtha out of leadership (CREW launched an attack on Murtha) now wants to minimize Barack's actions with "It's just the same as everybody else."
CREW is a joke. Supposedly they get outraged over ethic violations but, confronted with one of Obama's, they say 'everybody else does it too.'
Repeating, CREW is a joke.
It will be interesting to see which records the press receives. I will be following that offline very closely because I'm well aware of who is getting in and why. Pay for play, yes. A smart reporter, by the way, would go beyond campaign donations. The ones with big time access currently are the ones who donated big time to the inauguration fund.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Wednesday, October 28, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces another death, still no election law in Iraq, more on the Iraqi govenrment's desire to go nuclear, Najaf gets a new bank, the KRG gets a new cabinet, and more.
The US military announced yesterda: "CAMP VICTORY, Iraq – A Multi-National Corps-Iraq Soldier died today of a non-combat related injury at Camp Victory. The name of the deceased is being withheld pending notification of next of kin and release by the Department of Defense. The names of service members are announced through the U.S. Department of Defense official website at http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/. The announcements are made on the Web site no earlier than 24 hours after notification of the service member's primary next of kin. The incident is under investigation." DoD identifes the fallen as Maj David L. Audo from Saint Joseph, Illinois who was 35-years-old. The announcement brings the total number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4352.
"How stable is Iraq?" asked Riz Khan last night on his self-titled Al Jazeera program. "Stable enough for national elections in January?" He was joined by a panel consisting of Iraqi Laith Kubba, the New America Foundation's Steven Clemmons and one-time director of the US Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq J. Scott Carpenter.
Riz Khan: Let me ask a question that came from our Facebook page, and I'll put this to Steven Clemmons here, this came from Ninveh Albazi in California, Steven, here in the US. And Ninveh says, "The longer the US military stays, the more terrorists will come in Iraq to fight. If they leave, more bombings over power will occur. Either way the Iraqi people will suffer." How do you feel about that -- the presence of -- US presence actually being a trigger for these kind of attacks?
Steven Clemmons: Well I think that there are some people in society -- and we've seen it throughout the Middle East -- that react very viscerally and negatively to the sense that they're being occupied by foreign troops. In Afghanistan, it's one of the things that's driving Pashtun resistance beyond the question of, uh, the Taliban. And-and so, I think it would be wrong to-to-to argue that in fact the American troop presence doesn't drive some violent minorities. I think on the whole, Iraqi society has felt as if the United States has done more beneficial things recently and so those feelings are not as widespread. But-but certainly there are people like Robert Pape at the University of Chicago among others that have shown that foreign troop deployments do drive a kind of -- drive suicide bombings, drive some of the more radical responses from societies. So there is some truth to it. I don't think I would agree with the-the decibel level of the questioner's comments though.
Riz Khan: Well, Laith, this came in via Twitter to us, a viewer by the name of Mosharraf Zaidi who says, "Even with stability in Iraq, does Maliki have the sense to ensure a free and fair process? Is it even up to him?"
Laith Kubba: Well, I mean, the good news is there is sufficient, I think, awareness and organization in Iraq to have elections that are, generally speaking, fair and free. I think the last elections had a high turnout -- about 70%. Of course, there were cases of fraud. But by and large, I think it was representative. So that's on the good side. But I think on the negative side, even if you had representatives in Parliament, the system is in a grid-lock because it's a parliamentary system, not a presidential system. It does not produce an effective executive that takes the country and move forward. You have, ultimately, a quote over power and that paralyzes government.
Riz Khan: I'll get to the intracacise of that in a moment because there are some interesting intracacies to the elections in Iraq but, Scott, if I could put this to you from LiveStation chat room, people are online here, Crane in the USA says, "How can fair and transparant elections be ensured when there are repeated bombings?" And let me ask you, do you think the elections will go ahead in January with all the delays and potential problems?
J. Scott Carpenter: I do. I'm a perinally optimist about this, that at the last minute -- however late the last minute is, the Iraqis will find some way to have these elections because they see how important they are to the political future of Iraq, to American withdrawal -- frankly. I do think there will be elections that are credible in Iraq because people don't trust each other and so there will be lots of observation which is what drove the credibility and legitimacy of the provincial elections is that there were so many political party observers watching one another that when the results were broadcast, no one really questioned the legitimacy of the results.
Riz Khan: Steven Clemmons, do you think the west, there are those who think the west is really pushing for the elections as a way of closure to finally dust their hands and finally close the chapter on Iraq.
Steven Clemmons: I don't think it's just to dust their hands and put a punctuation point. I mean I think everyone would like to see that what we did there succeeded in something. But I think that we've seen Iraqi society already get near ripping itself in shreds internally and the reason why elections and civil institution building and these democratic processes which J. and Laith were speaking about are so important is it creates opportunites for cohesive and collaborative governance within Iraq. That if it doesn't proceed and move forward, the place has a high possibility of pulling itself apart. So I think it's much more than us saying we're done with this -- with this experiment although, clearly, I would like us to move on as well and see Iraqi society take responsibility for itself succeed. But on the other hand, I think that this is an important part of showing that the Iraqi government can have some durability and sustainability after we begin to much more greatly downsize our troop presence.
Riz Kahn: We have this came in, I'll put this to you, Laith, this comes in from Facebook as well and it's from Cambodia where a viewer by the name of Heidi Aljani in Pursat says, "We were warned of the United States' prolonged military presence when Obama spoke of Iraq. The new excuse: Iraqi people and their government are to blame for the inability to govern themselves." Now do you believe that the elections are definite and looking at this issue that Iraq has too much of an issue trying to govern itself. What's your view?
Laith Kubba: Well two things. Number one, I think elections will take place, that's not the issue. Yes, there is a problem currently in finding the right formula on how Iraq should govern itself. But I think by and large, it is the right thing to do is to leave Iraqis to work it out for themselves; however, that does not mean walking out. I think it's really too idealistic. I think that will create enough power vacuum and might lead to escalating violence where the US has to send back some troops and intervene again.
Staying with the issue of the elections, this morning Dow Jones reports that the KRG's represenative Qubad Talabani is stating that, following the January elections, the draft oil law may "finally pass." Sahar Issa and Hannah Allam (McClatchy Newspapers) report that a bill may be presented "to parliament for a vote within days". Qassim Abdul-Zahra (AP) reports that KRG President Massoud Barzani "demanded" today that Kirkuk become a part of the Kurdistan Region. Kirkuk is disputed territory due to Saddam Hussein forcing Kurds out of the region during his reign. Both the Baghdad-based government or 'government' and the KRG claim Kirkuk really belongs to them. This is not a new issue. It is so not a new issue that the 2005 Iraqi Constitution addressed the issue and mandated that a referendum be held on the matter. Article 140 has never been followed. The issue has not been resolved. It is repeatedly pushed aside. Sort of like the draft election law. Weeks ago was the deadline for passing the elections law and the deadline was missed. Appearing before the US House Armed Services Committee last week, the Pentagon's Michele Flournoy insisted that time remained:Although the government of Iraq's self-imposed deadline of October 15th for passing the elections law has passed, we judge that the COR [Council Of Representatives] still has another week or two to come to some kind of an agreement on the elections law before it will put the January date -- the early January date -- in jeopardy in terms of the election commission's ability to actually physically execute the, uh, the election. If a new law with open lists is not passed, the fall back solution for them is to return to the 2005 election law which is based on a closed list system. But that could be used for upcoming elections, the COR would simply have to vote on an election date. If that law is not passed in the next two weeks, they will be looking at slipping the date to later in January which would still be compliant with the [Iraqi] Constitution but would be later than originally planned. It is now one week since Flournoy claimed Iraq had two weeks. There is no progress. The same day she was testifying to Congress, " Rod Nordland (New York Times) reported, "The Iraqi Independent High Electoral Commission and United Nations elections experts have said Iraq needs at least 90 days to adequately prepare for the vote. Iraq's existing election law was declared unconstitutional by its highest court, which said it needs to be replaced or amended." The court ruling would appear to render obsolete Flournoy's claim that the law for the 2005 elections could still be used with just passage of legislation for a new date. In addition, 90 days? There are 3 days left in this month, 30 in November and 31 in December. That's 64.90 days needed. 90 minus 64 (check my math always) is 26 days. That would be January 26th, if legislation passed Parliament today. If. And maybe. The Iraqi Freedom Congress' Amjad Ali weighs in with "Amid violence, Iraq Freedom Congress calls for a sovereign, secular, transitional government" (Flesh & Stone):Over nearly seven years the "political process" did not result in anything but ferocious fighting between the forces and the parties that were part of this process in order to gain as much privilege, influence, power and wealth as possible. This conflict resulted in prolongation of the political chaos, an insecurity in Iraq, exacerbated poverty and destitution, and curtailed social and health services.The elections, one of the mechanisms of imposing the "political process," have never solved the issue of the power struggle because none of the elections held changed the sectarian and ethnic quotas. And that means the elections merely reproduced the same forces that are currently in power. All of the elections have been characterized by farces such as fraud, political assassinations, and the delayed announcement of voting results until agreements among the influential forces had been reached. However, after every election, we witnessed an increase of violence and terrorist activities as part of political arm twisting among these forces. National reconciliation was one of the themes to bring together the political movements that did not participate in power sharing with the forces that supported the war and occupation. The reconciliation was projected by the occupation administration to involve the pan-Arab nationalist forces who were excluded from the formation of a new Iraq to impose security and political stability. However, fears of the parties in power (political Islam, Shiite in particular, and Kurdish nationalists) has undermined national reconciliation.In the midst of the current political situation, neither the occupation nor the successive governments have been able to establish a state in Iraq. The conflict among the parties and the forces has always been a key factor in that lack of progress. Moreover, the conflict over what would be the identity of the state -- whether an Islamist Shiite, a Islamist Sunni, Arab nationalist, or federal moderate Islamist --is another obstacle to the establishment of an Iraqi state. The ongoing violence, which is another form of political conflict, will not end through a political process that was brought by the occupation. And the experience of nearly seven years of conflict between the political forces taught us that the violence would not be terminated. In fact, it would only reproduce more violence and terror. What is happening today, such as restructuring old alliances and forming new ones and the escalation of the conflicts within the one party, is an explanation of how deep the crisis is. As a result we could hear the prime minister and a number of political parties calling for an end to the rule of consensus or democracy through consensus.
Whenever the elections take place, they'll be the first national elections since 2005. In January 2009, provincial elections were held in 14 of Iraq's 18 provinces. In July the Kurdistan Region's three provinces held their elections. Today KRG Prime Minister Barham Salih's cabinet was sworn in: "Dr Salih was appointed Prime Minister by the Kurdistani List coalition, which won the Kurdistan Region parliamentary elections in July with 58 percent of the vote, and voter turnout of nearly 80 percent. Mr Azad Barwari, a senior member of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, was appointed Deputy Prime Minister." AFP reports the swearing in was "clouded by several MPs walking out after a refusal of separate votes for each minister." Vahal (Mideast Youth) offers this:
In a ceremony attended by the president of the region, Mr. Massoud Barzani, the outgoing PM, Mr. Nichervan Barzani as well as the Iraqi first lady, Mrs. Hero Ibrahim Ahmad, the sixth cabinet was sworn in at the Parliament.
The new cabinet will have only one woman, Asos Najib Abdullah who will be the minister of labor and social affairs.
Here is some poetic justice, the man who sentenced Saddam Hussein to death by hanging, judge Ra'ouf Rashid will now be the minister of Justice in Barham Salih's cabinet.
Sunday's bombings resulted in many deaths which means many burials. Saad Fakhrildeen (Los Angeles Times) reports, "The cars streamed into Najaf over the last two days as families buried loved ones killed in Sunday's double bombing in Baghdad. By Tuesday afternoon, what was thought to be the last of the dead were brought to the Valley of Peace cemetery, the most sacred burial ground for Iraq's Shiite majority. Undertaker Mehdi Assadi had listened to mourners' screams as at least 80 of the estimated 155 killed in Sunday's Baghdad bombings were buried in the Valley of Peace." Deutsche Presse-Agentur reports approximately 60 children are still missing following Sunday's Baghdad bombings with some believing they may be buried/trapped under the rubble and the Iraqi military rejecting the assertion with the following statement: "There is no truth in reports that there are bodies under the rubble of the Ministry of Justice in Baghdad. All the martyrs and injrued have been taken to hospitals." The military is awfully sure of themselves. Suprising when you consider Monday's report by Miguel Martinez on ABC's World News Tonight with Charlie Gibson where Martinez showed some of the destruction and noted, "This is the hole created by the explosion. It goes down about twenty-five feet. The blast was so powerful they burst a water main, flooding this section of Baghdad. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki who faces re-election in January has campaigned on his ability to make Iraq safer. His opponents say this bombings proves the military is infiltrated." If you saw the broadcast, you know no one could see to the bottom of the crater -- the very wide crater -- because it was filled with water. On Sunday's bombings, an Iraqi correspondent for McClatchy poses a number of questions at Inside Iraq, beginning with: "Is it completely correct to keep accusing only the neighboring countries all the time? If we assume they are involved, who implement their plans in Iraq?"
Yesterday's snapshot noted Martin Chulov (the Guardian) report on Iraq attempting to "become a nuclear player [. . .] The Iraqi government has approached the French nuclear industry about rebuilding at least one of the reactors that was bombed at the start of the first Gulf War. The government has also contacted the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and United Nations to seek ways around resolutions that ban Iraq's re-entry into the nuclear field." Today he does an audio report at the Guardian on the issue.
Martin Chulov: I think Iraqi politicians are looking around and they're seeing that they're out of options as far as delivering services to their -- to their constituents. It's got no electricity capacity, or very little. It has very little water capacity. And not much for science and technology so they figure now that a new reactor may help them serve their energy needs and all sorts of other scientific and health needs that might lead them forward.
Jon Dennis: Iraq hasn't had a very happy history with its nuclear technology.
Martin Chulov: It certainly hasn't. Three decades of Saddam during which he attempted to make good and maintain a nuclear program ended in catastrophe. All three nuclear reactors were bombed and destroyed. And he was invaded twice, partly on the basis that he had these reactors. So it's been a long and fraught and ultimately fruitless history with nuclear energy in Iraq but now, six years after Saddam was ousted, the Iraqis are looking to have another go at it.
Jon Dennis: But how could Iraq ensure that any new nuclear facility would be secure?
Martin Chulov: And this is indeed the problem and this is going to be a giant step -- a giant obstacle in getting any sort of approval. Iraq is a signatory to a number of non-proliferation treaties that were -- that were imposed after the invasion and which a number of yellow cake vials did, in fact, go missing. There are some contaminets out here in the Iraqi community that have not been recovered in six years since. Iraq has shown a very limited capacity to ensure its essential sites including four of its ministries which have been destroyed over the past three months by suicide bombers who have been able to drive straight up to the gates.
The report is a segment of Guardian Daily, the newspaper's daily audio broadcast. Today Oliver August (Times of London) observes:Iraq's new masters insist they have no intention of trying to develop nuclear bombs. "We are co-operating with the IAEA and expanding and defining areas of research where we can implement nuclear technology for peaceful means," the Science and Technology Minister, Raid Fahmi, told the Guardian. That is unlikely to reassure Iraq's neighbours, however, given the chaotic conditions that reign in the country. The insurgency is by no means subdued, with a group linked to Iraqi al-Qaeda claiming responsibility for the latest bombings, which killed more than 155 people on Sunday. The Sunni extremist group said on a website that its "martyrs . . . targeted the dens of infidelity".
The New Zealand Herald adds, "Iraq has also begun lobbying the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the United Nations to overturn resolutions which ban Iraq using atomic energy." At Iran's Press TV, a commentator named Jaled Ali Ayoub shares this opinion, "wake up, stupids they destroyed all irak with their amunitions and know they are going to reconstract irak with the companies, owned by them and paid by all the irakis population. You cannt by more ignorents, because when the morality of the iraks gain the power of irak, i sware that they will destroy it again. look to another horizon the green go and the english, they only represents death to all arabs and muslim. 10 of billions of US$ was stolen from your country."
Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Jenan Hussein (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing which wounded six people, a Baghdad sticky bombing which claimed the lives of 3 women and left four men injured and a Mosul roadside bombing which claimed 4 lives and left six people injured. Reuters notes a Tikrit roadside bombing "blew up an oil tanker" claiming 2 lives in the process ("the driver and his assistant"). Lin Zhi (Xinhua) reports a Diyala Province bombing which left three people injured (one female, two males) and a Diyala Proinvce "makeshift bomb" wounded a father and son.
