"The Water Line: Morality, the Rule of Law, and Leadership" (Dennis Loo, World Can't Wait):
When one considers Bush and Cheney’s presidency, the question almost invariably comes up: “Who is to blame for this colossal debacle?” How could Bush and Cheney have been permitted to take office in the first place and remain in office, escaping prosecution and removal through impeachment, when they were repeatedly caught red-handed engaging in acts far in excess of abuse of office: openly flouting the law, pervasive and persistent lies, torture, committing the supreme war crime by invading a country that had not attacked us, treason, feloniously spying on all Americans, uber malfeasance, criminal negligence in the face of Katrina and global warming, and corruption on a staggering scale, with this list only a part of their long, sordid tale?
Most people’s answer to this is: “It’s the American people’s fault.” Americans (apologies to the other Americans of South and Central America) are apathetic or secretly wanted what Bush and Cheney carried out or are just plain ignorant, selfish, materialistic and lazy.
While material comforts do clearly dampen political activity and some Americans are certainly willfully ignorant – I would estimate their numbers at perhaps 15-20% of the population (some of these not merely ignorant but politically reactionary) – and a sizable percentage politically disinterested (disinterest and willful ignorance are not the same thing), the majority are neither willfully ignorant nor reactionary. They are, instead, misled, naïve, poorly informed, and misinformed.
Were it the case that most Americans were simply stupid, selfish and lazy, then it would not be necessary for the mass media and political parties to systematically censor, distort and deceive. They would not need to spend the gigantic sums that they devote to propaganda that they do. Fox News would not have to exist and it wouldn’t have to maintain the laughable pretence that they are “fair and balanced.” Their slogan could be: “We’re biased and so are you.” Bush and Cheney wouldn’t have had to lie about a connection between 9/11 and Iraq. They could have said: “We’re going to invade Iraq and Afghanistan for oil and empire. Yahoo! Let’s go!”
Dennis Loo has written a great article but I disagree with him in the section above. My reason is "Fool me once, shame on you . . . Fool me -- fool me, twice, fool me -- won't get fooled again!" George W. Bush once said something like that.
The actual line is supposed to be, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
My point? Those idiots buying Barack as the Christ-child? They did the same with George W. Bush. That's why the media has always loved Barack. They knew they wouldn't have to do a great deal with Barack. The media loathed Hillary. If she got the presidency, it would be hard for them to say nice things, the way they flatter Barack.
It had to be Barack.
The fact that supposedly educated Americans have fallen for this new face of empire goes to their own stupidity. There are no more excuses after the last eight years.
They live in a state of willful denial.
They will have to own up to their part in that. I am sorry that I cannot offer some kinder words or thoughts.
But I see far too many hopium addicts. Craving their fix and knowing it's going to kill them, they continue to pursue the drug. Knowing it will kill not only them but also the rest of us, they continue to pursue the drug.
Dennis Loo is more forgiving or more understanding (or both) than I am.
To me, America spent the last eight years burning themselves and now, because Barack's in the White House, they want to rest their hands on stove burners. No doubt, they will then try to act surprised. I'm not in the mood for it.
Cedric's Big Mix
Barack says tomorrow will come
10 hours ago
The Daily Jot
THIS JUST IN! BARACK GETS BLOCKED!
10 hours ago
Thomas Friedman is a Great Man
Stevie Nicks
11 hours ago
Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude
folk rock
11 hours ago
SICKOFITRADLZ
Aretha Franklin
11 hours ago
Trina's Kitchen
Jefferson Airplane
11 hours ago
Ruth's Report
Laura Nyro
11 hours ago
Oh Boy It Never Ends
Carly Simon
11 hours ago
Like Maria Said Paz
Janis Joplin
11 hours ago
Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills)
Sly and the Family Stone
11 hours ago
Mikey Likes It!
The Doors
11 hours ago
The above are the links to last night's posts. Most of us covered music as the titles indicate. I enjoyed reading all of them and continue to maintain that these biographical posts are actually incredibly autobiographical.
