Tuesday, January 13, 2015

Will the Iraq Inquiry report be released soon?

BBC News reports:


A cross-party group of MPs is calling for a Commons debate so they can push for publication of the long-awaited inquiry into the Iraq war.
The MPs, including former Attorney General Dominic Grieve, said they were concerned the report would not be published before May's election.
They will ask the Backbench Business Committee to schedule a debate.
The inquiry, chaired by Sir John Chilcot, was set up under the last government in 2009.



Good.

That report has been buried.  It should have been released years ago.

It should be embarrassing to the British government that it hasn't been released.

 "TV: Jane The Iron Maiden" (Ava and C.I., The Common Ills):

And let's be clear that The CW can't stop trying to recreate Arrow but they have no plans for Jake The Virgin.

Of course, they don't.

Even the pig headed of The CW would get how ridiculous a show about an adult lead holding onto their virginity and living with Mommy was if it revolved around a male lead.

On top everything else, there's the fact that the show revolves around a forced pregnancy and that Jane's thrilled to death with it.

What sort of message does that send to young teens?

And what sort of message does The CW send when Hart of Dixie pulls in more viewers than Jane The Virgin but it's not announced as renewed over the weekend.

No, it has to prove itself.

See, a show starring a woman who's got an education, who charts her own way in life and who -- gasp! -- has sex is just a little too unnerving for The CW.

And that's another reason women should be outraged.



That show needs to be called out -- as do the people pimping it.


"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Monday, January 12, 2015.  Chaos and violence continue, Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi criticizes the US government's support, several US senators offer criticism of him as well, Jake Tapper offers an opinion offensive to The Cult of St. Barack so they feel they can lie about him, and more.



Don't you hate lying pieces of trash?



Maybe they're not liars in all cases.  I seriously question the sanity of The Obama Diary.

They're apparently too busy drooling over the cock of US President Barack Obama to form actual thoughts beyond "Must wrap lips around."

At Third, we called the idiots out for their inability to get that Bully Boy Bush going to his ranch-ette in Crawford, Texas wasn't the problem, going to war on Iraq was.

Today The Obama Diary is yet again lost.









    • The link?

    It doesn't say that.

    The Obama Diary apparently hopes you're so stupid -- the way they are -- that you'll just take their word for it.

    The Obama Diary is the worst of our side (the left).  A cheap whorish thug that thinks it can lie and get away with it.

    They're attacking Jake Tapper today for a reason we'll get to in just a second.

    But let's deal with their charge first.

    Media Matters in 2007 and 2008 whined about a lot of reporters.  Jake Tapper was one.

    The link goes to a whine about Jake saying Barack was still smoking despite Barack saying he had quit.

    As most now know, once in the White House, Barack was still smoking.

    Jake was actually correct.

    And Media Matters wrote a lengthy post suggesting he was wrong and a lengthy post to tell you how trivial the topic -- that, again, they wrote a lengthy post on -- was.

    The Obama Diary thinks this establishes something.

    All it establishes is just how stupid and whorish The Obama Diary is.  A certain 'sports' commentator in Chicago is equally stupid.  He slams Jake today by slamming CNN's Iraq coverage in 2002 and 2003 -- Jake Tapper didn't work for them then.

    Where did Jake Tapper work in 2002 and 2003?

    Salon.

    Salon didn't do investigative journalism.  It wasn't the sewer it is today where Joan Walsh regularly slimes people and calls them "un-American" because she doesn't like them.  But it didn't do investigative journalism. Didn't have the budget for it.  It was columns and opinion pieces and interviews.

    This is Jake Tapper's reporting for Salon on Iraq:







    Is Saddam alive?

    Rumsfeld won't say, but some early reports suggest that the puffy-faced man in glasses on Iraqi TV was one of Hussein's many impostors -- and that the real one may be dead.
    Thursday, Mar 20, 2003 11:53 AM CDT
    News 

    A cry for jihad

    The White House says that a war with Iraq has nothing to do with Islam, but imams all over the world are calling for a holy war.
    Thursday, Mar 20, 2003 06:45 PM CDT
    News 




    The undead

    U.S. and British officials keep insisting that Iraqi TV images of Saddam and his top cohorts are fake. But reports of their demise seem premature.
    Tuesday, Mar 25, 2003 08:06 PM CDT
    News Iraq war




    War? What war?