Shootings?
Reuters notes that Iraqi and US forces "killed a suspsected al Qaeda member" in Mosul yesterday.
Meanwhile Mu Xueuqan (Xinhua) reports Ban Ki-moon, UN Secretary-General, stated today that the UN will send someone to the country "for preliminary consulations related to Iraq's security and sovereignty." Khaled Farhan (Reuters) reports Najaf has a new bank, "In one of Shi'ite Islam's holiest cities, a bank has opened a branch only for women, hoping to tap a potentially large market and meet pent-up demand from Muslim women for financial services that meet their needs."
The Iraq War drags on and, if you doubt that, you're not paying attention. In the US, Pamela E. Walck (Savannah Morning News) reports Fort Stewart is sending 400 soldiers from the 2nd Heavy Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry to Iraq for a year. Jessica Fitzgerald's husband (Spc Kevin Fitzgerald) is among those deploying and she tells Walck, "This is his second deployment. It's not any easier this time." Spc Carla Robinson tells Walck, "I'm really feeling pretty positive right now. The sooner we get there, the sooner we can come home." And Sgt Brandon Bodily states, "This is my first deployment. I'm just hoping I come back safely." P. Norman Moody (Floriday Today) reports, "Florida National Guard soldiers from Cocoa began intense training this week for deployment in January to Iraq and Kuwait. The Guard's 53rd Infantry Brigade kicked off the training for 2,500 troops in what's expected to be the largest single-unit deployment of the Florida National Guard since World War II." Meanwhile Sify News reports that India qill not be sending troops to Iraq or Afghanistan according to Defense Minister A.K. Anthony. That declaration came on the same day that UPI reports, "U.S. and Indian forces wrapped up their largest joint military exercise to date, practicing a set of maneuvers simulating environments in Iraq and Afghanistan."
Turning to the US. Tony Perry (Los Angeles Times) reports the US military believes they've stumbled onto a category of people with an advanced level of detection when it comes to roadside bombs: "Military researchers have found that two groups of personnel are particularly good at spotting anomalies: those with hunting backgrounds, who traipsed through the woods as youths looking to bag a deer or turkey; and those who grew up in tough urban neighborhoods, where it is often important to know what gang controls which block." You have to wonder why the military can spend money studying that but they can never seem to study rape within the ranks? That issue was a topic yesterday on Democracy Now! (link has text, video and audio) as Amy Goodman and Sharif Abdel Kouddous spoke with a director of a new documentary.
AMY GOODMAN: Rape in the Ranks: The Enemy Within is a documentary that focuses on the cases of three female service members victimized by rape and other forms of sexual assault. One of the victims, Tina Priest, she was found dead in Iraq in March 2006, just weeks after she had accused a male soldier of raping her. Her family was told she took her own life, but they don't believe that. They think she may have been killed because she came forward with the rape accusation. In this scene from the film, Tina Priest's mother, Joy Priest, visits her daughter's gravesite.
PASCALE BOURGAUX: How did she die?
JOY PRIEST: She died in Iraq from what the Army says was a self-inflicted gunshot wound to her chest. That's what the Army says. I don't -- I don't know how she died. I want to find out how she died.
PASCALE BOURGAUX: What do you think?
UNIDENTIFIED: Don't know what to think.
JOY PRIEST: There are so many different opinions. I don't -- I don't see her killing herself. But if she did, I can understand why --
PASCALE BOURGAUX: Why?
JOY PRIEST: -- she did. Yes, because of the trauma that she had been through with the rape and the way that people treated her afterwards. And so, I can see how she would be depressed enough to do that. But it's not like her.
AMY GOODMAN: An excerpt of Rape in the Ranks: The Enemy Within. For more, we're joined by the film's director, Pascale Bourgaux, a French journalist and filmmaker. The film had its premiere last night here in New York at the Independent Film Festival.
Welcome to Democracy Now! Talk about Tina and the other three women you profile.
PASCALE BOURGAUX: So, Tina, the -- you've seen in the excerpt, it's -- I mean, the family is still looking for the truth, because they're convinced that she didn't commit suicide, that she was killed. But the case is dead. They asked answer -- they ask answer to the Army, but they never -- you know, they never answer those questions they raised. And then, the three other cases. There is Suzanne. She was raped by her command. She deserted. She refused to go back to Iraq to escape from her commander. And then she was in jail.
Finally, Grammy, Academy Award and Golden Globe winning singer-songwriter Carly Simon appeared on NBC's Today Show this morning and performed "You Belong To Me." The Carly classic (which Carly co-wrote with the Doobie Brothers' Michael McDonald) is part of a new album released this week, Never Been Gone. Carly offers two songs she hadn't previously recorded for commercial release as well as ten of her best-loved classics that she's reimagined to find diferent levels in and meanings to including "You're So Vain," "Anticipation," "Let The River Run," "The Right Thing To Do," "Boys In The Trees" and "That's The Way I've Always Heard It Should Be." Thursday she's on Tavis Smiley (PBS) and also on NPR's Talk Of The Nation. Click here to watch Carly on Monday's Good Morning America (ABC).
iraq
martin chulov
the guardianjon dennis
al jazeera
the new york timesrod nordland
iraqi freedom congressamjad ali
mcclatchy newspapershannah allam
sahar issa
the los angeles timessaad fakhrildeen
abc newsworld news tonight with charlie gibsonmiguel marquez
the times of londonoliver august
jenan hussein
savannah morning newspamela e. walckflorida todayp. norman moody
tony perry
amy goodmandemocracy now
carly simon
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Thomas E. Ricks, buy a bra
Thomas E. Ricks is a blowhard who honestly just needs to sit down for awhile and not speak.
Today on NPR's The Diane Rehm Show, Ricks felt he was also a comedian yet I seriously doubt, outside the locker room showers and the bedrooms, he's ever made anyone laugh.
"Matthew Hoh: new poster boy for critics of Afghanistan war" (Mark Sappenfield, Christian Science Monitor):
Matthew Hoh, perhaps unintentionally and unavoidably, has instantly made himself the poster boy for Vice President Joe Biden, liberal Democrats, and every American who looks at a troop surge in Afghanistan with deep skepticism.
Mr. Hoh, a respected retired marine captain, resigned his post as a Foreign Service officer in Afghanistan last week, The Washington Post reported Tuesday.
The reason: "I fail to see the value or the worth in continued US casualties or expenditures of resources in support of the Afghan government in what is, truly, a 35-year-old civil war," he said in his resignation letter.
Thomas E. Ricks called the man a nobody and told jokes about how the man didn't have a key to the washroom. He said he was a copy boy and nothing more and accused the Washington Post of attempting to create a story where there was none -- in other words, he accused Karen DeYoung -- a respected reporter -- of taking a small nothing and blowing it up.
That's really outrageous. I am aware that Thomas Ricks' journalism career is over and that the Washington Post and he are no longer together. But that was beyond a low blow.
He managed to insult both DeYoung and Matthew Hoh.
I am also really disgusted with people bringing him on and speaking to him about counter-insurgency as if he were objective.
He is not objective.
He belongs to the 'institute' that promotes counter-insurgency. (Counter-insurgency is war on a native people.)
Thomas E. Ricks needs to spend his time in the immediate future shopping in the young girls department for a bra to stash those man boobs into. He is a disgustingly vile man and I think we've all suffered enough from his bad attempts at humor.
In addition to what I've tackled above, C.I. calls him to the carpet for repeating the big lie of this decade.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Tuesday, October 27, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, Iraq wants to go nuclear, Thomas E. Ricks repeats the lies that sold the illegal war (connecting Iraq to you know what), if your loved one takes his or her own life while serving in a war zone the President of the United States sends you no letter expressing sorrow, and more.
Frank Sesno was the guest host on NPR's The Diane Rehm Show today and the first hour was devoted to Iraq and Afghanistan. Sesno spoke with McClatchy Newspapers Nancy A. Youssef, Wall St. Journal's Peter Spiegel and Crazy Ass Thomas E. Ricks.
Frank Sesno: Tom Ricks, let's start with these incredible bombings in Iraq and the shockwave they've sent through the military and the political systems there. What signal were they intended -- intending to send?
Thomas E. Ricks: I think they were intended to send the signal that [Prime Minister Nouri al-] Maliki does not have the control over Iraq that he asserts and that's really his sole campaign plank -- is look "You may not like me, you may not like how we're running the government but at least you're feeling safer" and I think was designed to undermine that. I was struck -- I read this morning that one of the trucks used to do the bombings was stolen in Falluja which indicates it probably came out of Anbar Province.
Frank Sesno: Which means?
Thomas E. Ricks: Which means a Sunni extrimist probably working with al Qaeda. Simeloutaneous large blast is one of the al Qaeda signatures that they like to do. We all remember that from 9-11.
Did Thomas E. Ricks just make a total idiot of himself? Yes, he did. He attempted to conflate al Qaeda in Mesopotomia with the al Qaeda group thought to be responsible for 9-11. The two are not related. Thomas E. Ricks is worse than George W. Bush because Ricks actually had a semi-functioning brain that wasn't destroyed via drink and cocaine. But that didn't stop him from conflating two separate things. al Qaeda in Mespotamia is a homegrown (Iraqi) group. It did not exist prior to the 2003 invasion. It is a response to the 2003 invasion. And Thomas E. Ricks needs to learn to choose his words a little more carefully. With each day, he drifts further and further from journalism.
What a moron. That anyone -- let alone a journalist -- would attempt to conflate 9-11 and Iraq at this late date is offensive. That a journalist would do so -- knowing full well that this conflation helped sell the illegal war -- helped sell it because the news media refused to call it out -- the same ones that will fact check a Saturday Night Live skit -- is just beyond belief. But notice that on the program, they just moved along past Crazy Ass Thomas Ricks -- not unlike they ignored that LIE when it was sold by the Bush administration. There WAS NO and IS NO connection between Iraq and 9-11 -- no matter what Thomas E. Ricks jibber-jabbers.
Frank Sesno: Which means, Nancy Youseff that Iraq is what? No where near as stable as the previous lull had indicated?
Nancy A. Youssef: Well it indicates that sectarian violence is still continuing despite the US military assertion that it's not as aggressive as it would be. These were Sunni attackers hitting Shia government buildings. It's an effort to sort of revitalize the sectarian fighting and I think it raises questions about ultimately what Iraqis and what Americans consider acceptable levels of violence in Iraq. Can these sort of occassional bombings -- you'll remember that the last one was in August -- will the Iraqis accept it? Will the Americans accept it as a condition for their leaving? That-that attacks will continue to go on? There are fewer attacks but they're becoming more and more spectacular.
Frank Sesno: And, Peter, at a critical critical moment.
Peter Spiegel: It is a critical moment because you have elections coming up in January. And just to not be overly pessimistic here 'cause, as Nancy mentioned, there was a very similar attack in August, we did not see the country descend into another round of sectarian violence. That's the good news. The other good news, as Tom pointed out, they seemed to be very political oriented. There are elections coming up. You know Maliki is vying for position with other Shia parties, with other Sunni parties. Is this just a domestic political issue being expressed through violence? If that's the case, there's an argument that as long as there's some sort of Sunni outlet through the political system, this may eventually go away. Now the problem is there appears to be no Sunni outlet for legitimate political expression right now because most of the parties are still dominated by Shi'ites and a lot of the government institutions are dominated by Shias -- they're using them to suppress Sunnis in the country. So as long as that continues, as long as there's no legitimate way for Sunnis to express their political outrage this stuff could continue.
Frank Sesno: Do you expect this stuff to continue?
Thomas E. Ricks: I do actually. The last line in the last book I've written on Iraq, The Gamble, is a quote from [former US] Ambassador [to Iraq] Ryan Crocker. He said to me twice in the course of 2008, "The events for which the Iraq War will be remembered have not yet occurred." There's a significant chance that the war will go on for another five to ten years. I think we're going to have American troops there for many, many years. They'll call them "trainers" and "advisors" but this war is far from over.
Frank Sesno: But Tom as they leave, as we have pulled out of the cities and as we withdraw to concentrated areas around the country, what vulnerability then does this latest string of events suggest for the innocent public in Iraq trying desparately to put their lives back together again because it suggest the vulnarability is extreme.
Thomas E. Ricks: Recently, the former mayor of Tal Afar, a city up in the northwest, wrote a very interesting essay in which he said all the conditions for civil war in Iraq are still there. This is why I think the civil war failed. It succeeded tactically, it improved security.
Frank Sesno: For the moment.
Thomas E. Ricks: Yes, but it's purpose was to lead to a political breakthrough and that didn't happen. That's not my saying what the purpose was, that's what the president said the purpose was.
Frarnk Sesno: Nancy, I see you nodding your head.
Nancy A. Youssef: Yeah, you know, what's interesting is that when you ask them at the Pentagon, "Look there have been two massive attacks in the last few months and what are you going to do?" And there's sort of a shrugging of the shoulders. The Status Of Forces Agreement calls for us to leave and the Pentagon's focused on Afghanistan now and yet if you go right below the surface you can feel from soldiers who have served, who wear braclets of fallen comrades, the frustration that potentially the United States is leaving as sloppily as it entered, that you've got 120,000 troops still based in Iraq and yet nothing is being done to-to-to stop this. The-the line --
Frarnk Sesno: Nothing is being done to stop this?
Nancy A. Youssef: No, because the line at the Pentagon is "We're asking for Maliki to ask us for help" or we're waiting for something like the Samarra mosque bombing. But if it gets to that level, it's already too late. I mean the Samarra mosque bombing didn't happen in a vacuum. That was a building of sectarian violence that manifested itself in a very violent way.
Peter Spiegel: One other issue, there are still 120,000 troops in Iraq which everyone seems to forget, which is about the levels they were pre-surge, which is still a very big level. But what is happening in sort of the granularity of that is a lot of assets that are needed to track down these bombing networks -- the UAVs, the unmanned drones, the intelligence assets -- all that is being sucked away to Afghanistan. And having spent time with General [Ray] Odierno, who is the commander there, a year ago, his-his real -- the thing he's most proud of is the ability to track down these networks through human intelligence through systems like unmanned drones and dismantle them. Well if you move all those assets to Afghanistan, are you still able to dismantle all those bombing networks that are still clearly sort of roving freely in Baghdad and be able to do these kind of things?
Frarnk Sesno: These bombs went off near three government buildings -- three important government buildings. How much of a set back does this present to the fledgling, struggling Iraqi government itself?
Nancy A. Youssef: I don't think we know yet. I mean, you saw the government try to respond by passing an election law which they've been debating for several months now as a way to sort of speak up. I think you're seeing Maliki -- it hurts Maliki the most, as Tom mentioned, because his political platform, his election platform is "I bring security to you." You saw rival political parties trying to exploit that.
Nancy A. Youssef was referring to a proposal put together by the Political Council for National Security and then passed on to Parliament. That was a proposal made (with much fanfare) yesterday. Like just about everything else on the governance front in Iraq, it fell apart. John Leland (New York Times) reports there was no consensus today and that they are at a stalemate, "another blockage in negotiations that have dragged on for weeks, threatening national elections scheduled for January 16th." 'Scheduled'? I believe the appropriate term is intended. Suadad al-Salhy (Reuters) adds that the issue of Kirkuk was the falling out point for the "proposal submitted by a high-ranking council that included Maliki and President Jalal Talabani." Repeating, no election law. Still.
Staying on Sunday's bombings, Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) reported this morning that credit for the bombings is allegedly being claimed by the Islamic State of Iraq and he noted that "rescue workers continued to pull bodies out of the rubble Monday". Robert Dreyfuss (The Nation via CBS News website) observes:
The perpetrators of the huge bomb attacks are unknown. Not unexpectedly, every Iraqi faction is blaming its enemies. Maliki is blaming Al Qaeda in Iraq and the Baathists, but at the very least the attacks have severely hurt Maliki's main cliam to leadership, namely, that he's kept Iraq safe. Many Sunnis are blaming Iran, charging that Iran's intelligence service is orchestrating the Baghdad attacks in order to force Maliki to abandon his independent electoral stance and sign on to the Shiite bloc, the Iraqi National Alliance. And, indirectly speaking for the Shiite bloc, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei of Iran has blamed "foreign agents" for the attacks:
"The bloody actions being committed in some Islamic countries, including Iraq, Pakistan and in some parts of the country (Iran), are aimed at creating division between the Shiites and Sunnis.... Those who carry out these terrorist actions are directly or indirectly foreign agents." Al Qaeda has claimed responsibility for the bombings, but such claims have to be taken with a grain of salt.