Okay, that's it for me. I Tivoed the speech. I told Mike we could watch highlights. I couldn't sit through it live. Great speaker, my ass. So now let me find out what 'great' thing Dear Leader did tonight.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Tuesday, February 24, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, another US service member is reported dead, Barack prepares to speak to the nation and the chatter is Iraq may actually be a topic, Jack Straw says no to an informed citizenry (and yes to covering up the illegal war), measles hit Iraq, and more.
Hamid Ahmed (AP) reported this morning, "Two policemen opened fire on U.S. troops visiting an Iraqi police station in the northern city of Mosul on Tuesday, killing a U.S. soldier and an Iraqi interpreter and wounding three other Americans, officials said." Missy Ryan and Kevin Liffey (Reuters) add, "Lieutenant Colonel David Doherty, a U.S. military spokesman, said four U.S. soldiers and one interpreter were injured, and another interpreter was killed." (A US military statement can be found here on the death of the interpreter.) This brings the total number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4251. Today's death follows yesterday's announcement of three deaths. "Three US soldiers and their interpreter were killed in Iraq. The US military reported they died in combat in Diyala Province, north of Baghdad. For the month of February, 13 Americans have died in Iraq," Gwen Ifill informed viewers last night on The NewsHour. In informing her viewers of that news, Gwen became the only US evening anchor on broadcast TV to bother doing so (though they all had time to bore their audiences with Slumlord Milionaire). AP's Kim Gamel covered the news for papers because no newspaper with their own Iraq division or US staff could be bothered writing about yesterday's deaths apparently. There are now 14 US military deaths in Iraq announced for the month thus far -- 6 of those have been announced since Saturday. Six US military deaths in Iraq announced in four days.
And where's the coverage? CBS and the New York Times are hyping a poll of the great uninformed American electorate who can sob "It's not our fault!" but that excuse got old long ago. You get the democracy you deserve and Americans chose what passes for democracy currently. Look around, all the things so offensive under the Bully Boy are suddenly manna squeezed out of Barack's ass. CBS breathlessly gushes, "Americans are more optimistic about the situation in Iraq than they have been since 2003 [!] . . . with 63 percent saying that things are going well for the United States in the country." Don't wake them from their slumber, it might require helping them wipe away their drool or, worse, changing their 'nighttime sticky' sheets. The foolish think "it is important that troops leave the country within President Obama's timeline of 16 months". What timeline? The one he was supposed to have begun upon being sworn in? That was the promise. February will be over shortly. Still no announcement on what he 'intends' to do. A working media would damn well be demanding answers on that issue. But you don't get a working news media with a compliant, overstuffed, lazy ass public drugged out on (and hooked on) hopium. It's February, he was sworn in back in January -- he might be able to make it to November without ever addressing that campaign promise that was supposed to start on day one. That would certainly allow more Americans to make fools of themselves by refusing to grasp (at this point, it's refusing, even for the uneducated) that "combat" troops does not mean all troops. Cristin Flanagan (Bloomberg News) reports on rumors that tonight, while speaking to the nation (most PBS stations will not only carry it live but also offer analysis afterwards), he will announce his 'withdrawal' plan is beginning . . . 19-months for the withdrawal of some -- not all -- troops. Meanwhile Steven Lee Myers (New York Times' Baghdad Bureau Blog) reports that Iraqis have more questions about Barack Obama than might be known (or might be reported?): "Sheik Moyad Fadhel Hussein al-Ameri, one of three brothers who were the hosts, said he was worried. A former mayor of Mahmudiya, he has a politician's acuity. And with it, he has closely tracked President Barack Obama's early statements on Iraq. 'President Obama is always talking about change,' he said, dressed in traditional robes and headdress and seated in one of the plush arm chairs that ringed the long greeting hall. 'We would like to know what change'."