    Dean, McAuliffe and the DNC wine and dine the party faithful in New York, pretending affirmative action, abortion and ethanol are really what's on their minds.
    Wednesday, Apr 2, 2003 10:01 AM CDT
    News 


    Why won’t anyone listen to Gary Hart?

    The former, and possibly future, presidential candidate says he pushed a resolution that could have kept the U.S. out of war. But no Democratic leader wanted to hear it.
    Thursday, Apr 3, 2003 07:37 PM CDT
    News 


    The last place we liberated

    The White House calls Afghanistan a success story. But the failure to commit needed resources has left it a chaotic, increasingly dangerous country where violent warlords run amok. Are we going to repeat our mistake in Iraq?
    Thursday, Apr 10, 2003 05:39 PM CDT
    News 

    WMD, MIA?

    Hasty, incomplete news reports have suggested that coalition troops found chemical weapons, or even nukes, in Iraq. They haven't -- at least not yet. And the rest of world is watching skeptically.
    Wednesday, Apr 16, 2003 05:35 PM CDT
    News



    Lowered WMD expectations

    Before the war, the Bush administration said the weapons existed and we would find them. Now, it's saying maybe we won't find them after all -- and the rest of the world smells a rat.
    Wednesday, Apr 30, 2003 05:52 PM CDT
    News


    Allies: Where are the WMDs?!

    The Dems and the U.S. public may meekly accept the administration's ever-changing answers about Saddam's alleged weapons. But our foreign allies don't -- and the more the White House spins, the angrier they get.
    Friday, May 30, 2003 05:32 PM CDT
    News

     


    The hyping of Saddam’s WMD

    Last August, Bush said Saddam merely "desired" weapons of mass destruction. A month later, as he began selling the Iraq war, his tone suddenly changed.
    Wednesday, Jun 18, 2003 05:46 PM CDT
    News



    More or less in order, above is his work on Iraq while at Salon (there are two stories not included which may be on Afghanistan alone or Afghanistan and Iraq -- they're about US efforts to sell image to the Muslim communities and I didn't have time to read those and determine whether they were about Iraq or not so didn't include them).


    There are minor stories, there are major stories.  It's a body of work and it looks at the topic from a number of angles.  I see nothing to be embarrassed or ashamed about.  And that's before you add the qualifier of 'compared to other outlets.'  When you add that qualifier, the work becomes even more significant.

    The Obama Diary has a fit and thinks they can slime him.  All they prove is that they lie and that they're stupid.

    I would argue Jake Tapper is one of the few journalists who takes the news and accuracy seriously.  I don't know Jake, I've never met him.  In 2008, he got an issue wrong -- as did every other outlet.  Ava and I wrote "There was no pardon, Barack (Ava and C.I.)" following a debate where Barack lied -- or, if you want to be kind -- misspoke.  And the media ran with his lie without checking it out.
    That same day, Ava and I wrote "Jake Tapper, correct your error" and I called a friend at ABC News (where Jake was working at the time) to ask that they take a look at the report.

    The media got it wrong.  Not just Jake.

    Why did we single out Jake?

    Because co-workers and peers of his had portrayed him as someone who took his work seriously.  So we felt we had the best chance of someone bucking the narrative -- which was false -- with him.

    By the time I was online the next morning, Jake and ABC News had corrected the error.

    Not the bitchy way that David Corn did.

    And we can talk about that briefly -- no links, google Third, we covered it there at length.  But Barack lied/misspoke in the debate and claimed Bill Clinton pardoned two members of the Weather Undergound when he did no such thing.  It was days after the debate -- and long after Jake Tapper had led the way for others in the media to self-correct.  Yet David Corn continued to repeat the lie.  He had three posts on the lie in fact.  And he refused to correct it.  When community members informed me that Mother Jones -- when you called them about this -- had a bitchy receptionist who didn't want to take it seriously, I spoke to 'friends' at the magazine.  David Corn had to do a correction -- he was forced to (unlike bitchy receptionist, he wasn't fired) -- and he did the nastiest little correction where he slimed Bill Clinton (by bringing up a pardon that had nothing to do with the Weather Underground) and acted like that was how journalism was done.  

    Jake didn't do that.  He corrected the error.  Corn Nuts is a joke.

    And, sadly, Corn Nuts represents too much of the media.