Sunday's bombings resulted in some TV coverage for Iraq yesterday. NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams, click here for the video of that segment
Ann Curry: We turn now to Iraq, still reeling from massive explosions that wrecked three buildings in Baghdad on Sunday. The dead now number more than 150. Hundreds more are injured. And the attacks raise the question: can the Iraqi government keep the lid on? The latest tonight from NBC's Tom Aspell. Tom Aspell: Grief and shock today at some of the funerals for bombings in Baghdad. Iraqi police and hospitals now say that up to thirty children from a day care center at the Justice Ministry are among the dead. The second blast was captured on a cell phone. The blast destroyed two government buildings outside the Green Zone in central Baghdad. Iraqi officials said at least 150 people were killed, at least 500 people were wounded. A security spokesman said two buses were used to carry the explosives -- 2,000 pounds in one and 1500 pounds in the other. It was the worst attack in Baghdad for two years. This morning Iraqis were blaming the government for lax security issues. There are checkpoints every one-hundred yards How did these vehicles come here" asked this man. Iraqi troops were patrolling Baghdad streets this morning. The government is warning there could be more attacks before elections in three months time. Tom Aspell, NBC News, London.
Also covering the bombings was PBS' NewsHour (link has text, audio and video options) and this an excerpt:JANE ARRAF [Christian Science Monitor]: It has. The death toll looks like it's going past about 150, Ray, and hundreds more wounded. And more than that, a lot of questions being raised as to how this actually could have happened just two months after the horrific bombing of the Finance and Foreign Ministries. Now, yesterday, at the site, there were absolute scenes of devastation, people sobbing, carrying away wounded relatives, trying to find their relatives, and pretty much chaos for the first little while. The streets were flooded. Rescue workers were trying to wade through bystanders. It really was one of the most horrific scenes that many of us have seen in quite a long time. We had kind of thought this was over with. And now it seems to have started again. And that is definitely the feeling that you feel on the streets, that things could very much get worse again.RAY SUAREZ: You mentioned that August attack. At the time, weren't measures put in place to make this kind of operation less likely in Baghdad?JANE ARRAF: Absolutely. That August attack, which killed at least 100 people with an eerily similar attack, a truck packed with explosives in two different places, and a suicide attack, at that, was actually a wakeup call. And it was said to have been a systemic failure -- failure of security. Now, the Iraqi government responded by firing some senior Iraqi security officials. It said it put new measures in place. I spoke with a senior American official today who said, indeed, they had put measures in place. But it has not prevented these two bombings, which, again, were eerily similar. These were trucks traveling streets where no trucks are supposed to be in daytime. They apparently went through checkpoints, where they should have been checked, but weren't. And they managed to explode in one of the busiest times of the day, in one of the most packed places in Baghdad, killing government workers, as well as passersby, including children.
ABC World News Tonight with Charlie Gibson covered the bombings.Charlie Gibson: In Iraq meanwhile the funerals began today in the wake of the stunning twin bombings that tore through the heart of Baghdad yesterday. The death toll is now 155 with the grim discovery that 24 children at a day care center were among those killed. The attacks raised questions about Iraq's security. Miguel Marquez was at the scene of the blasts.Miguel Marquez: The devastation is almost unimaginable, buildings shredded as far as the eye can see, glass, blood splattered clothing and burned rubber. When the bombs went off they shattered the relative calm here. Six months ago this street was off limits to traffic but with security improving the barriers were lifted. An investigation is now underway into how two vehicles carrying 1500 pounds of explosives each including military grade C4, got through multiple military checkpoints before reaching their targets. Despite all the security agencies the government here is helpless he says, they only cause traffic jams. Today Iraqis begin the wrenching task of burying their loved ones. Comfort was in short supply. They blame their government for failing to stop the violence. This is the hole created by the explosion. It goes down about twenty-five feet. The blast was so powerful they burst a water main, flooding this section of Baghdad. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki who faces re-election in January has campaigned on his ability to make Iraq safer. His opponents say this bombings proves the military is infiltratedIraqi National Security Advisor Mouwaffak Rubaie: What we need to concentrate on is enabling our intelligence agencies. This is an intelligence led war now. Miguel Marquez: The bombings are especially shocking because security here has improved by leaps and bounds in the last two years. Construction is everywhere and night life has made a roaring comeback. [An Iraqi woman speaks.] "We have one quiet week and then the next week things get worse," she says. "The security situation is still the same." The US military says it is assisting in the investigation but there are no plans to increase US patrols here nor slow the rate of pulling US forces out of Iraq. Miguel Marquez, ABC News, Baghdad.
Not everyone provided significant time for the news. CBS Evening News (Harry Smith sitting in for Katie Couric) reduced it to a five-sentence headline. Remember that when you've heard a story and are trying to select an evening newscast in order to find out what happened. It was just a headline to CBS Evening News. Oliver August (Times of London) quotes a government employee stating, "Sadness is overwhelming today in the office. It's as if we are sitting at a funeral in the office because many of our colleagues and people we know were killed." Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) quotes an employee injured in the bombings, Shauki Abdul Jabar, stating, "There is no security, no hope." And he reports on three men searching through the rubble for some sign of Youssef Musen Nouri, their four-year-old nephew whom they now assume is dead. It wasn't just a passing headline to any of those people.
The heartbeat went out of our house
The rhythm went out of our romance
But in life that happens and you just have to remember to breathe . . .
-- "Coming Around Again," written by Carly Simon from her new recording on Never Been Gone.
Meanwhile Mu Xuequan (Xinhua) reports, "Baghdad governor on Tuesday said that his council voted to demand resignation of Iraqi minister of interior and chief of Baghdad operations command over Sunday's bloody blasts that enraged Iraqis and shaped a setback to the Iraqi government which struggle to restore normalcy in the country nearly three months ahead of the country's national elections." Sammy Ketz (Mail & Guardian) adds that Baghdad Governor Salah Abdul Razzaq said of the bombings (after viewing video footage of it), "It's a human failure . . . It can only be negligence or collusion."
And while these bombings are fresh on everyone's mind, someone might want to ask who in the world thinks nuclear power is needed in Iraq? What if a nuclear reactor were in Iraq and had been targeted on Sunday. It's something people better start considering. Martin Chulov (Guardian) reports:
Iraq has started lobbying for approval to again become a nuclear player, almost 19 years after British and American war planes destroyed Saddam Hussein's last two reactors, the Guardian has learned.
The Iraqi government has approached the French nuclear industry about rebuilding at least one of the reactors that was bombed at the start of the first Gulf war. The government has also contacted the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and United Nations to seek ways around resolutions that ban Iraq's re-entry into the nuclear field.
Iraq says it envisages that a reactor would be used initially for research purposes. "We are co-operating with the IAEA and expanding and defining areas of research where we can implement nuclear technology for peaceful means," the science and technology minister, Raid Fahmi, told the Guardian.
From future violence to some of today's reported violence, Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 shop owner was shot dead in Mosul and 1 "young man" was shot dead in Mosul.
Turning to the US, today on Democracy Now! (link has text, audio and video options), Sharif Abdel Kouddous and Amy Goodman spoke with Chancellor Keesling's parents Jannett and Gregg Keesling. Their son, Chancellor, was serving in Iraq, on his second deployment, when he apparently took his own life earlier this year.
JANNETT KEESLING: I spoke to Chancellor the night before he died for about four minutes. And as always, he wore a really tough exterior, because even after conversations with some of the soldiers after he died, no one saw that he was in any type of distress or trouble. I know they say he was sleeping. He was happy that morning. He was singing.
But what he did tell me that night is that he was going to have a very long, difficult day. His conversation was quite brief. Normally he would say that he loves me, and he would say goodbye. But this time he simply hung up. I had the feeling that something was definitely bothering him more than the norm. And the next thing we knew, they were at our door saying that he had --
GREGG KEESLING: He had passed.
JANNETT KEESLING: -- passed away.
AMY GOODMAN: Where was he?
JANNETT KEESLING: But nobody saw.
GREGG KEESLING: He was at Camp Stryker in Baghdad. And he --
AMY GOODMAN: And what did they explain to you? What happened?
GREGG KEESLING: That he had gone to a latrine and locked himself in the latrine and took his own life, with his M4.
[. . .]
GREGG KEESLING: Well, I just -- we do not believe our son would have taken his life if he had been here at home. This would not have happened. This is directly related to his military service. Our casualty officer -- the military has been very, very, very good to us in helping us. And our casualty officer, though, said the same thing, that "We do not believe your son would have taken his life if he was back home." And, you know, every other benefit that the military provides to families has been afforded to us. We were flown to Dover to greet the body, in a very emotional experience. And we had a military burial and the twenty-one-gun salute. And Jannett was presented the American flag, which is a very moving ceremony. But the issue of presidential condolences -- in fact, we were shocked. I began -- President Obama has set up the suicide task force, and I began to talk with Brigadier General Colleen McGuire and members of staff there, and they were very helpful and wonderful. And during those conversations, I mentioned, "By the way, you know, when do you think the letter comes from the President?" And she goes, "I don't know. I'll check it out." And we talked again a few times. And every time at the end of the conversation, you know, "How are you guys doing?" and all that. And I said, "By the way, when are we going to get the letter from the President?" And on our third conversation, one of the staff members said to me, "Oh, my god, Mr. Keesling, I've just discovered there's a longstanding policy that prevents the President from acknowledging the death of a soldier who takes his life in the war theater by his own hand." And I nearly dropped to my knees. I was shocked. And I just said to her that I think this is a policy that should change. Our loss is no different. He was on his second tour. The investigative report shows that he was a good soldier. One of my favorite comments in the report is that his unit commander said, or unit leader says, "I wish I had fifteen Keeslings." He was a good soldier. He helped other soldiers. In fact, there's a soldier back stateside today who was at risk of suicide that Chancy intervened to help. And we got his uniform back, and when my sister was packing away the uniform, she found in the pocket and pulled out the suicide information card. He had it in his pocket of his uniform. And he helped other soldiers, but he was unable to help himself. And so, our grief is deep. And, you know, the letter won't stop -- we'll still be hollow inside for the rest of our lives, but the acknowledgement from the President that our son gave his life in service to the causes of the United States is important to us, and I think it should be important to the hundreds, perhaps even thousands, of suicide victims in this war in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well. It's my understanding that the suicide rate in the military has, for the first time, surpassed the civilian suicide rate. The mental health issues are quite severe. And so, we're just simply appealing to the President to change the policy, to offer condolences to the families, like ours, that are struggling and suffering with the unique form of suffering a military suicide leaves in its wake. And it's been especially hard for us.
The suicide rate has repeatedly increased and the stories of it are usually 'this happened, then that happened' in a sort of timeline manner that rarely connects the death to the loss those who survive feel. The parents expressed their loss today and on July 31st, on the second hour of NPR's The Diane Rehm Show, guest host Susan Paige spoke with a caller who wanted to address this topic.
Susan Paige: Let's go to Pamela. She's calling us from New Jersey. Pamela, thanks so much for calling.
Pamela: Yes. Good morning, how are you? Thank you for taking my call. I am responding to a comment I heard earlier and it really just like shot me in my heart. And the comment was that the suicide rates [in the US military] are skyrocketing and how this has to be addressed. And I literally like I said stopped dead in my tracks. I . . . lost my brother in service due to suicide. He was home on a leave and, uh, about to be, pardon me, to go back and to serve and, uh, was, uh -- the difficulty in getting the mental health services I believe that he needed -- I mean he was married with two children -- was most, most difficult and delayed and a long wait and this and that. And then the unfathomable happened and, uh, when I, uh, at times decided to share how he died rather than just say he died in the war and I would say he died by suicide the remark I would hear unfortunately was, "Oh my goodness, he didn't die a hero then." And-and I continually hear this and I guess I want to make a statement that how someone dies, um, should not be -- that -- that is not a definition of how they lived their lives. And here was a good man who gave and did so much for the community and yet because of how he died -- which you know is a mental illness health related, etc. etc. -- he is now being defined as -- not -- as a zero. And not being defined. And I think you know this-this suicide issue is getting way out of control and for every person that dies by suicide there are at least six to ten people that are horribly effected as well to the point where their mental health also, uh, you know, begins to fall apart and the whole mental health, how to get help, starts all over again. And I should say that the support groups for those that lose a loved one by suicide are now separated from regular grief groups and while attending one and sharing how my loved one died, people were going around the room, people said to me, "Oh my God, why is she here?" I've been asked to leave meetings because -- grief support meetings -- because of how my brother died and I don't think that's fair or correct or right and, um, so the issue goes far beyond the pain of losing a loved one and is extremely complicated. And, um, I wanted to share all that. And if ever anybody hears of someone that dies of a suicide please just say "I'm sorry for your loss" and ask about the person. And don't say anything cruel or unkind because, again, how one lives their entire life for 38 years should not be defined by a, you know, a irrational moment that effects -- that became a permanent solution to a temporary problem.
Changing topics, Senator Carl Levin's office released the following statement yesterday:WASHINGTON -- Calling the plight of religious minorities in Iraq "a tragic consequence" of the war there, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., today introduced a Senate resolution calling on the U.S. government, Iraqi government and United Nations Mission in Iraq to take steps to alleviate the dangers facing these minority groups. Sens. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., and Dick Durbin, D-Ill., joined Levin in sponsoring the sense of the Senate resolution. "While violence has declined in Iraq overall, religious minorities continue to be the targets of violence and intimidation," Levin said. "Members of many minority groups who have fled other parts of the country have settled in the north, only to find themselves living in some of the most unstable and violent regions of Iraq. We strongly urge the Iraqi government, the United Nations and the U.S. government to address this crisis without delay." Of approximately 1.4 million Christians of various denominations living in Iraq in 2003, only 500,000 to 700,000 remain. Another minority group, the Sabean Mandeans, has seen its population decline by more than 90 percent. Iraq's Jewish community, once one of the largest in the Arab world, has almost ceased to exist.According to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, members of religious minorities "have experienced targeted intimidation and violence, including killings, beatings, abductions, and rapes, forced conversions, forced marriages, forced displacement from their homes and businesses, and violent attacks on their houses of worship and religious leaders." The U.N. High Commissioner on Refugees reported that in 2008, there were an estimated 2.8 million internally displaced persons living in Iraq. Of that 2.8 million, nearly two out of three reported fleeing their home because of a direct threat to their lives, and, of that number, almost nine out of ten said they were targeted because of their ethnic or religious identity. The resolution introduced by the senators addresses the tragedy in several ways. It states the sense of the Senate that the fate of Iraqi religious minorities is a matter of grave concern and calls on the U.S. government and the United Nations to urge Iraq's government to increase security at places of worship, particularly where members of religious minorities are known to face risks. The resolution calls for the integration of regional and religious minorities into the Iraqi security forces, and for those minority members to be stationed within their own communities. The resolution calls on the Iraqi government to ensure that minority citizens can participate in upcoming elections, and to enforce its constitution, which guarantees "the administrative, political, cultural, and educational rights" of minorities. Finally, it urges a series of steps to ensure that development aid and other forms of support flow to minority communities in Iraq.
And lastly Carly Simon's latest album is released, Never Been Gone. The twelve track album is Carly dipping into her songwriting canon and providing two new songs and ten re-imaginings of earlier favorites including "You're So Vain," "Let The River Run" (her Grammy, Academy Award and Golden Globe winning song as Diane Sawyer pointed out yesterday on ABC's Good Morning America), "Anticipation," "You Belong To Me," "That's The Way I've Always Heard It Should Be" and "The Right Thing To Do." Tomorrow Carly's on NBC's The Today Show, Thursday's she's on Tavis Smiley (PBS) and also on NPR's Talk Of The Nation.
iraq
nprthe diane rehm show
mcclatchy newspapersnancy a. youssefnbc newsnbc nightly news with brian williamsann currytom aspellpbsthe newshourray suarezjane arrafthe christian science monitorabc newsworld news tonight with charlie gibsonmiguel marquez
the times of london
oliver augustmartin chulov
the washington posternesto londono
carly simon
Today on NPR's The Diane Rehm Show, Ricks felt he was also a comedian yet I seriously doubt, outside the locker room showers and the bedrooms, he's ever made anyone laugh.