Those who would like to the live in the reality-based world should know that next month, many people will be standing against the war and organizations participating include The National Assembly to End the Wars, the ANSWER coalition, World Can't Wait and Iraq Veterans Against the War. Here's IVAW's announcement of the March action:
IVAW's Afghanistan Resolution and National Mobilization March 21stAs an organization of service men and women who have served in Iraq, Afghanistan, stateside, and around the world, members of Iraq Veterans Against the War have seen the impact that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have had on the people of these occupied countries and our fellow service members and veterans, as well as the cost of the wars at home and abroad. In recognition that our struggle to withdraw troops from Iraq and demand reparations for the Iraqi people is only part of the struggle to right the wrongs being committed in our name, Iraq Veterans Against the War has voted to adopt an official resolution calling for the immediate withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan and reparations for the Afghan people. (To read the full resolution, click here.) To that end, Iraq Veterans Against the War will be joining a national coalition which is being mobilized to march on the Pentagon, March 21st, to demand the immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and further our mission and goals in solidarity with the national anti-war movement. This demonstration will be the first opportunity to show President Obama and the new administration that our struggle was not only against the Bush administration - and that we will not sit around and hope that troops are removed under his rule, but that we will demand they be removed immediately.For more information on the March 21st March on the Pentagon, and additional events being organized in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Orlando, to include transportation, meetings, and how you can get involved, please visit: www.pentagonmarch.org or www.answercoalition.org.
As Ron Jacobs (Dissident Voice) observed this weekend:
As Barack Obama's troop escalation begins in Afghanistan and talking heads debate how many more troops the US should send, the leadership of what was once the largest antiwar organization (UFPJ) in the United States rejected a call for a unified antiwar protest on March 21st, 2009. Instead, they issued a call to go to Wall Street on April 4th, 2009 and encourage the war profiteers to move "beyond a war economy," while toning down the demand to end the wars and occupations now to a demand to merely end them. Like antiwar organizer Ashley Smith told me in an email: "(That is) something Dick Cheney could support." The implication of this call by UFPJ is that now that Barack Obama and the Democrats are in power, there is no longer any need to protest against war. Not only is this incredibly naive, it is downright dangerous for the future of the world. As anybody who has paid the least bit of attention to the nature of the US economy over the past century, its very foundations rest on the production of war and materials for war. Also apparent to those of us who have been paying attention is that the Democrats are just as responsible for this reality as the Republicans are. Just because George Bush and his administration were personally reprehensible and their arrogance and disregard for principles most Americans hold dear was as obvious as the nose on Pinocchio's wooden face doesn't mean that the policies of the Democrats are substantially different.Consequently, the antiwar movement would be foolish to think they have a government of allies in Washington, DC now. There may be a more personable bunch of folks ruling the country now, but the odds of those folks pulling out of Afghanistan or Iraq now instead of later without a major push from the American people insisting that they do so are about as poor as they were under the Bush administration. The time for the antiwar movement to demand that the Obama administration end the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan is now, before its political ego becomes entangled in a military exercise that is ill-advised, poorly done, and just plain wrong.
Ashley Smith, mentioned above, has covered the 'peace' movement for sometime. Smith and Eric Ruder wrote about United for Pathetic and Juvenile decision to be inactive for the next four years in the Socialist Worker back in December.
Yesterday's snapshot noted IVAW member Suzanne Swift and there should have been a link to her website. There wasn't, my apologies.