    Helen Thomas did not like Jake's politics (he was too centrist for her) but she repeatedly stated that Jake was the one to watch out of the then-current political class.  She was only one of many of his peers who vouched for him and offered praise of him.

    Thus far, I think he's lived up to Helen's evaluation of his talent and integrity.

    This morning, a friend at CNN called about a column Jake had written "I'm ashamed by U.S. leaders' absence in Paris:"


    And world leaders were standing together amidst a procession that included Francois Hollande of France, Angela Merkel of Germany, David Cameron of Great Britain, Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority and Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, along with the leaders of Mali, Jordan and Turkey.
    It is no small thing for the king of Jordan, a direct descendent of the Prophet Mohammed, to march in a rally prompted by the murders of people who mocked Islam as well as of innocent Jews -- all of whom were killed by Islamic extremists.
    The United States, which considers itself to be the most important nation in the world, was not represented in this march -- arguably one of the most important public demonstrations in Europe in the last generation -- except by U.S. Ambassador Jane Hartley, who may have been a few rows back. I didn't see her. Even Russia sent Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.
      I say this as an American -- not as a journalist, not as a representative of CNN -- but as an American: I was ashamed.
      I certainly understand the security concerns when it comes to sending President Barack Obama, though I can't imagine they're necessarily any greater than sending the lineup of other world leaders, especially in aggregate.
      But I find it hard to believe that collectively President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew and Attorney General Eric Holder -- who was actually in France that day for a conference on counterterrorism -- just had no time in their schedules on Sunday. Holder had time to do the Sunday shows via satellite but not to show the world that he stood with the people of France?


      That's the excerpt we went with.

      Tapper goes on to call out those politicians considered to be planning runs for the Democratic and Republican Party's presidential nominations for not being present, he calls out Congressional leaders.

      It was a brave column.

      I was asked, by the CNN friend, if I could work it in during the day?  I said we'd do an excerpt in the morning entry.

      Whether you agreed with him or not (I did agree), Jake Tapper wrote a strong column.  If you disagreed and you were functioning adult, you should have been able to grasp where he was coming from.

      If you disagreed and were a functioning adult, you could have written a rebuttal.

      But instead of doing that, people chose to lie and attack.

      If they'd stayed away from Iraq, I would've ignored it.

      But when it's a journalist who did try to be truthful about Iraq and that record is distorted and lied about, we will focus on it.

      And people should.

      They should focus this week on his Iraq work.  For example, those of us (that includes me) who still feel there's been no accountability for those officials who lied the US into an illegal war should note that, once upon a time, Senator John McCain was concerned about those lies.  Where's that concern today?

      The column Jake was an important one but the responses to it?  The Obama Diary and their ilk are just ridiculous.  They're not being honest, they're not thinking, they're just being attack poodles on behalf of Barack.  Even the White House today acknowledged the error.  Greg Jaffe and Katie Zezima (Washington Post) report:

      World leaders marched arm-in-arm with millions through the streets of Paris. There were long-time adversaries such as the Israeli prime minister and the head of the Palestinian Authority, and stalwart allies such as the leaders of Germany, France and the United Kingdom.
      What was missing was the presence of senior official from the United States — a mistake for which the White House repeatedly apologized Monday.
      “I think it’s fair to say that we should have sent someone with a higher profile,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Monday.


      The Obama Diary -- and the rest of the Cult of St. Barack -- are why we can't have a better country or a better government.  Instead of addressing issues, these attack poodles work overtime to smear anyone who raises an issue or a question about the object of their affection.  It's not about truth -- if it were, they wouldn't lie about Jake Tapper's record -- it's about silencing any voices that speak out.

      And that's why our government is so depressing today -- to put it mildly.

      It's really past time that liars are rebuked and shunned.  They are not contributing to an informed dialogue or conversation.  They deliberately work to obscure issues and silence voices that raise concerns.

      And that attitude is exactly how Bully Boy Bush was able -- with the help of the US Congress -- to start an illegal war.


      It's the kind of mindless sheep following that Spandan Chakrabarti offers at "The People's" View:

      You want to be ashamed, Jake Tapper? Be ashamed of your and your colleagues' march to war in lockstep so that you could film shock-n-awe. Be ashamed that you helped deliver as many as a million innocent Iraqis to the doorstep of death. Be ashamed your station and others still hold "debates" on whether waterboarding is torture. You want to be ashamed, Mr. Tapper? Don't look at Paris. Look in the mirror.