"Matthew Hoh: new poster boy for critics of Afghanistan war" (Mark Sappenfield, Christian Science Monitor):
Matthew Hoh, perhaps unintentionally and unavoidably, has instantly made himself the poster boy for Vice President Joe Biden, liberal Democrats, and every American who looks at a troop surge in Afghanistan with deep skepticism.
Mr. Hoh, a respected retired marine captain, resigned his post as a Foreign Service officer in Afghanistan last week, The Washington Post reported Tuesday.
The reason: "I fail to see the value or the worth in continued US casualties or expenditures of resources in support of the Afghan government in what is, truly, a 35-year-old civil war," he said in his resignation letter.
Thomas E. Ricks called the man a nobody and told jokes about how the man didn't have a key to the washroom. He said he was a copy boy and nothing more and accused the Washington Post of attempting to create a story where there was none -- in other words, he accused Karen DeYoung -- a respected reporter -- of taking a small nothing and blowing it up.
That's really outrageous. I am aware that Thomas Ricks' journalism career is over and that the Washington Post and he are no longer together. But that was beyond a low blow.
He managed to insult both DeYoung and Matthew Hoh.
I am also really disgusted with people bringing him on and speaking to him about counter-insurgency as if he were objective.
He is not objective.
He belongs to the 'institute' that promotes counter-insurgency. (Counter-insurgency is war on a native people.)
Thomas E. Ricks needs to spend his time in the immediate future shopping in the young girls department for a bra to stash those man boobs into. He is a disgustingly vile man and I think we've all suffered enough from his bad attempts at humor.
In addition to what I've tackled above, C.I. calls him to the carpet for repeating the big lie of this decade.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Tuesday, October 27, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, Iraq wants to go nuclear, Thomas E. Ricks repeats the lies that sold the illegal war (connecting Iraq to you know what), if your loved one takes his or her own life while serving in a war zone the President of the United States sends you no letter expressing sorrow, and more.
Frank Sesno was the guest host on NPR's The Diane Rehm Show today and the first hour was devoted to Iraq and Afghanistan. Sesno spoke with McClatchy Newspapers Nancy A. Youssef, Wall St. Journal's Peter Spiegel and Crazy Ass Thomas E. Ricks.
Frank Sesno: Tom Ricks, let's start with these incredible bombings in Iraq and the shockwave they've sent through the military and the political systems there. What signal were they intended -- intending to send?
Thomas E. Ricks: I think they were intended to send the signal that [Prime Minister Nouri al-] Maliki does not have the control over Iraq that he asserts and that's really his sole campaign plank -- is look "You may not like me, you may not like how we're running the government but at least you're feeling safer" and I think was designed to undermine that. I was struck -- I read this morning that one of the trucks used to do the bombings was stolen in Falluja which indicates it probably came out of Anbar Province.
Frank Sesno: Which means?
Thomas E. Ricks: Which means a Sunni extrimist probably working with al Qaeda. Simeloutaneous large blast is one of the al Qaeda signatures that they like to do. We all remember that from 9-11.
Did Thomas E. Ricks just make a total idiot of himself? Yes, he did. He attempted to conflate al Qaeda in Mesopotomia with the al Qaeda group thought to be responsible for 9-11. The two are not related. Thomas E. Ricks is worse than George W. Bush because Ricks actually had a semi-functioning brain that wasn't destroyed via drink and cocaine. But that didn't stop him from conflating two separate things. al Qaeda in Mespotamia is a homegrown (Iraqi) group. It did not exist prior to the 2003 invasion. It is a response to the 2003 invasion. And Thomas E. Ricks needs to learn to choose his words a little more carefully. With each day, he drifts further and further from journalism.
What a moron. That anyone -- let alone a journalist -- would attempt to conflate 9-11 and Iraq at this late date is offensive. That a journalist would do so -- knowing full well that this conflation helped sell the illegal war -- helped sell it because the news media refused to call it out -- the same ones that will fact check a Saturday Night Live skit -- is just beyond belief. But notice that on the program, they just moved along past Crazy Ass Thomas Ricks -- not unlike they ignored that LIE when it was sold by the Bush administration. There WAS NO and IS NO connection between Iraq and 9-11 -- no matter what Thomas E. Ricks jibber-jabbers.
Frank Sesno: Which means, Nancy Youseff that Iraq is what? No where near as stable as the previous lull had indicated?
Nancy A. Youssef: Well it indicates that sectarian violence is still continuing despite the US military assertion that it's not as aggressive as it would be. These were Sunni attackers hitting Shia government buildings. It's an effort to sort of revitalize the sectarian fighting and I think it raises questions about ultimately what Iraqis and what Americans consider acceptable levels of violence in Iraq. Can these sort of occassional bombings -- you'll remember that the last one was in August -- will the Iraqis accept it? Will the Americans accept it as a condition for their leaving? That-that attacks will continue to go on? There are fewer attacks but they're becoming more and more spectacular.
Frank Sesno: And, Peter, at a critical critical moment.
Peter Spiegel: It is a critical moment because you have elections coming up in January. And just to not be overly pessimistic here 'cause, as Nancy mentioned, there was a very similar attack in August, we did not see the country descend into another round of sectarian violence. That's the good news. The other good news, as Tom pointed out, they seemed to be very political oriented. There are elections coming up. You know Maliki is vying for position with other Shia parties, with other Sunni parties. Is this just a domestic political issue being expressed through violence? If that's the case, there's an argument that as long as there's some sort of Sunni outlet through the political system, this may eventually go away. Now the problem is there appears to be no Sunni outlet for legitimate political expression right now because most of the parties are still dominated by Shi'ites and a lot of the government institutions are dominated by Shias -- they're using them to suppress Sunnis in the country. So as long as that continues, as long as there's no legitimate way for Sunnis to express their political outrage this stuff could continue.
Frank Sesno: Do you expect this stuff to continue?
Thomas E. Ricks: I do actually. The last line in the last book I've written on Iraq, The Gamble, is a quote from [former US] Ambassador [to Iraq] Ryan Crocker. He said to me twice in the course of 2008, "The events for which the Iraq War will be remembered have not yet occurred." There's a significant chance that the war will go on for another five to ten years. I think we're going to have American troops there for many, many years. They'll call them "trainers" and "advisors" but this war is far from over.
Frank Sesno: But Tom as they leave, as we have pulled out of the cities and as we withdraw to concentrated areas around the country, what vulnerability then does this latest string of events suggest for the innocent public in Iraq trying desparately to put their lives back together again because it suggest the vulnarability is extreme.
Thomas E. Ricks: Recently, the former mayor of Tal Afar, a city up in the northwest, wrote a very interesting essay in which he said all the conditions for civil war in Iraq are still there. This is why I think the civil war failed. It succeeded tactically, it improved security.
Frank Sesno: For the moment.
Thomas E. Ricks: Yes, but it's purpose was to lead to a political breakthrough and that didn't happen. That's not my saying what the purpose was, that's what the president said the purpose was.
Frarnk Sesno: Nancy, I see you nodding your head.
Nancy A. Youssef: Yeah, you know, what's interesting is that when you ask them at the Pentagon, "Look there have been two massive attacks in the last few months and what are you going to do?" And there's sort of a shrugging of the shoulders. The Status Of Forces Agreement calls for us to leave and the Pentagon's focused on Afghanistan now and yet if you go right below the surface you can feel from soldiers who have served, who wear braclets of fallen comrades, the frustration that potentially the United States is leaving as sloppily as it entered, that you've got 120,000 troops still based in Iraq and yet nothing is being done to-to-to stop this. The-the line --
Frarnk Sesno: Nothing is being done to stop this?
Nancy A. Youssef: No, because the line at the Pentagon is "We're asking for Maliki to ask us for help" or we're waiting for something like the Samarra mosque bombing. But if it gets to that level, it's already too late. I mean the Samarra mosque bombing didn't happen in a vacuum. That was a building of sectarian violence that manifested itself in a very violent way.
Peter Spiegel: One other issue, there are still 120,000 troops in Iraq which everyone seems to forget, which is about the levels they were pre-surge, which is still a very big level. But what is happening in sort of the granularity of that is a lot of assets that are needed to track down these bombing networks -- the UAVs, the unmanned drones, the intelligence assets -- all that is being sucked away to Afghanistan. And having spent time with General [Ray] Odierno, who is the commander there, a year ago, his-his real -- the thing he's most proud of is the ability to track down these networks through human intelligence through systems like unmanned drones and dismantle them. Well if you move all those assets to Afghanistan, are you still able to dismantle all those bombing networks that are still clearly sort of roving freely in Baghdad and be able to do these kind of things?
Frarnk Sesno: These bombs went off near three government buildings -- three important government buildings. How much of a set back does this present to the fledgling, struggling Iraqi government itself?
Nancy A. Youssef: I don't think we know yet. I mean, you saw the government try to respond by passing an election law which they've been debating for several months now as a way to sort of speak up. I think you're seeing Maliki -- it hurts Maliki the most, as Tom mentioned, because his political platform, his election platform is "I bring security to you." You saw rival political parties trying to exploit that.
Nancy A. Youssef was referring to a proposal put together by the Political Council for National Security and then passed on to Parliament. That was a proposal made (with much fanfare) yesterday. Like just about everything else on the governance front in Iraq, it fell apart. John Leland (New York Times) reports there was no consensus today and that they are at a stalemate, "another blockage in negotiations that have dragged on for weeks, threatening national elections scheduled for January 16th." 'Scheduled'? I believe the appropriate term is intended. Suadad al-Salhy (Reuters) adds that the issue of Kirkuk was the falling out point for the "proposal submitted by a high-ranking council that included Maliki and President Jalal Talabani." Repeating, no election law. Still.
Staying on Sunday's bombings, Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) reported this morning that credit for the bombings is allegedly being claimed by the Islamic State of Iraq and he noted that "rescue workers continued to pull bodies out of the rubble Monday". Robert Dreyfuss (The Nation via CBS News website) observes:
The perpetrators of the huge bomb attacks are unknown. Not unexpectedly, every Iraqi faction is blaming its enemies. Maliki is blaming Al Qaeda in Iraq and the Baathists, but at the very least the attacks have severely hurt Maliki's main cliam to leadership, namely, that he's kept Iraq safe. Many Sunnis are blaming Iran, charging that Iran's intelligence service is orchestrating the Baghdad attacks in order to force Maliki to abandon his independent electoral stance and sign on to the Shiite bloc, the Iraqi National Alliance. And, indirectly speaking for the Shiite bloc, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei of Iran has blamed "foreign agents" for the attacks:
"The bloody actions being committed in some Islamic countries, including Iraq, Pakistan and in some parts of the country (Iran), are aimed at creating division between the Shiites and Sunnis.... Those who carry out these terrorist actions are directly or indirectly foreign agents." Al Qaeda has claimed responsibility for the bombings, but such claims have to be taken with a grain of salt.
Sunday's bombings resulted in some TV coverage for Iraq yesterday. NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams, click here for the video of that segment
Ann Curry: We turn now to Iraq, still reeling from massive explosions that wrecked three buildings in Baghdad on Sunday. The dead now number more than 150. Hundreds more are injured. And the attacks raise the question: can the Iraqi government keep the lid on? The latest tonight from NBC's Tom Aspell. Tom Aspell: Grief and shock today at some of the funerals for bombings in Baghdad. Iraqi police and hospitals now say that up to thirty children from a day care center at the Justice Ministry are among the dead. The second blast was captured on a cell phone. The blast destroyed two government buildings outside the Green Zone in central Baghdad. Iraqi officials said at least 150 people were killed, at least 500 people were wounded. A security spokesman said two buses were used to carry the explosives -- 2,000 pounds in one and 1500 pounds in the other. It was the worst attack in Baghdad for two years. This morning Iraqis were blaming the government for lax security issues. There are checkpoints every one-hundred yards How did these vehicles come here" asked this man. Iraqi troops were patrolling Baghdad streets this morning. The government is warning there could be more attacks before elections in three months time. Tom Aspell, NBC News, London.
Also covering the bombings was PBS' NewsHour (link has text, audio and video options) and this an excerpt:JANE ARRAF [Christian Science Monitor]: It has. The death toll looks like it's going past about 150, Ray, and hundreds more wounded. And more than that, a lot of questions being raised as to how this actually could have happened just two months after the horrific bombing of the Finance and Foreign Ministries. Now, yesterday, at the site, there were absolute scenes of devastation, people sobbing, carrying away wounded relatives, trying to find their relatives, and pretty much chaos for the first little while. The streets were flooded. Rescue workers were trying to wade through bystanders. It really was one of the most horrific scenes that many of us have seen in quite a long time. We had kind of thought this was over with. And now it seems to have started again. And that is definitely the feeling that you feel on the streets, that things could very much get worse again.RAY SUAREZ: You mentioned that August attack. At the time, weren't measures put in place to make this kind of operation less likely in Baghdad?JANE ARRAF: Absolutely. That August attack, which killed at least 100 people with an eerily similar attack, a truck packed with explosives in two different places, and a suicide attack, at that, was actually a wakeup call. And it was said to have been a systemic failure -- failure of security. Now, the Iraqi government responded by firing some senior Iraqi security officials. It said it put new measures in place. I spoke with a senior American official today who said, indeed, they had put measures in place. But it has not prevented these two bombings, which, again, were eerily similar. These were trucks traveling streets where no trucks are supposed to be in daytime. They apparently went through checkpoints, where they should have been checked, but weren't. And they managed to explode in one of the busiest times of the day, in one of the most packed places in Baghdad, killing government workers, as well as passersby, including children.
ABC World News Tonight with Charlie Gibson covered the bombings.Charlie Gibson: In Iraq meanwhile the funerals began today in the wake of the stunning twin bombings that tore through the heart of Baghdad yesterday. The death toll is now 155 with the grim discovery that 24 children at a day care center were among those killed. The attacks raised questions about Iraq's security. Miguel Marquez was at the scene of the blasts.Miguel Marquez: The devastation is almost unimaginable, buildings shredded as far as the eye can see, glass, blood splattered clothing and burned rubber. When the bombs went off they shattered the relative calm here. Six months ago this street was off limits to traffic but with security improving the barriers were lifted. An investigation is now underway into how two vehicles carrying 1500 pounds of explosives each including military grade C4, got through multiple military checkpoints before reaching their targets. Despite all the security agencies the government here is helpless he says, they only cause traffic jams. Today Iraqis begin the wrenching task of burying their loved ones. Comfort was in short supply. They blame their government for failing to stop the violence. This is the hole created by the explosion. It goes down about twenty-five feet. The blast was so powerful they burst a water main, flooding this section of Baghdad. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki who faces re-election in January has campaigned on his ability to make Iraq safer. His opponents say this bombings proves the military is infiltratedIraqi National Security Advisor Mouwaffak Rubaie: What we need to concentrate on is enabling our intelligence agencies. This is an intelligence led war now. Miguel Marquez: The bombings are especially shocking because security here has improved by leaps and bounds in the last two years. Construction is everywhere and night life has made a roaring comeback. [An Iraqi woman speaks.] "We have one quiet week and then the next week things get worse," she says. "The security situation is still the same." The US military says it is assisting in the investigation but there are no plans to increase US patrols here nor slow the rate of pulling US forces out of Iraq. Miguel Marquez, ABC News, Baghdad.
Not everyone provided significant time for the news. CBS Evening News (Harry Smith sitting in for Katie Couric) reduced it to a five-sentence headline. Remember that when you've heard a story and are trying to select an evening newscast in order to find out what happened. It was just a headline to CBS Evening News. Oliver August (Times of London) quotes a government employee stating, "Sadness is overwhelming today in the office. It's as if we are sitting at a funeral in the office because many of our colleagues and people we know were killed." Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) quotes an employee injured in the bombings, Shauki Abdul Jabar, stating, "There is no security, no hope." And he reports on three men searching through the rubble for some sign of Youssef Musen Nouri, their four-year-old nephew whom they now assume is dead. It wasn't just a passing headline to any of those people.
The heartbeat went out of our house
The rhythm went out of our romance
But in life that happens and you just have to remember to breathe . . .
-- "Coming Around Again," written by Carly Simon from her new recording on Never Been Gone.