28-year-old Iraq War veteran Kristoffer Walker was noted in yesterday's snapshot as well. He is the Army Reservist who is in the news for refusing to return to Iraq. WISC reports, "Walker said Monday night his beliefs haven't changed but he's considering all his options." The Green Bay Press-Gazette editorial board doesn't want Walker to consider his options, they just want him to go back to Iraq. They want that so badly, that they fail at their job. An editorial has 'weight' because it is informed. When you don't know the basics, no one mistakes you for informed. The editorial board hides behind the words of the publicity hack (what a proud moment, "Mom, Dad, I'm in the army! What's that? I fight the word war!") Nathan Banks who insists that you get 30 days and after 30 days you will be charged with desertion. Lie, lie, lie. Hacks are worse than recruiters. Agustin Aguayo turned himself in after being gone less than 30 days. Agustin was still court-martialed for desertion. By contrast, many who have been court-martialed for going AWOL? Gone over 30 days. It is a 'rule of thumb,' it is not an actual rule. Walker could turn himself in tomorrow and face a court-martial. Something allegedly educated and informed people who sit on an editorial board damn well should have known before they wasted everyone's time in order to flaunt their ignorance.
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports two Baghdad roadside bombings that left 8 injured, a Mosul grenade attack on the PUK Party headquarters that left two people injured and, dropping back to Monday, a Mosul roadside bombing that left three police officers wounded.
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports an armed clash in Diyala Province "between a joint American and Iraqi forces and insurgents" that left 3 suspected 'insurgents' dead.
As spin continues, Tim King (Salem-News) does not agree with the latest wave of Operation Happy Talk: ". . . in spite of this rosy article from the UK, people are still dying in Iraq, and the war is anything but successful. In fact, according to recent reports, Iraq is still very dangerous. I was there over the summer just in time to see the beginning of the elimination/reduction of the 'Sons of Iraq' program which is one of the few elements of the 'Surge' that actually brought peace and stability to this country. (see: Could Removal of U.S. Support Shift Iraq's Peaceful Balance? (VIDEO)). Iraqi people told me that as soon as the U.S. pulls out, a civil war will reignite between Shiite and Sunni Muslims." He goes on to explain that, while in Iraq, the only ones he encountered who supported the US remaining there were people on the US payroll.
Independent journalist Dahr Jamail is back in Iraq. This week, he reports on the medical situation in the country:
Seventy percent of Iraq's doctors are reported to have fled the war-torn country in the face of death threats and kidnappings. Those who remain live in fear, often in conditions close to house arrest.
"I was threatened I would be killed because I was working for the Iraqi government at the Medical City," Dr. Thana Hekmaytar told IPS. Baghdad Medical City is the largest medical complex in the country.
Dr. Hekmaytar, a head and neck surgeon, has now been practising at the Saint Raphael Hospital in Baghdad for the last five years.
It is difficult now both as woman and as doctor, she says. Most women are now living in repressive conditions because the government is less secular. And that is besides the chaotic conditions around Iraq.
"It is particularly difficult for female doctors," Dr. Hekmaytar says. "Large groups in Iraq only want us to stay at home, and certainly not be professionals."
"We've had doctors kidnapped, and so many others have fled," said Khaleb, a senior manager at the hospital who requested that his last name not be used. He named several doctors who had been kidnapped. This IPS correspondent, he said, was the first media person allowed into the hospital since the U.S. invasion of March 2003.
Dahr's examination of the medical situation (he filed on the 21st) anticipates today's news from IRIN: Measle outbreaks are taking place in many provinces in Iraq "where health services had collapsed".