      No, Spandan, you look in the mirror and acknowledge the stupid whore starting back at you, the stupid whore that didn't bother to look and see what Jake Tapper wrote about Iraq.  That would be a little too much work, wouldn't it?  

      Jake Tapper was in Paris.  He was covering a unity march which xenophobes and sheep in the United States don't see as very important because the attack didn't happen on US soil.

      But it was important, the attack, the unity march.  And Jake was embarrassed as an American that there was no effort to send any high ranking US official to participate in the march.  

      Idiots like The Obama Diary and Spandan really offer nothing to the public debate.  They don't the basic work required.  They lie.  And, I don't care about tone, but if you're going to try to be bitchy, pull it off.  Make me laugh.  Otherwise, you come off like Ann Coulter -- someone who thinks they just wrote or said the funniest thing while everyone around them exchanges looks of horror at how unfunny the remark was.

       


      Today, All Iraq News notes Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi had some criticism for the US government as he declared, "The US-led Coalition to the IA [Iraq Army] is too slow, but it was improved in the last two weeks."


      Don't dish it out if you can't take it.  Today saw US senators call out al-Abadi on his inability to provide humanitarian assistance for those in need in northern Iraq.  Senator Barbara Boxer's office issued the following:
      Monday, January 12th 2015

      Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Ron Johnson (R-WI) – joined by Senators Richard Durbin (D-IL), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Ed Markey (D-MA), Christopher Coons (D-DE), and Tim Kaine (D-VA) – sent a letter to Iraqi Prime Minister Haider Al-Abadi regarding humanitarian aid for the nearly two million Iraqis displaced by the violent campaign of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).
      The letter follows a Foreign Relations subcommittee hearing chaired by Senator Boxer last month on ISIL’s brutal tactics and the growing regional humanitarian crisis.  (Full video of that hearing is available here. Senator Boxer’s statement from the hearing is available here. Senator Johnson’s statement from the hearing is available here.)
      “We have heard firsthand about the suffering and harsh conditions facing these men, women, and children—many of whom have taken refuge in Iraq’s Kurdistan region,” wrote the Senators. “These civilians are in dire need of basic necessities—food, clean water, and shelter. In particular, we are concerned about the welfare of women and children—who make up a majority of the displaced population.”
      In their letter, the Senators ask for Iraqi Prime Minister Al-Abadi’s leadership in ensuring that critical humanitarian assistance reaches vulnerable communities most in need—including Iraqi civilians who have taken refuge in Iraq’s Kurdistan region.
      “As such, we respectfully ask that you take every action to ensure there are no gaps or delays in aid distribution, and that available assistance is dispersed without any discrimination based on sect, ethnicity, or religion. We also ask that you coordinate closely with KRG officials, local authorities, and key international actors to provide them with the resources they need to protect and care for displaced civilians and to continue the fight against ISIL,” the Senators wrote.

       The full text of today’s letter is below.

       January 12, 2015
      His Excellency Dr. Haider Al-Abadi
      Prime Minister, Republic of Iraq

       Dear Prime Minister Al-Abadi:

       We write to commend and show appreciation for your efforts as Prime Minister in beginning to heal the sectarian rifts within Iraqi society and to build a stable, secure and more prosperous country for all Iraqis.
      As you know well, one of the greatest threats facing our two nations is the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). Over the past year, ISIL has taken control of vast swaths of territory across Iraq and Syria with the goal of establishing radical Islamic rule. In its wake, ISIL has left a trail of brutal violence and abuse—targeting other Muslims, ethnic and religious minorities, and women and girls. As a result, nearly two million Iraqis have been displaced.
      We have heard firsthand about the suffering and harsh conditions facing these men, women, and children—many of whom have taken refuge in Iraq’s Kurdistan region. These civilians are in dire need of basic necessities—food, clean water, and shelter. In particular, we are concerned about the welfare of women and children—who make up a majority of the displaced population. 
      The Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) has stepped forward to provide sanctuary to many of these desperate individuals. However, the sheer volume of the displaced has put a tremendous burden on the KRG. According to the KRG Education Ministry, over 600 schools have been converted into shelters to help deal with the estimated 520,000 displaced people now living in the Dohuk region. Even outside the Kurdish Region of Iraq, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens also need urgent assistance – whether clean water and food or shelter for winter.
      Despite pledges by your government and the international community to address this humanitarian crisis, we are deeply concerned that these critical resources are not reaching those who need them most. With winter now settling in, it is imperative that these vulnerable civilians receive immediate and sustained assistance.
      As such, we respectfully ask that you take every action to ensure there are no gaps or delays in aid distribution, and that available assistance is dispersed without any discrimination based on sect, ethnicity, or religion. We also ask that you coordinate closely with KRG officials, local authorities, and key international actors to provide them with the resources they need to protect and care for displaced civilians and to continue the fight against ISIL. We are hopeful that under your leadership all Iraqis will one day have an equal opportunity to live in peace and security.
      We stand ready to work with you on this and other issues of mutual interest.
      Sincerely,
      Barbara Boxer
      United States Senator
      Ron Johnson
      United States Senator
      Richard Durbin
      United States Senator
      Marco Rubio
      United States Senator
      Jeanne Shaheen
      United States Senator
      Ed Markey
      United States Senator
      Christopher Coons
      United States Senator
      Tim Kaine
      United States Senator
      ###