Meanwhile Mu Xuequan (Xinhua) reports, "Baghdad governor on Tuesday said that his council voted to demand resignation of Iraqi minister of interior and chief of Baghdad operations command over Sunday's bloody blasts that enraged Iraqis and shaped a setback to the Iraqi government which struggle to restore normalcy in the country nearly three months ahead of the country's national elections." Sammy Ketz (Mail & Guardian) adds that Baghdad Governor Salah Abdul Razzaq said of the bombings (after viewing video footage of it), "It's a human failure . . . It can only be negligence or collusion."
And while these bombings are fresh on everyone's mind, someone might want to ask who in the world thinks nuclear power is needed in Iraq? What if a nuclear reactor were in Iraq and had been targeted on Sunday. It's something people better start considering. Martin Chulov (Guardian) reports:
Iraq has started lobbying for approval to again become a nuclear player, almost 19 years after British and American war planes destroyed Saddam Hussein's last two reactors, the Guardian has learned.
The Iraqi government has approached the French nuclear industry about rebuilding at least one of the reactors that was bombed at the start of the first Gulf war. The government has also contacted the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and United Nations to seek ways around resolutions that ban Iraq's re-entry into the nuclear field.
Iraq says it envisages that a reactor would be used initially for research purposes. "We are co-operating with the IAEA and expanding and defining areas of research where we can implement nuclear technology for peaceful means," the science and technology minister, Raid Fahmi, told the Guardian.
From future violence to some of today's reported violence, Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 shop owner was shot dead in Mosul and 1 "young man" was shot dead in Mosul.
Turning to the US, today on Democracy Now! (link has text, audio and video options), Sharif Abdel Kouddous and Amy Goodman spoke with Chancellor Keesling's parents Jannett and Gregg Keesling. Their son, Chancellor, was serving in Iraq, on his second deployment, when he apparently took his own life earlier this year.
JANNETT KEESLING: I spoke to Chancellor the night before he died for about four minutes. And as always, he wore a really tough exterior, because even after conversations with some of the soldiers after he died, no one saw that he was in any type of distress or trouble. I know they say he was sleeping. He was happy that morning. He was singing.
But what he did tell me that night is that he was going to have a very long, difficult day. His conversation was quite brief. Normally he would say that he loves me, and he would say goodbye. But this time he simply hung up. I had the feeling that something was definitely bothering him more than the norm. And the next thing we knew, they were at our door saying that he had --
GREGG KEESLING: He had passed.
JANNETT KEESLING: -- passed away.
AMY GOODMAN: Where was he?
JANNETT KEESLING: But nobody saw.
GREGG KEESLING: He was at Camp Stryker in Baghdad. And he --
AMY GOODMAN: And what did they explain to you? What happened?
GREGG KEESLING: That he had gone to a latrine and locked himself in the latrine and took his own life, with his M4.
[. . .]
GREGG KEESLING: Well, I just -- we do not believe our son would have taken his life if he had been here at home. This would not have happened. This is directly related to his military service. Our casualty officer -- the military has been very, very, very good to us in helping us. And our casualty officer, though, said the same thing, that "We do not believe your son would have taken his life if he was back home." And, you know, every other benefit that the military provides to families has been afforded to us. We were flown to Dover to greet the body, in a very emotional experience. And we had a military burial and the twenty-one-gun salute. And Jannett was presented the American flag, which is a very moving ceremony. But the issue of presidential condolences -- in fact, we were shocked. I began -- President Obama has set up the suicide task force, and I began to talk with Brigadier General Colleen McGuire and members of staff there, and they were very helpful and wonderful. And during those conversations, I mentioned, "By the way, you know, when do you think the letter comes from the President?" And she goes, "I don't know. I'll check it out." And we talked again a few times. And every time at the end of the conversation, you know, "How are you guys doing?" and all that. And I said, "By the way, when are we going to get the letter from the President?" And on our third conversation, one of the staff members said to me, "Oh, my god, Mr. Keesling, I've just discovered there's a longstanding policy that prevents the President from acknowledging the death of a soldier who takes his life in the war theater by his own hand." And I nearly dropped to my knees. I was shocked. And I just said to her that I think this is a policy that should change. Our loss is no different. He was on his second tour. The investigative report shows that he was a good soldier. One of my favorite comments in the report is that his unit commander said, or unit leader says, "I wish I had fifteen Keeslings." He was a good soldier. He helped other soldiers. In fact, there's a soldier back stateside today who was at risk of suicide that Chancy intervened to help. And we got his uniform back, and when my sister was packing away the uniform, she found in the pocket and pulled out the suicide information card. He had it in his pocket of his uniform. And he helped other soldiers, but he was unable to help himself. And so, our grief is deep. And, you know, the letter won't stop -- we'll still be hollow inside for the rest of our lives, but the acknowledgement from the President that our son gave his life in service to the causes of the United States is important to us, and I think it should be important to the hundreds, perhaps even thousands, of suicide victims in this war in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well. It's my understanding that the suicide rate in the military has, for the first time, surpassed the civilian suicide rate. The mental health issues are quite severe. And so, we're just simply appealing to the President to change the policy, to offer condolences to the families, like ours, that are struggling and suffering with the unique form of suffering a military suicide leaves in its wake. And it's been especially hard for us.
The suicide rate has repeatedly increased and the stories of it are usually 'this happened, then that happened' in a sort of timeline manner that rarely connects the death to the loss those who survive feel. The parents expressed their loss today and on July 31st, on the second hour of NPR's The Diane Rehm Show, guest host Susan Paige spoke with a caller who wanted to address this topic.
Susan Paige: Let's go to Pamela. She's calling us from New Jersey. Pamela, thanks so much for calling.
Pamela: Yes. Good morning, how are you? Thank you for taking my call. I am responding to a comment I heard earlier and it really just like shot me in my heart. And the comment was that the suicide rates [in the US military] are skyrocketing and how this has to be addressed. And I literally like I said stopped dead in my tracks. I . . . lost my brother in service due to suicide. He was home on a leave and, uh, about to be, pardon me, to go back and to serve and, uh, was, uh -- the difficulty in getting the mental health services I believe that he needed -- I mean he was married with two children -- was most, most difficult and delayed and a long wait and this and that. And then the unfathomable happened and, uh, when I, uh, at times decided to share how he died rather than just say he died in the war and I would say he died by suicide the remark I would hear unfortunately was, "Oh my goodness, he didn't die a hero then." And-and I continually hear this and I guess I want to make a statement that how someone dies, um, should not be -- that -- that is not a definition of how they lived their lives. And here was a good man who gave and did so much for the community and yet because of how he died -- which you know is a mental illness health related, etc. etc. -- he is now being defined as -- not -- as a zero. And not being defined. And I think you know this-this suicide issue is getting way out of control and for every person that dies by suicide there are at least six to ten people that are horribly effected as well to the point where their mental health also, uh, you know, begins to fall apart and the whole mental health, how to get help, starts all over again. And I should say that the support groups for those that lose a loved one by suicide are now separated from regular grief groups and while attending one and sharing how my loved one died, people were going around the room, people said to me, "Oh my God, why is she here?" I've been asked to leave meetings because -- grief support meetings -- because of how my brother died and I don't think that's fair or correct or right and, um, so the issue goes far beyond the pain of losing a loved one and is extremely complicated. And, um, I wanted to share all that. And if ever anybody hears of someone that dies of a suicide please just say "I'm sorry for your loss" and ask about the person. And don't say anything cruel or unkind because, again, how one lives their entire life for 38 years should not be defined by a, you know, a irrational moment that effects -- that became a permanent solution to a temporary problem.
Changing topics, Senator Carl Levin's office released the following statement yesterday:WASHINGTON -- Calling the plight of religious minorities in Iraq "a tragic consequence" of the war there, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., today introduced a Senate resolution calling on the U.S. government, Iraqi government and United Nations Mission in Iraq to take steps to alleviate the dangers facing these minority groups. Sens. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., and Dick Durbin, D-Ill., joined Levin in sponsoring the sense of the Senate resolution. "While violence has declined in Iraq overall, religious minorities continue to be the targets of violence and intimidation," Levin said. "Members of many minority groups who have fled other parts of the country have settled in the north, only to find themselves living in some of the most unstable and violent regions of Iraq. We strongly urge the Iraqi government, the United Nations and the U.S. government to address this crisis without delay." Of approximately 1.4 million Christians of various denominations living in Iraq in 2003, only 500,000 to 700,000 remain. Another minority group, the Sabean Mandeans, has seen its population decline by more than 90 percent. Iraq's Jewish community, once one of the largest in the Arab world, has almost ceased to exist.According to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, members of religious minorities "have experienced targeted intimidation and violence, including killings, beatings, abductions, and rapes, forced conversions, forced marriages, forced displacement from their homes and businesses, and violent attacks on their houses of worship and religious leaders." The U.N. High Commissioner on Refugees reported that in 2008, there were an estimated 2.8 million internally displaced persons living in Iraq. Of that 2.8 million, nearly two out of three reported fleeing their home because of a direct threat to their lives, and, of that number, almost nine out of ten said they were targeted because of their ethnic or religious identity. The resolution introduced by the senators addresses the tragedy in several ways. It states the sense of the Senate that the fate of Iraqi religious minorities is a matter of grave concern and calls on the U.S. government and the United Nations to urge Iraq's government to increase security at places of worship, particularly where members of religious minorities are known to face risks. The resolution calls for the integration of regional and religious minorities into the Iraqi security forces, and for those minority members to be stationed within their own communities. The resolution calls on the Iraqi government to ensure that minority citizens can participate in upcoming elections, and to enforce its constitution, which guarantees "the administrative, political, cultural, and educational rights" of minorities. Finally, it urges a series of steps to ensure that development aid and other forms of support flow to minority communities in Iraq.
And lastly Carly Simon's latest album is released, Never Been Gone. The twelve track album is Carly dipping into her songwriting canon and providing two new songs and ten re-imaginings of earlier favorites including "You're So Vain," "Let The River Run" (her Grammy, Academy Award and Golden Globe winning song as Diane Sawyer pointed out yesterday on ABC's Good Morning America), "Anticipation," "You Belong To Me," "That's The Way I've Always Heard It Should Be" and "The Right Thing To Do." Tomorrow Carly's on NBC's The Today Show, Thursday's she's on Tavis Smiley (PBS) and also on NPR's Talk Of The Nation.
iraq
nprthe diane rehm show
mcclatchy newspapersnancy a. youssefnbc newsnbc nightly news with brian williamsann currytom aspellpbsthe newshourray suarezjane arrafthe christian science monitorabc newsworld news tonight with charlie gibsonmiguel marquez
the times of london
oliver augustmartin chulov
the washington posternesto londono
carly simon
Monday, October 26, 2009
Isaiah, Carly Simon, Hank
Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "'Feminist' Naomi Wolf speaks" went up last night.
"Coming around again" (Joan Anderman, Boston Globe):
People have been asking Simon why she has felt compelled to speak so freely ever since the notoriously frank singer-songwriter released her well-titled breakthrough, 1972’s “No Secrets.’’ As she prepares to put out her 26th studio album, the question - and the answer - still applies.
“We’re all so tiny,’’ Simon says. “We’re going to be gone in a second. What the hell?’’
Anxious and intrepid, wounded and ardent, sensationally smart and lethally self-doubting, Carly Simon can parse her own paradoxes with finesse, and on her best songs she transposes the elegant wreckage into verse and chorus. Now she’s diving back into the remains of days past for “Never Been Gone,’’ a collection of re-imaginings of her hits (and a pair of never-heard tracks) that comes out Tuesday.
“I didn’t want to do it,’’ Simon confesses, “but my hands were tied.’’
She’s referring to her contract with Starbucks, which Simon is suing, claiming that the company mishandled the promotion of her last album, 2008’s “This Kind of Love,’’ resulting in poor sales. “The reason I went to Starbucks is I thought they had such perfect marketing for me,’’ says Simon, who followed in the footsteps of Paul McCartney, Ray Charles, and ex-husband James Taylor, all of whom had great success selling music to the chain’s upscale, educated patrons. But Simon says she found out just days before that album’s release in April last year that the coffee giant was ending its involvement in Hear Music, a joint venture with the Concord Music Group.
“The week my album came out I did a concert in their marquee store in [New York’s] Astor Place and there wasn’t one copy in the place. At my signing event,’’ Simon notes incredulously. “Was I supposed to sign the air?’’
Back when that album came out, Trina and Kat both shared stories of the problems they had getting it -- Starbucks clerks being completely unaware the album was out and insisting it wasn't, then finally checking their deliveries and finding out that they did have copies. Starbucks screwed Carly over and they should have to pay for what they did.
Even if they do pay, it's not a 'win' for Carly. She spent a lot of time working on that album, pouring her heart into it and it can't be given a new sendoff. But Starbucks can learn that they have to honor their contracts. It's past time they learned that.
The album's out tomorrow. Be sure to check it out. At Third, yesterday, we did "The Carly Roundtable."
"TV: Hank Tanks" (Ava and C.I., The Third Estate Sunday Review):
Hank (Grammer) and Tilly Pryor (Melinda McGraw) are supposed to have gone from riches to rags but try to find any evidence of that in anything the writers assign to Tilly. For someone who's supposedly gone from the high life to a home falling around her and sleeping in a children's bed, Tilly's just a ray of sunshine. A constant ray of sunshine. You keep waiting for the episode where everyone finds out that she's been hoarding Quaaludes since the late seventies. That's really the only explanation for her eternal, beaming smile.
That really goes a long way towards summing up everything that's wrong with the show which I have seen. I am the worst about remembering TV shows and we make a point to try to catch Cougar Town on ABC Wednesdays. The first few weeks, I had to have the TV on from the start prime time and I'd go through some work folders or talk to Mike or whatever in killing time waiting for Courtney Cox's show. Hank is the worst show. It's just not funny. I don't know that I'm necessarily funny but I do enjoy laughing and I couldn't laugh once at that awful show.
In Baghdad yesterday, deadly bombings. C.I. covers it in the snapshot but I'll note you can click here if you'd like audio and catch Free Speech Radio News' report.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Monday, October 26, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, Iraq's death toll from yesterday's massive bombings rises and includes children, finger-pointing becomes the favorite past-time, a US 'helper' and his ties to an oil company are explored, a US Iraq War resister seeks sanctuary in a Canadian church, and more.
Sunday Baghdad saw bombings resulting in a higher death total than Black Wednesday, Bloody Wednesday, Gory Wednesday August 19th. Eleanor Hall (Australia's ABC's The World Today -- link has text and audio) explained, "Twin suicide bombers targeted the Iraqi Ministry of Justice all but destroying the government department's headquarters, which are just outside the high-security 'green zone' in the centre of Baghdad." Shane McLeod added, "The sound of the second blast was captured by a mobile phone video camera being used to survey the aftermath of the first. Targeted was the headquarters of the Ministry of Justice, just a few hundred metres from the fortified green zone in Baghdad." Sahar Issa and Hannah Allam (McClatchy Newspapers) report that Iraqi government figures are stating that "a water tanker and a refrigerated food truck" were used in the attacks. This morning, Jack Kimball and Michael Christie (Reuters) report that the death toll has climbed and is currently at 155 with over five hundred left injured. Rod Nordland (New York Times) observes that "an uncertain number of children" are among the dead. CBS News and AP add that 24 "children who were killed were on a bus leaving a daycare center near the Justice Ministry when the attack occurred".
Ned Parker and Caesar Ahmed (Los Angeles Times) sketch out yesterday's assault, "Cars clogges the road as tehy approached the traffic circle in front of the Justice Ministry, with its statue of modern Iraq's first ruler, King Faisal, mounted on a horse. An old white pickup truck had broken down by the traffic circle and its driver approached a policeman and started yelling. [. . .] It was then that the first of two car bombs exploded on opposite ends of the block." Xinhua adds, "Xinhua correspondent at the scene said that he saw ponds of blood and parts of human bodies scattered close to the blast site near the Mansour Hotel where the wreckage of dozens of civilian cars could be seen near the site." Martin Chulov (Guardian) offers, "Witnesses described body parts sprawled across the area. Mohammed Falah, was caught in the blast: 'There was a woman's leg next to me. I picked it up and gave it to the ambulance'."
Sharif Abdel Kouddous (Democracy Now! -- link has text, video and audio) asked Rick Rowley for his take on the bombings today:
Well, first of all, the first thing to say is that, you know, there is no peace in Iraq, that these bombings, first of all, put the lie once again to the three myths that we've been pushed about the war in Iraq: first, the story that the war is over; second, that we won the war; and third, that the lessons of this victory can be applied to Afghanistan. The fact is that what passes for calm in Iraq today isn't peace at all; it's a fragile, fraying truce after a brutal sectarian civil war, and it's a truce without reconciliation that -- because it's put in place a system that is a continuing engine for violence, and tragedies like these are a legacy of the American occupation and will remain one for years to come. So, bombings like these today -- or on Sunday were attempts -- I mean, you know, they're being blamed on al-Qaeda in Iraq, and it seems likely that it was a group like al-Qaeda in Iraq that carried them out. And there are attempts by those extreme elements inside the Sunni insurgency to target the Shiite-led government, which they see as their sectarian enemy, but also to try to draw the Shiite militias back into an all-out civil war that could unite the Shiites again in their resistance. I mean, bombings like the ones on Sunday are remarkable for their massive scale, the carnage they cause, but there are multiple bombings in Iraq every single week.
[. . .]
And yeah, absolutely, I mean, the government in Baghdad is seen by al-Qaeda in Iraq and by the extremists inside the Sunni resistance as a proxy, as an Iranian proxy, dominated by the Supreme Council and by the Dawa Party, both parties that were -- well, I mean, the Supreme Council was formed in Iran, and Dawa, you know, spent most of its existence in Iran. And, you know, these parties were put by the US in mid-2004, were put in charge of the government, and their militias were turned into the core of the Iraqi security structure. So, as the civil war kicked off, the main protagonists in the civil war were militias inside the police force that were -- came from these parties and, you know, versus Sunni insurgents on the outside who were doing bombings and these kinds of soft-target attacks on civilians. So, you know, clearly, I mean, institutions and ministries that are controlled by ISCI, the Supreme Council, and by Dawa are definitely seen as sectarian enemies. I mean, the Ministry of Justice, as well, you know, it's -- the police and the court system have been seen in the -- I mean, not so much the court system. The police and the prison system in Iraq have been seen as one of the tools in the sectarian fight that the Shiite militias have used from the very beginning.
Gina Chon (Wall St. Journal) noted yesterday that the charge of "al Qaeda in Iraq" was instantly being made by some including Nouri al-Maliki, US-installed thug of the occupation. Mohammed al Dulaimy and Hannah Allam (McClatchy Newspapers -- link has text and video) add, "Maliki, a Shiite Muslim, released a statement blaming elements of Saddam Hussein's predominantly Sunni Baath Party and militants from al Qaida in Iraq for the attack. As of late Sunday, no group had claimed responsibility." Yes, Maliki couldn't wait to start (yet again) blaming former Ba'athists.
ELEANOR HALL: Given the number of people killed though in these two recent attacks and the outrage from the public that we are already hearing, I mean what is this attack and the August one likely to mean for the elections in January?
SAM PARKER: Well, clearly it undercuts Prime Minister Maliki's main narrative which is Iraq was chaos and he brought it back from the brink. It definitely hurts him and certainly if you look at what has followed the August bombings there has been a lot of that, a lot of finger pointing and a lot of people saying your claims are bogus. That Iraq is just as unsafe as it has always been and that generally is not true.I mean, yes you can point to these like high-profile mass casualty attacks and as tragic as they are, overall death counts in Iraq are still, even despite these attacks, are still much lower than they have been at any period except for right after the invasions. So for the entire war, we are still at the lowest points and so these large scale attacks largely had propaganda value to them.
Liz Sly and Usama Redha (Los Angeles Times) explain, "It is Maliki who stands to lose the most from a security breakdown, because he is campaigning on his record as the leader who helped restore a good measure of security after the sectarian warfare that raged after the U.S.-led invasion. Overall, violence is down 90% since the peak in 2006, U.S. commanders say." Anthony Shadid (Washington Post) adds, "The attacks came at a precarious moment in Iraqi politics. Parliament has yet to agree on legislation to organize the planned Jan. 16 vote, despite warnings by the United States and the United Nations that time will probably run out by next weekend. Critics have also complained that some of the key officials charged with security -- Maliki and Interior Minister Jawad Bolani -- are more engaged in the election than in running the country." Kurdish MP Mahmoud Othman tells Al Jazeera, "This sends two messages, one of them is to the investment conference in Washington held just a few days ago as if to tell investors not to come to Iraq . . . At the same time I think it may be a message to the meeting today of the political council of national security." Baghdad governor Salah Abdel Razaq tells Elizabeth Palmer (CBS News), "The bodies I have seen -- these innocent people, what have they done? To have this destiny, it is very terrible." Timothy Williams (New York Times) explains, "In large part, Mr. Maliki's popularity has rested on the belief that he has kept the country reasonably safe. But the bombings at four high-profile, well-protected government buildings within a two-month span led some Iraqis to say Sunday that they were reconsidering their support for Mr. Maliki." It should be noted that "Mr. Maliki's popularity" -- like Ashlee Simpson's talent -- is something that's been assumed but never verified. Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) provides a voice for people on the streets such as vendor Abbas Fadhil who states, "This is all from the political parties -- they want to gain seats in the election." Um Ali tells Arraf, "There had to be someone with official backing behind this -- how could they get through the checkpoints? Why are our children, our sisters still being killed? For 20 years we've been fighting."
Gina Chon (Wall St. Journal) puts the bombings into the larger instability landscape that is Iraq: "The timing of the Sunday bombings coincided with plans by Iraq's top political body, the Political Council for National Security, comprising top political leaders and cabinet ministers, to consider ways to end a stalemate over a crucial election law needed to begin work ahead of the vote. The legislation has stalled over disagreements between factions over how the vote will be conducted in Kirkuk, an oil-rich region in the north torn by sectarian and ethnic tensions among the area's Kurds, Arabs and Turkomen."
Ranj Alaaldin (Guardian) offers his take on the bombings:
A broad analysis suggests complicity on the part of the Sunni-Arab world: keep Iraq unstable and you stop the country from becoming an effective Iranian client state when the US withdraws; or, at the very least, facilitate terrorist attacks in the country and you have some form of a counter-measure to Iran's unmatched influence. Alternatively, the attacks on Kurdish-run and Shia-run ministries may have sought to encourage incorporation of the Sunnis, specifically the Sons of Iraq fighters, into the Shia-led government, which has so far been slow in doing so. The objectives are not necessarily independent of each other.
A more straightforward analysis suggests prime minister Nouri al-Maliki as the prime target of all this: destabilise Iraq in the run-up to January's parliamentary elections and you hurt Maliki's chances of success, as he will be campaigning on the same security platform that won him this year's provincial elections. Indeed, things are not looking too rosy for the premier now that he has lost his security card. Iraqis will struggle to list his achievements in recent times and find the country no closer to better services and increased employment levels.
As far as observations go, James Denselow (Guardian) is on stronger ground than anyone when he observes:
It takes a certain death toll for Iraq to make it back on to the headlines. Despite the presence of some 120,000 US troops (and 100 or so British naval trainers who were recently let back into the country) Iraq appears to be old news. In many people's minds it is yesterday's conflict; the surge was a success and the prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, is a democratically mandated strongman who is bringing economic success to the country -- or so the narrative goes.
And as the instability thrives, Nouri depends upon US forces to prop him up. Mohammed al Dulaimy and Hannah Allam (McClatchy Newspapers) explain, "U.S. Marines arrived at the scene of Sunday's attack with Iraqi forces, in accordance with a U.S.-Iraq security pact that requires American forces to coordinate with their Iraqi counterparts before getting involved in combat or other operations. Americans at the scene asked Iraqi security guards for surveillance videos from buildings in the area, and investigators took soil samples and carted off pieces of twisted metal." The US government has attempted to call the assault a "terrorist" attack -- it's a war. All sides could be labled "terrorists." That would inclue the US which bombed and raided Iraq for the last six years and counting. It was an attack, it was an assault. It was not "terrorism." It was an attack which took place in an ongoing war and was most likely aimed at a government installed by foreigners and made up of Iraqi exiles who spent most of the last decade living abroad. Wamith al-Kassab (MideastYouth) ponders the bombings:
what just happened? Cause I watch the news every day ,and I saw Hilary Clinton give a speech on Iraq-American conference in Washington and she was promising the Iraqi displace families that there will be efforts to return them to Iraq as security improved , Almalky said in his speech in the same conference that security in Iraq has improved and today Iraqi people can go outside at night and drive safely to visit the holly shrines in Najaf ( Iraqi leaders measure security by the times when people get killed visiting holly shrines and days when people can go safely ,which brings us to bigger question , is security in Iraq related to shiaa visits to shrines or it is a whole state security?)
yes , the Iraq I left after working for 7 years in medical camps for refugees ,was a safe place ,I mean it was not totally safe , cause there is few nasty bad boys who usually beats the hell of journalists in the middle of the streets ,and threats to kill you cause you post some bloges on human rights every now and then , and yes ,if I return today my chances is zero to go out of Baghdad airport alive ,but come on ,I am only 1 person and this is small terrorist attacks that should not effect the magnificent large picture of security change in Iraq ,we had 600,000 Iraqi soldiers most of them trained in Jordan ,Kurdistan ,few went to USA ,all of them were train by Americans ,we had security companies( they work to protect the VIP only ,but any way we had ones) ,we bought armed cars ,we bought weapons ,we had police forces ,the support forces from Sunni ( waking councils) ,we had beshmerka ( Kurdish army which sometimes goverment say they are militia ,others time they are official army) ,we had small armies for each party in Iraq ,we had many people who carry guns and I do not know why ,just I know you do not whanna mess with them.
So we had allot of people who formed check points with metal and weapons and explosive detectors devices ,we had concrete walls all over Baghdad and we had traffic jam because of the check points has to check each car to prevent terrorist from attacking the innocent
Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) reports, "On Monday, streets around the devastated buildings remained closed to traffic. The blasts sheared the front off the Justice and Municipality ministry buildings, leaving floors caving under collapsed ceilings." Gina Chon (Wall St. Journal) adds that "Iraqi police and soldiers were carrying out intense searches at checkpoints" today.
Violence continued today in Iraq.
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Karbala suicide car bombing which claimed the life of the driver and 4 civilians leaving fourteen more people injured, a Mosul sticky bombing which wounded one person and a Falluja roadside bombing which injured four people.
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 Turkoman shot dead in Mosul. Reuters drops back to Sunday to note that 2 people were shot dead (two more injured) in Mosul.
Kidnappings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 "young boy" kidnapped in Kirkuk.
Corpses?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse was discovered in Kirkuk
(man who had been kidnapped Saturday).
We'll move over to Canada to note, as requested, Krystalline Kraus (Rabble) reporting on US War Resister Rodney Watson:
The latest flashpoint in the battle to keep war resisters in Canada has been
the case of Rodney Watson who on Monday October 19, 2009, decided to seek
sanctuary in a B.C. [British Columbia] church rather than face deporation to the United States to face desertion charges. Watson, who is originally from Kansas City, Kansas, enlisted in the US Army in 2004 for a three-year contract with the intentions of becoming a cook since he wanted to serve the troops in a non-combat capactiy.
In 2005, he was deployed to Iraq just north of Mosul, where he was put in
charge of searching vehicles and Iraqi civilians for explosives, contraband and
weapons before they entered the base. He was also expected to "keep the
peace" by monitoring Iraqi civilians who worked on the base and fire his weapon
at Iraqi children who approached the perimeter.
When he was informed he was being deported, Rodney sought asylum at the church. Earlier this month, Stig Nielsen (Metro Vancouver) reported:Rodney Watson of Kansas City had just returned from a deployment in Iraq in 2006 when the U.S. army extended his contract for three years. Watson said he felt he had served his time and that he wasn't about to go back to a war he doesn't agree with. "The main thing was the disrespect for the people -- some guys would have a bad day and they would just beat up on some Iraqi civilians," Watson said.He deserted three years ago and crossed the border into Canada, where he fell in love and became a father.The 31-year-old is at First United Church on Hastings Street in Vancouver where he's been granted asylum since September. Camille Bains (Canadian Press) reported that he was ordered deported September 11th:Ric Matthews, lead minister of First United Church in Vancouver, said the board and the congregation support Watson. Matthews said he met Watson at a rally organized on his behalf by the War Resisters Support Campaign and that Watson later approached him about staying at the church. "There will be an effort to try and help create the momentum for something constructive to come out of this," he said. "I think the United Church in general, beyond just us, would now be working through some of our people who have experience in working with refugee claims and in engaging with government in conversation." Matthews said Watson's fiancee and son often visit him at the church, which provides daily meals for people in need.
Back to Iraq. On the latest installment of Inside Iraq (Al Jazeera) which began broadcasting Friday (streams online as well), Jasim al-Azzawi explored the conflict of 'help' and enrichment by examining the apparent conflicts of interests which have ensnared
Peter Galbraith.
Jasim al-Azzawi: When Norway's most respected financial newspaper, Dagens Noeringsliv, covered the activities of a small, Norwegian oil company called DNO operating in northern Iraq, no one expected subsequent investigations to implicate the former US politician Peter Galbraith. Ambassador Galbraith is now suing DNO for a quarter of a billion dollars because the Kurdistan Regional Government has squeezed him out of his 5% stake in the company. What is more devastating for Iraq is the role Mr. Galbraith played as a political consultant to the KRG writing Iraq's Constitution in a way that can only be described as a potential ticking time bomb. This story has all the marks of dual loyalty, betrayal and international intrigue. [. . .] I am now joined from Oslo by Terje Erikstad, a financial news editor at Dagens Naeringsliv and from London by Sabah al-Mukhtar, president of Arab Layers Association in London. And we were also supposed to be joined by Mohammad Ihsan, Minister for Extra-Regional Affairs of the KRG but unfortunately we were informed at the last minute that he fell sick and cannot join the program. Sabah and Terje, welcome to Inside Iraq. Terje, let me start with you. Were you surprised to discover that the name of Mr. Peter Galbraith, former US Ambassador to Croatia and a leading figure in Washington, he had a 5% stake in the DNO?
Terje Erikstad: Yes, indeed we were very much surprised because it all started with a Norwegian company being fined by the Oslo stock exchange. And we started working on this case as an ordinary conflict between a company on the stock exchange and the stock exchange. And it ended up with Peter Galbraith owning oil interests or having oil interests in Kurdistan. That was very surprising for us indeed.
Jasim al-Azzawi: Sabah, who is Peter Galbraith? Set the situation for us.
Sabah al-Mukhtar: Galbraith is a professor of international politics in the USA. He was an ambassador in a variety of capacities -- in Croatia and Afghanistan. He was advisor to the US government. He was a man who was being paid a salary by the government of the United States of America. He was at the same time being paid a salary by the Kurdish government as an advisor. And at the same time, he was taking money from a company which is going to apply for oil in Iraq. He has been instrumental in assisting the Americans and the Kurds to produce a Constitution for Iraq which is a designer made country, which is a failed state, to install a government and a regime there that has been looking after the interests of-of Mr. Galbraith. And this reminds us and reminds the listeners and the viewers that this is again history repeating itself. In the past, there was a Mr. [Calouste] Gulbenkian -- Mr. 5% -- during the Ottoman Empire who had five-percent of the oil of Iraq and now we have this man having a 5% interest in the Kurdish area -- in Tawke field in particular -- but now they seem to have turned the table on him. That's why he's on an arbitration course with them.
Jasim al-Azzawi: If that is the case, Terje, explain to me how come in a very lengthy explanation and justification by the Minister of Natural Resources of the KRG, Mr. Ashti Hara, at the website of the KRG.org, he mentioned what happened, the genesis of the story of DNO and its operations in Kurdistan for almost five, six pages and yet the name of Peter Galbraith has not been mentioned even once. How do you explain that?
Terje Erikstad: Because Peter Galbraith was a secret partner with the Norwegian company you mentioned, DNO International, and this company had two secret partners in their exploration in Kurdistan. The interest of Mr. Galbraith was hidden behind the company name -- behind the company named Porcupine and this Porcupine is incorporated in one of the states in the USA, Deleware, and it was very difficult to know about his identity. We found it through the company registry and it was all hidden, it was -- He is in a conflict with the DNO because the Kurdish government did not recognize his interests when the new oil law was applied to this field, the Tawke field in Kurdistan. And he is now in an arbitration process with DNO. And it was all kept secret until we found out the-the identity of the company in this arbitration process and the man behind it, Mr. Galbraith. The Kurdish government say that they know nothing about this but that is very difficult to understand.