      Kristina Wong (The Hill) points out:

       While their letter focused on humanitarian aid, lawmakers have also been concerned that the Iraqi government, dominated by Shia, has been withholding U.S. military assistance from Kurdish fighters known as peshmerga.  
      "I am concerned by the varying reports I have received from the Obama administration about the equipment and support that has been provided to the Kurds to date," said Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) on Friday.

      Haider is either unwilling or unable to provide the Kurds with military aid -- despite depending on them as the sole functioning military in Iraq.

      He also can't get a budget passed.  Still.

      All Iraq News notes that Parliament did   a second reading of the 2015 budget today.  Remember all those promises -- five so far from the Speaker of Parliament -- about how a vote was only days away -- all those remarks so many weeks and months ago?

      Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) counts 206 dead in acts of violence throughout Iraq today with another sixty-five injured.












      kristina wong


      Posted by at

      Sunday, January 11, 2015

      Ms. magazine, why I'm not laughing

      Note the link:

      http://msmagazine.com/blog/2015/01/09/the-interview-why-im-not-laughing/


      You can't use it.

      You go there and get "page not found."

      Google "The Interview Why I'm Not Laughing" and click on cache and you can read it:
      You are here: Home / Arts / Film / The Interview: Why I’m Not Laughing

      The Interview: Why I’m Not Laughing

      January 9, 2015 by | Leave a Comment
      Share on facebookShare on twitterShare on emailShare on printMore Sharing Services
      Photo: Matthew McQuilkin/Flickr
      Photo: Matthew McQuilkin/Flickr

      If you’re an Asian American or Asian-Pacific Islander female like myself, seeing or even hearing about The Interview via word of mouth or eavesdropped water-cooler conversation makes for a discomforting at best and downright degrading at its worst type of interaction.
      If you haven’t had a chance to see the film in select screenings or illegally download the movie in the comfort of your own home, don’t fret – you’re not missing much.
      If you’ve seen any movie that features a mostly white male speaking cast; stereotypes and disenfranchises minorities; and degrades hypersexualized women all in the name of cheap laughs and thrills, then throw in a few punchlines centered on the phonetics of Asian languages, a tiger, some unnecessary explosions that embody American superiority and congratulations, you’ve seen The Interview.
      A lot has been written so far regarding the visible damage that The Interview has caused. References to the Sony hack are aplenty, while discussion surrounding the international repercussions of the film continue to proliferate in our news feeds.
      But little has been written about the more micro-level consequences of The Interview, and the marginalized groups who truly lose out when movies like this garner worldwide attention, however positive or negative it may be.




      That's the opening.

      It's a thoughtful and intelligent article.

      So why did Ms. pull it down?

      I have no idea.

      Seems rather cowardly, to me.


      "Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
      Saturday, January 10, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, Americans oppose ground troops in Iraq in a poll the press ignores, Juan Cole slimes the military, and more.



      Cher weighs in on Iraq:


      I Understand.We Did Great Damage,By Invading IRAQ,But As Of Now"SORRY"Won't GET ITWe Need2 Mend Fences W/Those Who R Open

      6:55 AM - 9 Jan 2015

      The damage was done and the damage continues.  Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) notes 139 violent deaths in Iraq yesterday with 21 more injured.


      How is Barack's bombing campaign (passed off as a 'plan') reducing violence?