Jasim al-Azzawi: Indeed it is very difficult to understand. Sabah al-Mukhtar, if you were Peter Galbraith, here's a man who spent the better part of almost four years consulting and advising the KRG. He shepparded them through the lengthy process of the Constitution writing. He insterted some very important clauses to the benefit of the KRG regarding the relationship between Baghdad and Irbil, regarding the oil law, regarding the peshmerga, regarding their territorial authorization. And yet, at the very last minute, they squeezed him out and they crossed him and the five-percent that he was banking on never materialized.
Sabah al-Mukhtar: Well I think this is a -- when you have, when you have a dispute between the forty thieves of Baghdad that's what you end up with. You end up with disclosures that I think this is going to run a little more. Galbraith at the present moment has a problem with the KRG but I think within the KRG itself there are a variety of individuals who may have interests vested interests, who may have conflict of interests and that is part of the problem. But to go back to what Galbraith did, in the Constitution, he's the one who instigated the idea that a federation is set up in Iraq, but based on ethnicity which is not the concept of federal government He has encouraged the Kurds and insisted on having the local government -- the local government having priority over the federal government. He has given the local government the final say. He's given the oil rights to the regional government rather than the federal government. He has assisted them in drafting the Constitution which by any stretch of imagination could not be accepted as a proper Constitution to the extent that there is Article 142 of the Constitution which called for a revision and review of that Constitution within four months which -- until now -- they have failed to do. He then -- he assisted them in working on the idea, what's called "the land grab" -- i.e. taking areas which were not within the regional government of Kurdistan to be part of Kurdistan so that he can have the oil. He has encouraged them to have the -- the type of contract that he signed with them but then subsequently the problem with the federal government and the regional government stopped that contract from going on and I think, for reasons I don't know, there is, they have fallen out. Having paved the way for them to set up this arrangement, he now stands to lose the money but I think he's a man who has been working on conflict of interests on a variety of levels from the USA to Iraq, to the politics, to the Kurdish government and at the same time working for a company which is going to contract with the Kurdish government and this is an extreme case of conflict of interest which I think amounts to an illegal act but I think this is a matter for the US to deal with.
Picking back up on "in a very lengthy explanation and justification by the Minister of Natural Resources of the KRG, Mr. Ashti Hara, at the website of the KRG.org, he mentioned what happened, the genesis of the story of DNO and its operations in Kurdistan for almost five, six pages and yet the name of Peter Galbraith has not been mentioned even once"? Jasim al-Azzawi appears to be referring to the letter from Dr. Ashti Hawrami to DNO ("Subject: Causing Serious Harm to KRG Reputation") that the KRG posted -- in PDF format -- September 21st. The KRG has now removed the letter from their website. You can find a copy of it (PDF format warning) here. The letter was quoted from in the September 22nd snapshot.
We'll note this from Sherwood Ross' "U.S. FORCIBLY DEPORTED ISLANDERS AND GASSED THEIR DOGS TO MAKE WAY FOR DIEGO GARCIA MILITARY BASE" (Veterans Today):In order to convert the sleepy, Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia into a dominating military base, the U.S. forcibly transported its 2,000 Chagossian inhabitants into exile and gassed their dogs.By banning journalists from the area, the U.S. Navy was able to perpetrate this with virtually no press coverage, says David Vine, an assistant professor of anthropology at American University and author of "Island of Shame: the Secret History of the U.S. Military on Diego Garcia (Princeton University Press).""The Chagossians were put on a boat and taken to Mauritius and the Seychelles, 1,200 miles away, where they were left on the docks, with no money and no housing, to fend for themselves," Vine said on the interview show ""Books Of Our Time," sponsored by the Massachusetts School of Law at Andover."They were promised jobs that never materialized. They had been living on an island with schools, hospitals, and full employment, sort of like a French coastal village, and they were consigned to a life of abject poverty in exile, unemployment, health problems, and were the poorest of the poor," Vine told interview host Lawrence Velvel, dean of the law school.Their pet dogs were rounded up and gassed, and their bodies burned, before the very eyes of their traumatized owners, Vine said."They were moved because they were few in number and not white," Vine added. The U.S. government circulated the fiction the Chagossians were transient contract workers that had taken up residence only recently but, in fact, they had been living on Diego Garcia since about the time of the American Revolution. Merchants had imported them to work on the coconut and copra plantations. Vine said the U.S. government induced The Washington Post not to break a story spelling out events on the island."Through Diego Garcia," Vine pointed out, "the U.S. can project its power throughout the Middle East, and from East Africa to India, Australia and Indonesia. With Guam, the island is the most important American base outside the U.S." He said U.S. bases now number around 1,000, including 287 in Germany, 130 in Japan and Okinawa, and 57 in Italy.
iraq
abcthe world todayeleanor hallshane mcleod
jack kimballmichael christiereutersmcclatchy newspapershannah allammohammed al dulaimythe los angeles timesned parker
caesar ahmed
the christian science monitorjane arraf
the wall street journal
gina chonxinhuamartin chulovliz slyusama redha
al jazeera
timothy williamsthe new york times
rod nordland
cbs news
elizabeth palmer
the guardianjames denselow
stig nielsenmetro vancouverthe canadian presscamille bains
inside iraq
jasim al-azzawi
sherwood ross
"Coming around again" (Joan Anderman, Boston Globe):
People have been asking Simon why she has felt compelled to speak so freely ever since the notoriously frank singer-songwriter released her well-titled breakthrough, 1972’s “No Secrets.’’ As she prepares to put out her 26th studio album, the question - and the answer - still applies.
“We’re all so tiny,’’ Simon says. “We’re going to be gone in a second. What the hell?’’
Anxious and intrepid, wounded and ardent, sensationally smart and lethally self-doubting, Carly Simon can parse her own paradoxes with finesse, and on her best songs she transposes the elegant wreckage into verse and chorus. Now she’s diving back into the remains of days past for “Never Been Gone,’’ a collection of re-imaginings of her hits (and a pair of never-heard tracks) that comes out Tuesday.
“I didn’t want to do it,’’ Simon confesses, “but my hands were tied.’’
She’s referring to her contract with Starbucks, which Simon is suing, claiming that the company mishandled the promotion of her last album, 2008’s “This Kind of Love,’’ resulting in poor sales. “The reason I went to Starbucks is I thought they had such perfect marketing for me,’’ says Simon, who followed in the footsteps of Paul McCartney, Ray Charles, and ex-husband James Taylor, all of whom had great success selling music to the chain’s upscale, educated patrons. But Simon says she found out just days before that album’s release in April last year that the coffee giant was ending its involvement in Hear Music, a joint venture with the Concord Music Group.
“The week my album came out I did a concert in their marquee store in [New York’s] Astor Place and there wasn’t one copy in the place. At my signing event,’’ Simon notes incredulously. “Was I supposed to sign the air?’’
Back when that album came out, Trina and Kat both shared stories of the problems they had getting it -- Starbucks clerks being completely unaware the album was out and insisting it wasn't, then finally checking their deliveries and finding out that they did have copies. Starbucks screwed Carly over and they should have to pay for what they did.
Even if they do pay, it's not a 'win' for Carly. She spent a lot of time working on that album, pouring her heart into it and it can't be given a new sendoff. But Starbucks can learn that they have to honor their contracts. It's past time they learned that.
The album's out tomorrow. Be sure to check it out. At Third, yesterday, we did "The Carly Roundtable."
"TV: Hank Tanks" (Ava and C.I., The Third Estate Sunday Review):
Hank (Grammer) and Tilly Pryor (Melinda McGraw) are supposed to have gone from riches to rags but try to find any evidence of that in anything the writers assign to Tilly. For someone who's supposedly gone from the high life to a home falling around her and sleeping in a children's bed, Tilly's just a ray of sunshine. A constant ray of sunshine. You keep waiting for the episode where everyone finds out that she's been hoarding Quaaludes since the late seventies. That's really the only explanation for her eternal, beaming smile.
That really goes a long way towards summing up everything that's wrong with the show which I have seen. I am the worst about remembering TV shows and we make a point to try to catch Cougar Town on ABC Wednesdays. The first few weeks, I had to have the TV on from the start prime time and I'd go through some work folders or talk to Mike or whatever in killing time waiting for Courtney Cox's show. Hank is the worst show. It's just not funny. I don't know that I'm necessarily funny but I do enjoy laughing and I couldn't laugh once at that awful show.
In Baghdad yesterday, deadly bombings. C.I. covers it in the snapshot but I'll note you can click here if you'd like audio and catch Free Speech Radio News' report.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Monday, October 26, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, Iraq's death toll from yesterday's massive bombings rises and includes children, finger-pointing becomes the favorite past-time, a US 'helper' and his ties to an oil company are explored, a US Iraq War resister seeks sanctuary in a Canadian church, and more.
Sunday Baghdad saw bombings resulting in a higher death total than Black Wednesday, Bloody Wednesday, Gory Wednesday August 19th. Eleanor Hall (Australia's ABC's The World Today -- link has text and audio) explained, "Twin suicide bombers targeted the Iraqi Ministry of Justice all but destroying the government department's headquarters, which are just outside the high-security 'green zone' in the centre of Baghdad." Shane McLeod added, "The sound of the second blast was captured by a mobile phone video camera being used to survey the aftermath of the first. Targeted was the headquarters of the Ministry of Justice, just a few hundred metres from the fortified green zone in Baghdad." Sahar Issa and Hannah Allam (McClatchy Newspapers) report that Iraqi government figures are stating that "a water tanker and a refrigerated food truck" were used in the attacks. This morning, Jack Kimball and Michael Christie (Reuters) report that the death toll has climbed and is currently at 155 with over five hundred left injured. Rod Nordland (New York Times) observes that "an uncertain number of children" are among the dead. CBS News and AP add that 24 "children who were killed were on a bus leaving a daycare center near the Justice Ministry when the attack occurred".
Ned Parker and Caesar Ahmed (Los Angeles Times) sketch out yesterday's assault, "Cars clogges the road as tehy approached the traffic circle in front of the Justice Ministry, with its statue of modern Iraq's first ruler, King Faisal, mounted on a horse. An old white pickup truck had broken down by the traffic circle and its driver approached a policeman and started yelling. [. . .] It was then that the first of two car bombs exploded on opposite ends of the block." Xinhua adds, "Xinhua correspondent at the scene said that he saw ponds of blood and parts of human bodies scattered close to the blast site near the Mansour Hotel where the wreckage of dozens of civilian cars could be seen near the site." Martin Chulov (Guardian) offers, "Witnesses described body parts sprawled across the area. Mohammed Falah, was caught in the blast: 'There was a woman's leg next to me. I picked it up and gave it to the ambulance'."
Sharif Abdel Kouddous (Democracy Now! -- link has text, video and audio) asked Rick Rowley for his take on the bombings today:
Well, first of all, the first thing to say is that, you know, there is no peace in Iraq, that these bombings, first of all, put the lie once again to the three myths that we've been pushed about the war in Iraq: first, the story that the war is over; second, that we won the war; and third, that the lessons of this victory can be applied to Afghanistan. The fact is that what passes for calm in Iraq today isn't peace at all; it's a fragile, fraying truce after a brutal sectarian civil war, and it's a truce without reconciliation that -- because it's put in place a system that is a continuing engine for violence, and tragedies like these are a legacy of the American occupation and will remain one for years to come. So, bombings like these today -- or on Sunday were attempts -- I mean, you know, they're being blamed on al-Qaeda in Iraq, and it seems likely that it was a group like al-Qaeda in Iraq that carried them out. And there are attempts by those extreme elements inside the Sunni insurgency to target the Shiite-led government, which they see as their sectarian enemy, but also to try to draw the Shiite militias back into an all-out civil war that could unite the Shiites again in their resistance. I mean, bombings like the ones on Sunday are remarkable for their massive scale, the carnage they cause, but there are multiple bombings in Iraq every single week.
[. . .]
And yeah, absolutely, I mean, the government in Baghdad is seen by al-Qaeda in Iraq and by the extremists inside the Sunni resistance as a proxy, as an Iranian proxy, dominated by the Supreme Council and by the Dawa Party, both parties that were -- well, I mean, the Supreme Council was formed in Iran, and Dawa, you know, spent most of its existence in Iran. And, you know, these parties were put by the US in mid-2004, were put in charge of the government, and their militias were turned into the core of the Iraqi security structure. So, as the civil war kicked off, the main protagonists in the civil war were militias inside the police force that were -- came from these parties and, you know, versus Sunni insurgents on the outside who were doing bombings and these kinds of soft-target attacks on civilians. So, you know, clearly, I mean, institutions and ministries that are controlled by ISCI, the Supreme Council, and by Dawa are definitely seen as sectarian enemies. I mean, the Ministry of Justice, as well, you know, it's -- the police and the court system have been seen in the -- I mean, not so much the court system. The police and the prison system in Iraq have been seen as one of the tools in the sectarian fight that the Shiite militias have used from the very beginning.
Gina Chon (Wall St. Journal) noted yesterday that the charge of "al Qaeda in Iraq" was instantly being made by some including Nouri al-Maliki, US-installed thug of the occupation. Mohammed al Dulaimy and Hannah Allam (McClatchy Newspapers -- link has text and video) add, "Maliki, a Shiite Muslim, released a statement blaming elements of Saddam Hussein's predominantly Sunni Baath Party and militants from al Qaida in Iraq for the attack. As of late Sunday, no group had claimed responsibility." Yes, Maliki couldn't wait to start (yet again) blaming former Ba'athists.
ELEANOR HALL: Given the number of people killed though in these two recent attacks and the outrage from the public that we are already hearing, I mean what is this attack and the August one likely to mean for the elections in January?
SAM PARKER: Well, clearly it undercuts Prime Minister Maliki's main narrative which is Iraq was chaos and he brought it back from the brink. It definitely hurts him and certainly if you look at what has followed the August bombings there has been a lot of that, a lot of finger pointing and a lot of people saying your claims are bogus. That Iraq is just as unsafe as it has always been and that generally is not true.I mean, yes you can point to these like high-profile mass casualty attacks and as tragic as they are, overall death counts in Iraq are still, even despite these attacks, are still much lower than they have been at any period except for right after the invasions. So for the entire war, we are still at the lowest points and so these large scale attacks largely had propaganda value to them.
Liz Sly and Usama Redha (Los Angeles Times) explain, "It is Maliki who stands to lose the most from a security breakdown, because he is campaigning on his record as the leader who helped restore a good measure of security after the sectarian warfare that raged after the U.S.-led invasion. Overall, violence is down 90% since the peak in 2006, U.S. commanders say." Anthony Shadid (Washington Post) adds, "The attacks came at a precarious moment in Iraqi politics. Parliament has yet to agree on legislation to organize the planned Jan. 16 vote, despite warnings by the United States and the United Nations that time will probably run out by next weekend. Critics have also complained that some of the key officials charged with security -- Maliki and Interior Minister Jawad Bolani -- are more engaged in the election than in running the country." Kurdish MP Mahmoud Othman tells Al Jazeera, "This sends two messages, one of them is to the investment conference in Washington held just a few days ago as if to tell investors not to come to Iraq . . . At the same time I think it may be a message to the meeting today of the political council of national security." Baghdad governor Salah Abdel Razaq tells Elizabeth Palmer (CBS News), "The bodies I have seen -- these innocent people, what have they done? To have this destiny, it is very terrible." Timothy Williams (New York Times) explains, "In large part, Mr. Maliki's popularity has rested on the belief that he has kept the country reasonably safe. But the bombings at four high-profile, well-protected government buildings within a two-month span led some Iraqis to say Sunday that they were reconsidering their support for Mr. Maliki." It should be noted that "Mr. Maliki's popularity" -- like Ashlee Simpson's talent -- is something that's been assumed but never verified. Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) provides a voice for people on the streets such as vendor Abbas Fadhil who states, "This is all from the political parties -- they want to gain seats in the election." Um Ali tells Arraf, "There had to be someone with official backing behind this -- how could they get through the checkpoints? Why are our children, our sisters still being killed? For 20 years we've been fighting."
Gina Chon (Wall St. Journal) puts the bombings into the larger instability landscape that is Iraq: "The timing of the Sunday bombings coincided with plans by Iraq's top political body, the Political Council for National Security, comprising top political leaders and cabinet ministers, to consider ways to end a stalemate over a crucial election law needed to begin work ahead of the vote. The legislation has stalled over disagreements between factions over how the vote will be conducted in Kirkuk, an oil-rich region in the north torn by sectarian and ethnic tensions among the area's Kurds, Arabs and Turkomen."
Ranj Alaaldin (Guardian) offers his take on the bombings:
A broad analysis suggests complicity on the part of the Sunni-Arab world: keep Iraq unstable and you stop the country from becoming an effective Iranian client state when the US withdraws; or, at the very least, facilitate terrorist attacks in the country and you have some form of a counter-measure to Iran's unmatched influence. Alternatively, the attacks on Kurdish-run and Shia-run ministries may have sought to encourage incorporation of the Sunnis, specifically the Sons of Iraq fighters, into the Shia-led government, which has so far been slow in doing so. The objectives are not necessarily independent of each other.
A more straightforward analysis suggests prime minister Nouri al-Maliki as the prime target of all this: destabilise Iraq in the run-up to January's parliamentary elections and you hurt Maliki's chances of success, as he will be campaigning on the same security platform that won him this year's provincial elections. Indeed, things are not looking too rosy for the premier now that he has lost his security card. Iraqis will struggle to list his achievements in recent times and find the country no closer to better services and increased employment levels.
As far as observations go, James Denselow (Guardian) is on stronger ground than anyone when he observes:
It takes a certain death toll for Iraq to make it back on to the headlines. Despite the presence of some 120,000 US troops (and 100 or so British naval trainers who were recently let back into the country) Iraq appears to be old news. In many people's minds it is yesterday's conflict; the surge was a success and the prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, is a democratically mandated strongman who is bringing economic success to the country -- or so the narrative goes.
And as the instability thrives, Nouri depends upon US forces to prop him up. Mohammed al Dulaimy and Hannah Allam (McClatchy Newspapers) explain, "U.S. Marines arrived at the scene of Sunday's attack with Iraqi forces, in accordance with a U.S.-Iraq security pact that requires American forces to coordinate with their Iraqi counterparts before getting involved in combat or other operations. Americans at the scene asked Iraqi security guards for surveillance videos from buildings in the area, and investigators took soil samples and carted off pieces of twisted metal." The US government has attempted to call the assault a "terrorist" attack -- it's a war. All sides could be labled "terrorists." That would inclue the US which bombed and raided Iraq for the last six years and counting. It was an attack, it was an assault. It was not "terrorism." It was an attack which took place in an ongoing war and was most likely aimed at a government installed by foreigners and made up of Iraqi exiles who spent most of the last decade living abroad. Wamith al-Kassab (MideastYouth) ponders the bombings:
what just happened? Cause I watch the news every day ,and I saw Hilary Clinton give a speech on Iraq-American conference in Washington and she was promising the Iraqi displace families that there will be efforts to return them to Iraq as security improved , Almalky said in his speech in the same conference that security in Iraq has improved and today Iraqi people can go outside at night and drive safely to visit the holly shrines in Najaf ( Iraqi leaders measure security by the times when people get killed visiting holly shrines and days when people can go safely ,which brings us to bigger question , is security in Iraq related to shiaa visits to shrines or it is a whole state security?)
yes , the Iraq I left after working for 7 years in medical camps for refugees ,was a safe place ,I mean it was not totally safe , cause there is few nasty bad boys who usually beats the hell of journalists in the middle of the streets ,and threats to kill you cause you post some bloges on human rights every now and then , and yes ,if I return today my chances is zero to go out of Baghdad airport alive ,but come on ,I am only 1 person and this is small terrorist attacks that should not effect the magnificent large picture of security change in Iraq ,we had 600,000 Iraqi soldiers most of them trained in Jordan ,Kurdistan ,few went to USA ,all of them were train by Americans ,we had security companies( they work to protect the VIP only ,but any way we had ones) ,we bought armed cars ,we bought weapons ,we had police forces ,the support forces from Sunni ( waking councils) ,we had beshmerka ( Kurdish army which sometimes goverment say they are militia ,others time they are official army) ,we had small armies for each party in Iraq ,we had many people who carry guns and I do not know why ,just I know you do not whanna mess with them.
So we had allot of people who formed check points with metal and weapons and explosive detectors devices ,we had concrete walls all over Baghdad and we had traffic jam because of the check points has to check each car to prevent terrorist from attacking the innocent
Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) reports, "On Monday, streets around the devastated buildings remained closed to traffic. The blasts sheared the front off the Justice and Municipality ministry buildings, leaving floors caving under collapsed ceilings." Gina Chon (Wall St. Journal) adds that "Iraqi police and soldiers were carrying out intense searches at checkpoints" today.
Violence continued today in Iraq.
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Karbala suicide car bombing which claimed the life of the driver and 4 civilians leaving fourteen more people injured, a Mosul sticky bombing which wounded one person and a Falluja roadside bombing which injured four people.
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 Turkoman shot dead in Mosul. Reuters drops back to Sunday to note that 2 people were shot dead (two more injured) in Mosul.
Kidnappings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 "young boy" kidnapped in Kirkuk.
Corpses?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse was discovered in Kirkuk
(man who had been kidnapped Saturday).
We'll move over to Canada to note, as requested, Krystalline Kraus (Rabble) reporting on US War Resister Rodney Watson:
The latest flashpoint in the battle to keep war resisters in Canada has been
the case of Rodney Watson who on Monday October 19, 2009, decided to seek
sanctuary in a B.C. [British Columbia] church rather than face deporation to the United States to face desertion charges. Watson, who is originally from Kansas City, Kansas, enlisted in the US Army in 2004 for a three-year contract with the intentions of becoming a cook since he wanted to serve the troops in a non-combat capactiy.
In 2005, he was deployed to Iraq just north of Mosul, where he was put in
charge of searching vehicles and Iraqi civilians for explosives, contraband and
weapons before they entered the base. He was also expected to "keep the
peace" by monitoring Iraqi civilians who worked on the base and fire his weapon
at Iraqi children who approached the perimeter.
When he was informed he was being deported, Rodney sought asylum at the church. Earlier this month, Stig Nielsen (Metro Vancouver) reported:Rodney Watson of Kansas City had just returned from a deployment in Iraq in 2006 when the U.S. army extended his contract for three years. Watson said he felt he had served his time and that he wasn't about to go back to a war he doesn't agree with. "The main thing was the disrespect for the people -- some guys would have a bad day and they would just beat up on some Iraqi civilians," Watson said.He deserted three years ago and crossed the border into Canada, where he fell in love and became a father.The 31-year-old is at First United Church on Hastings Street in Vancouver where he's been granted asylum since September. Camille Bains (Canadian Press) reported that he was ordered deported September 11th:Ric Matthews, lead minister of First United Church in Vancouver, said the board and the congregation support Watson. Matthews said he met Watson at a rally organized on his behalf by the War Resisters Support Campaign and that Watson later approached him about staying at the church. "There will be an effort to try and help create the momentum for something constructive to come out of this," he said. "I think the United Church in general, beyond just us, would now be working through some of our people who have experience in working with refugee claims and in engaging with government in conversation." Matthews said Watson's fiancee and son often visit him at the church, which provides daily meals for people in need.
Back to Iraq. On the latest installment of Inside Iraq (Al Jazeera) which began broadcasting Friday (streams online as well), Jasim al-Azzawi explored the conflict of 'help' and enrichment by examining the apparent conflicts of interests which have ensnared
Peter Galbraith.
Jasim al-Azzawi: When Norway's most respected financial newspaper, Dagens Noeringsliv, covered the activities of a small, Norwegian oil company called DNO operating in northern Iraq, no one expected subsequent investigations to implicate the former US politician Peter Galbraith. Ambassador Galbraith is now suing DNO for a quarter of a billion dollars because the Kurdistan Regional Government has squeezed him out of his 5% stake in the company. What is more devastating for Iraq is the role Mr. Galbraith played as a political consultant to the KRG writing Iraq's Constitution in a way that can only be described as a potential ticking time bomb. This story has all the marks of dual loyalty, betrayal and international intrigue. [. . .] I am now joined from Oslo by Terje Erikstad, a financial news editor at Dagens Naeringsliv and from London by Sabah al-Mukhtar, president of Arab Layers Association in London. And we were also supposed to be joined by Mohammad Ihsan, Minister for Extra-Regional Affairs of the KRG but unfortunately we were informed at the last minute that he fell sick and cannot join the program. Sabah and Terje, welcome to Inside Iraq. Terje, let me start with you. Were you surprised to discover that the name of Mr. Peter Galbraith, former US Ambassador to Croatia and a leading figure in Washington, he had a 5% stake in the DNO?
Terje Erikstad: Yes, indeed we were very much surprised because it all started with a Norwegian company being fined by the Oslo stock exchange. And we started working on this case as an ordinary conflict between a company on the stock exchange and the stock exchange. And it ended up with Peter Galbraith owning oil interests or having oil interests in Kurdistan. That was very surprising for us indeed.
Jasim al-Azzawi: Sabah, who is Peter Galbraith? Set the situation for us.
Sabah al-Mukhtar: Galbraith is a professor of international politics in the USA. He was an ambassador in a variety of capacities -- in Croatia and Afghanistan. He was advisor to the US government. He was a man who was being paid a salary by the government of the United States of America. He was at the same time being paid a salary by the Kurdish government as an advisor. And at the same time, he was taking money from a company which is going to apply for oil in Iraq. He has been instrumental in assisting the Americans and the Kurds to produce a Constitution for Iraq which is a designer made country, which is a failed state, to install a government and a regime there that has been looking after the interests of-of Mr. Galbraith. And this reminds us and reminds the listeners and the viewers that this is again history repeating itself. In the past, there was a Mr. [Calouste] Gulbenkian -- Mr. 5% -- during the Ottoman Empire who had five-percent of the oil of Iraq and now we have this man having a 5% interest in the Kurdish area -- in Tawke field in particular -- but now they seem to have turned the table on him. That's why he's on an arbitration course with them.
Jasim al-Azzawi: If that is the case, Terje, explain to me how come in a very lengthy explanation and justification by the Minister of Natural Resources of the KRG, Mr. Ashti Hara, at the website of the KRG.org, he mentioned what happened, the genesis of the story of DNO and its operations in Kurdistan for almost five, six pages and yet the name of Peter Galbraith has not been mentioned even once. How do you explain that?
Terje Erikstad: Because Peter Galbraith was a secret partner with the Norwegian company you mentioned, DNO International, and this company had two secret partners in their exploration in Kurdistan. The interest of Mr. Galbraith was hidden behind the company name -- behind the company named Porcupine and this Porcupine is incorporated in one of the states in the USA, Deleware, and it was very difficult to know about his identity. We found it through the company registry and it was all hidden, it was -- He is in a conflict with the DNO because the Kurdish government did not recognize his interests when the new oil law was applied to this field, the Tawke field in Kurdistan. And he is now in an arbitration process with DNO. And it was all kept secret until we found out the-the identity of the company in this arbitration process and the man behind it, Mr. Galbraith. The Kurdish government say that they know nothing about this but that is very difficult to understand.
Jasim al-Azzawi: Indeed it is very difficult to understand. Sabah al-Mukhtar, if you were Peter Galbraith, here's a man who spent the better part of almost four years consulting and advising the KRG. He shepparded them through the lengthy process of the Constitution writing. He insterted some very important clauses to the benefit of the KRG regarding the relationship between Baghdad and Irbil, regarding the oil law, regarding the peshmerga, regarding their territorial authorization. And yet, at the very last minute, they squeezed him out and they crossed him and the five-percent that he was banking on never materialized.
Sabah al-Mukhtar: Well I think this is a -- when you have, when you have a dispute between the forty thieves of Baghdad that's what you end up with. You end up with disclosures that I think this is going to run a little more. Galbraith at the present moment has a problem with the KRG but I think within the KRG itself there are a variety of individuals who may have interests vested interests, who may have conflict of interests and that is part of the problem. But to go back to what Galbraith did, in the Constitution, he's the one who instigated the idea that a federation is set up in Iraq, but based on ethnicity which is not the concept of federal government He has encouraged the Kurds and insisted on having the local government -- the local government having priority over the federal government. He has given the local government the final say. He's given the oil rights to the regional government rather than the federal government. He has assisted them in drafting the Constitution which by any stretch of imagination could not be accepted as a proper Constitution to the extent that there is Article 142 of the Constitution which called for a revision and review of that Constitution within four months which -- until now -- they have failed to do. He then -- he assisted them in working on the idea, what's called "the land grab" -- i.e. taking areas which were not within the regional government of Kurdistan to be part of Kurdistan so that he can have the oil. He has encouraged them to have the -- the type of contract that he signed with them but then subsequently the problem with the federal government and the regional government stopped that contract from going on and I think, for reasons I don't know, there is, they have fallen out. Having paved the way for them to set up this arrangement, he now stands to lose the money but I think he's a man who has been working on conflict of interests on a variety of levels from the USA to Iraq, to the politics, to the Kurdish government and at the same time working for a company which is going to contract with the Kurdish government and this is an extreme case of conflict of interest which I think amounts to an illegal act but I think this is a matter for the US to deal with.
Picking back up on "in a very lengthy explanation and justification by the Minister of Natural Resources of the KRG, Mr. Ashti Hara, at the website of the KRG.org, he mentioned what happened, the genesis of the story of DNO and its operations in Kurdistan for almost five, six pages and yet the name of Peter Galbraith has not been mentioned even once"? Jasim al-Azzawi appears to be referring to the letter from Dr. Ashti Hawrami to DNO ("Subject: Causing Serious Harm to KRG Reputation") that the KRG posted -- in PDF format -- September 21st. The KRG has now removed the letter from their website. You can find a copy of it (PDF format warning) here. The letter was quoted from in the September 22nd snapshot.
We'll note this from Sherwood Ross' "U.S. FORCIBLY DEPORTED ISLANDERS AND GASSED THEIR DOGS TO MAKE WAY FOR DIEGO GARCIA MILITARY BASE" (Veterans Today):In order to convert the sleepy, Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia into a dominating military base, the U.S. forcibly transported its 2,000 Chagossian inhabitants into exile and gassed their dogs.By banning journalists from the area, the U.S. Navy was able to perpetrate this with virtually no press coverage, says David Vine, an assistant professor of anthropology at American University and author of "Island of Shame: the Secret History of the U.S. Military on Diego Garcia (Princeton University Press).""The Chagossians were put on a boat and taken to Mauritius and the Seychelles, 1,200 miles away, where they were left on the docks, with no money and no housing, to fend for themselves," Vine said on the interview show ""Books Of Our Time," sponsored by the Massachusetts School of Law at Andover."They were promised jobs that never materialized. They had been living on an island with schools, hospitals, and full employment, sort of like a French coastal village, and they were consigned to a life of abject poverty in exile, unemployment, health problems, and were the poorest of the poor," Vine told interview host Lawrence Velvel, dean of the law school.Their pet dogs were rounded up and gassed, and their bodies burned, before the very eyes of their traumatized owners, Vine said."They were moved because they were few in number and not white," Vine added. The U.S. government circulated the fiction the Chagossians were transient contract workers that had taken up residence only recently but, in fact, they had been living on Diego Garcia since about the time of the American Revolution. Merchants had imported them to work on the coconut and copra plantations. Vine said the U.S. government induced The Washington Post not to break a story spelling out events on the island."Through Diego Garcia," Vine pointed out, "the U.S. can project its power throughout the Middle East, and from East Africa to India, Australia and Indonesia. With Guam, the island is the most important American base outside the U.S." He said U.S. bases now number around 1,000, including 287 in Germany, 130 in Japan and Okinawa, and 57 in Italy.
iraq
abcthe world todayeleanor hallshane mcleod
jack kimballmichael christiereutersmcclatchy newspapershannah allammohammed al dulaimythe los angeles timesned parker
caesar ahmed
the christian science monitorjane arraf
the wall street journal
gina chonxinhuamartin chulovliz slyusama redha
al jazeera
timothy williamsthe new york times
rod nordland
cbs news
elizabeth palmer
the guardianjames denselow
stig nielsenmetro vancouverthe canadian presscamille bains
inside iraq
jasim al-azzawi
sherwood ross
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)