      As we ponder that, let's move over to note how it's always interesting what gets attention and what doesn't.  Everyone and their dog (that would be the Christian Science Monitor) weighed in on the poll regarding the number of Republicans who believed (wrongly) that WMD (one of the false reasons given for the illegal war on Iraq) were discovered there.  We covered the poll in Wednesday's snapshot but we covered it: "32% of Democrats in the US and 51% of Republicans wrongly believe WMDs were discovered in Iraq."  Though many outlets used the poll -- which has issues that should question some of the validity of the results -- to do another slam book post on Republicans and Fox News, that 32% of Democrats believe the lie is telling.

      A few wanted to insist that the bad New York Times article was responsible.

      No.

      One report can't do that.

      Not even if it's amplified.

      The issue is no one was held accountable.  When no one's held accountable, the message is no one needs to be held accountable because no one was wrong.

      You go into Jack In The Box and order fries, walk out the door, look in the sack and discover they gave you onion rings, you can walk back in and they will take accountability for their mistake and give you the fries you ordered.

      One of the reasons given for the 'need' to go to war on Iraq was that Iraq had WMD and was seeking out Betty Crocker Yellow Cake Uranium or some such nonsense.

      And these reasons have not led to accountability.

      Except maybe for Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson.

      Joe is the former US Ambassador to Iraq who exposed Bully Boy Bush's lie about the yellow cake uranium and he was held accountable for that truth telling by the BBB administration which went on to illegally out his wife Valerie Plame as a CIA operative.  (Thanks to his father, Poppy Bush, it is illegal for a US government official or employee to out a CIA operative.  It is not a crime for others to do so.  Which is why columnist Robert Novak committed no crime -- a fact that David Corn -- in his never ending eagerness to suck the phallus of the CIA -- frequently was confused over.)

      So Joe and Valerie suffered.

      Cindy Sheehan and others across the US suffered as they saw their family members perish in the Iraq War or return home wounded.

      The American people -- for many generations -- are suffering -- and will suffer -- as a result of the financial debt the illegal war has created.

      But despite all the suffering and consequences being doled out to various people, the ones who lied were never held accountable.

      Colin Powell is treated as 'respectable' by the media despite his public lying.  He's far from the only one.

      And let's not forget that his cuddle buddy, Lawrence Wilkerson, was given free reign by the media (especially MSNBC and Democracy Now!) to rewrite history and present Colin Powell -- human filth since Vietnam -- as a victim and a truthful person.

      When no one's held accountable for lying, when there are no prosecutions for deceiving the American people and starting an illegal war, people will assume the lies were true.

      But, as usual, that was too much for the media in this country to address.

      Heaven forbid we address the glaring lack of accountability.

      And heaven forbid we address a real poll -- one whose methodology raises no questions.

      See there were two polls that had to do with Iraq that were released this week.

      And if you wanted to slam book Republicans and Fox News, you focused on the questionable one (and generally ignored the 32% of Democrats who believed the lie of WMD found).

      And if you support war, you'll continue to ignore the other poll.

      57% of Americans oppose sending US troops into combat in Iraq.  (Yes, they are already in combat.  Dropping bombs from planes is combat and, throughout the US Air Force's history, people have long received decorations for those combat missions.)

      57% oppose.

      That's a majority.

      That, however, wasn't big news this week.

      A search of even Antiwar.com doesn't even turn up a report or citation.

      The poll was conducted by the Brookings Institute -- a centrist organization not known for pacifist sentiment.

      It was released on Thursday.

      I missed it until a friend at Brookings asked why I wasn't noting it.

      Antiwar.com probably missed it for the same reason.

      But what about the MSM which usually can't stop presenting Brookings as a "trusted voice."

      One poll offered easy scorn towards a group of Americans -- a group of Americans that many in the MSM look down upon, let's be honest.  And they glommed on that poll -- and zoomed in on the results they loved about the people they dislike (Republicans) while ignoring the results on their kindred (Democrats).

      But a poll that speaks against what the administration wants?

      That poll receives pretty much no attention at all.

      Shibley Telhami, who conducted the survey, notes, "If airstrikes are not enough to stop ISIS, 57 percent of Americans oppose sending U.S. ground troops into Iraq to fight the Islamic State.  On the other hand, 53 percent of Republicans favor sending ground troops."

      That the number for Republicans is only 53% is rather amazing.  It's also a number, if peace activists were familiar with it, that could be worked on.

      You better believe that the War Hawks are aware of the poll.  You better believe they'll be working to lower the 57%.

      You better believe that includes the White House.

      As far back as June, US President Barack Obama (rightly) insisted that the only answer for Iraq's crises was a political solution.

      But the US government hasn't focused their efforts on that, have they?

      Instead, the DoD and the State Dept -- and the State Dept -- have focused on roping in other countries to join in the bombings and pressuring these countries to put troops on the ground -- whether they're billed as 'advisors' or what have you.

      The White House hasn't been able to get the ground forces it needs.

      As we've noted before, many State Dept efforts on this have been greeted with foreign officials responding, 'Why should we be sending in combat forces when you government isn't?"

      This repeated reaction from officials in other countries forced the White House to show its hand last month.


      That's when they sent US Secretary of State John Kerry to argue, December 9th, before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that Congress must pass an authorization for Barack's actions in Iraq and Syria and that this legislation must include that Barack can send US combat troops into Iraq.


      Secretary of State John Kerry: However, while we certainly believe this is the soundest policy, and while the president has been clear he's open to clarifications on the use of U.S. combat troops to be outlined in an AUMF, that does not mean we should pre-emptively bind the hands of the commander in chief oo  or our commanders in the field -- in responding to scenarios and contingencies that are impossible to foresee. 


      Barack wants ground troops in Iraq.

      Or, if you're an idiot like Ray McGovern, a rogue John Kerry wants them!

      His Hips Are Plenty Wide To Hide Barack!

      Who knew?

      John has such a narrow frame.

      But just as Barack hid behind Hillary's skirt during his first term, he now hides behind John's rather bony ass.

      And a lot of liars and idiots are willing to go along with that nonsense and pretend that when Kerry goes before the Senate -- and sends his written remarks, his opening statement, 48 hours before appearing -- the White House is caught by surprise that Kerry's asking for ground troops.

      Not only are they caught by surprise but poor little Barack can't even stand up to John.

      Not only that, Barack's unable to tell the press he rejects the call for ground troops.

      He's a prisoner!

      Do men like Ray McGovern portray Barack as such a weakling because it lets them get off on their sexual fantasies where they're strong and important and rescue the damsel Barack?


      There were two polls this week.

      One led to mockery.

      Which one is really important in 2015?

      Which one matters right now as the White House wants Congress to give them the right to put US forces into combat in Iraq?


      That would be the poll the press ignored, that would be the Brookings poll.

      Something else that matters is Asa Fitch and Ghassan Adnan's report for the Wall St. Journal which notes thug Nouri al-Maliki is still plotting to return as prime minister.

      After finally being forced out of office in August (though he continues to refuse to leave the prime minister's house), Nouri al-Maliki continues to plot and conspire.  Haider al-Abadi, Iraq's current prime minister, is seen as weak and not all that different from Nouri when it comes to sectarian positions.

      We'll note this from the article:


      Mr. Maliki still harbors major political ambitions of his own, say insiders such as Ali Dabbagh, who worked as Mr. Maliki’s spokesman in his first term as prime minister but now opposes him.

      “Maliki is still dreaming, and this is going to kill him,” he said. “I think finally he should accept the reality. This is politics and this is like a wheel, down and up, and you are down. I don’t think that anybody would allow you to come up—ever.” 

      That's Ali al-Dabbagh.

      We used to mock Ali in the snapshots, note what a liar he was for Nouri and how the day would come when Nouri would turn on him (as Nouri turns on everyone).

      That came with the $4 billion weapons deal with Russia.

      The deal was corrupt (on the Iraqi side).  Nouri's son was one of the many profiting from the deal.

      As the corruption was exposed -- in the Iraq press -- Nouri began looking for fall guys.

      Ali al-Dabbagh fled the country (and his post as spokesperson) when Nouri attempted to scapegoat him.

      al-Dabbagh feels safe enough now not only to return to Iraq but also to publicly criticize Nouri.

      That criticism won't go unnoticed by Nouri, a petty man who will nurse a grudge like it's a bottle of vintage scotch.



      Juan Cole was an Iraq War cheerleader -- he also cheerleaded the assault on Libya.  Friday morning we noted his latest nonsense and we'll continue that conversation briefly by noting this, "Sharif was about to go to Iraq in 2005, himself, to fight Bush's troops there."  I realize that the nomad lacked basic education in his formative years and never really took courses in US history and civics but the military is not the military of an individual, even if that person is occupying the Oval Office.

      In a column where he blames Bush repeatedly, attacks him repeatedly, for him to then type "Bush's troops"?

      Now he can mock them, he can ridicule them.

      But he can also face the fall out.

      And that fall out should include his stupidity in assuming that the US troops belong to any Oval Office occupant.  They are not toys, they are not possessions.

      They are also not the ones calling the shots.  How easy it is to attack a group of people -- especially ones who do not make policy.


      Turning to the issue of veterans, Senators Patty Murray and Johnny Isakson deliver a win to veterans.  Senator Murray is the Chair of the Senate Finance Committee and serves on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee.  Senator Johnny Isakson serves on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee as well.  Senator Murray's office issued the following:





      For Immediate Release                                                      CONTACT: Murray (202) 224-2834
      Friday, January 9th, 2014                                                                                        Isakson (202) 224-7777
      Top U.S. Army Official Fixes Retirement Benefits Issue After Calls from Murray, Isakson
       
      In a November letter to Army Secretary McHugh, the Senators called for immediate reversal of previous policy
        

      WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Patty Murray (D-WA) and Johnny Isakson (R-GA) applauded U.S. Army Secretary John McHugh for reversing a policy that caused a significant number of Army officers to retire at a lower rank and lose significant retirement benefits, as much as $1,000 per month for the rest of their lives.  

       
      Under the now-reversed policy, a significant group of Army captains and majors (former non-commissioned officers who were recruited for Officer Candidate School after September 11, 2001) were forced to retire at their highest previous enlisted rank, instead of their rank as officers, as a result of the Army’s use of Enhanced-Selective Early Retirement Boards (E-SERB).  In November, the Senators sent a letter to Sec. McHugh calling for this change. The new policy will result in a significant increase in lifetime retirement benefits for the impacted soldiers, for some as much as $1,000 per month or more, or just over $1 million over a 40 year retirement in the case of a captain forced to retire as a sergeant first class.   

       
      “I heartily share your concern regarding those officers…who were informed they must retire in their previous enlisted grade,” Secretary McHugh wrote to the Senators.  “I am pleased to inform you that…I have waived the minimum requirement for those officers, allowing them to retire as officers without regard to the number of years they  have in active commissioned service.”  
       

      The full text of Secretary McHugh’s letter can be viewed HERE.  
       


      "These brave men and women answered the Army’s call to duty not just once, but twice, and I applaud Secretary McHugh’s swift action to correct this policy and ensure we fully honor the service and sacrifice of our nation’s heroes,” Senator Murray said. “I'm grateful to my friend and colleague, Senator Isakson, for joining me in this fight.”
       
      “I am thrilled Secretary McHugh responded quickly and is taking the steps necessary to rectify this situation and allow these deserving men and women to retire at the rank they have earned and appropriately honor their service to our nation,” said Isakson, chairman of the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee.
        

      Read a one-page summary of the issue here.

       
      Under the previous Army policy, a soldier must have served at least 8 years of active service as a commissioned officer in order to retire as a commissioned officer.  Soldiers who served 20 years total, but less than 8 years as commissioned officers, were retired at their highest enlisted rank. 

       
      During the “Grow the Army” effort, the Army dramatically increased the number of officers commissioned via its Officer Candidate School (OCS).  The Army expanded to a post 9-11 peak of 570,000 soldiers in 2010 and is currently executing an end strength reduction designed to shrink the Army to 450,000 soldiers.  Many of those OCS graduates are now being forced to retire through the E-SERB process as the Army shrinks.  Officers with more than 18 years active service are screened by E-SERB and those selected will be forced to retire on the first day of the month following the month they reach 20 years of service. These former non-commissioned officers stepped up and volunteered for OCS at a time the Army badly needed officers and served honorably for between 6 and 7 years, but many were being retired at enlisted ranks they had not held in years. 

      Senators Murray and Isakson were joined in sending their initial letter by: Senators Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), Susan Collins (R-ME), Tom Harkin (D-IA), Mike Johanns (R-NE), Tim Johnson (D-SD), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Mark Pryor (D-AR), Bernard Sanders (D-VT) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH).
       
      ###
      Sean Coit
      Press Secretary
      Office of U.S. Senator Patty Murray
      202-224-2834










      the christian science monitor
      Posted by at
      Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)