Turning to England where ITV reports Jack Straw, alleged 'Justice' Secretary, has blocked the release of the minutes where War Criminal Tony Blair and his cronies made the decision to break international law and go to war on Iraq. Philip Johnston (Telegraph of London) points out he predicted Straw would block the release "exactly a year ago after Richard Thomas, took the courageous decision to demand their release. Mr Thomas's opinion was subsequently upheld by the Information Tribunal to which the Government unsuccessfully appealed. Mr Straw, the artchitect of the FoI [Freedom of Information] Act, has now been forced to demolish his own edifice by exposing both the lack of teeth of the Information Commissioner and Labour's skin deep commitment to true openess." James Chapman (Daily Mail) explains, "The meetings considered the hugely controversial issue of whether the invasion was allowed under international law. In his diary, the late Foreign Secretary and leader of the Commons Robin Cook recorded details of the Cabinet discussions at which several ministers raised serious concerns about the legality of the looming conflict. But Mr Cook claimed that Mr Brown, previously sceptical about the war, delivered a 'long and passionate statement of support' of then Prime Minister Tony Blair's strategy in the days before the war." The Scottish National Party has issued a statement where they quote SNP Westminster leader and Defence spokesperson Angus Robertson stating, "The public feels it was lied to about the reasons for going to war in Iraq, and those responsible must not be allowed to hide from an inquiry. This Cabinet cover up is typical of the Labour government's attitude to freedom of information. We must learn the lessons from the worst UK Foreign policy decision in living memory. Our brave troops have had to pay the price of an illegal conflict forced by Tony Blair, paid for by Gordon Brown and supported by the Tories. Those responsible have never answered the most fundamental questions about why we were led into this war. The claim that the war was about weapons of mass destruction was a lie, a mere cover story unsupported by the facts, which has cost the lives of thousands of civilians and hundreds of our brave soldiers." The Liberal Democrats have also issued a statement where they quote Liberal Democrat Shadow Justice Secretary David Howarth, "The decision to go to war in Iraq was momentous, controversial and disastrous, especially for this country's repuation as an upholder of international law. There never has been a full and comprehensive public inquiry into the decision to go to war in Iraq. Jack Straw must now give his support for such an inquiry. We need to learn the lessons, and we need to learn them as quickly as possible. That is why there Cabinet minutes should be released much earlier than would normally be the case. We already know the names of the dissenters from their memoirs. All we need to know is whether there was any discussion and any challenge of any sort. That is a matter of great public importance and goes to the heart of accountability." Straw read a prepared speech to the House of Commons today and, upon arriving at his announcement not to release the minutes, cries of "disgraceful" and "that's disgraceful" could be heard from members of the House of Commons. Straw ignored the cries, refused to look up and continued reading his statement. As the outrage continues to grow, Jack Straw remains silent as his own blog or maybe he's just so proud of that post about his "Fleece-lined, steel toe-caps" boots that he wore earlier this month in London and wants to be sure everyone has a chance to catch that?
In other legal news, charges "of conspiracy to commit murder" have been dropped against US Sgt Charles Quigley regarding a 2007 death in Baghdad. Madeline Chambers and Tim Pearce (Reuters) explain, "Three soldiers have already been convicted of crimes linked to their involvement in the incident and two more -- Sergeant First Class Joseph P. Mayo and Master Sergeant John E. Hatley -- face trial in the coming months at the Rose Barracks Courthouse in Vilseck in southern Germany, the army said."
And, on politics, the Independent of London (via Information Clearing House) asks, "Obama, Tell Us The Whole Truth:"
This newspaper was not so naive as to imagine that President Obama would immediately conform to the most scrupulous interpretation of US and international law. We are pleased that he has ordered the closure within a year of Guantanamo Bay, halted military trials and restricted CIA interrogators to Army Field Manual techniques. But the refusal to grant legal rights to detainees at Bagram is disappointing. The US Supreme Court ruling in 2004 that prisoners in Guantanamo had the right to take their cases to US courts ended the anomalous status of the prison camp in Cuba. President Bush's attempt to create a legal limbo outside the American and international legal systems had failed. But he continued to try to deny legal rights to prisoners not just in Guantanamo but in Iraq and Bagram, too. Mr Obama's closure of Guantanamo therefore smacks more of fulfilling a symbolic pledge than following it through. The Bush administration's legal case was transparently unconvincing. It argued that detainees were "enemy combatants" being held until hostilities ceased. If so, they should have been entitled to the protections of the Geneva Conventions on the rights of prisoners of war. Yet President Bush resisted even that, and now President Obama represents continuity with that policy. Indeed, Elena Kagan, Mr Obama's nominee for Solicitor General, said during her confirmation hearing that someone suspected of helping to finance al-Qa'ida should be subject to battlefield law -- indefinite detention without trial -- even if captured in the Philippines, say, rather than a battle zone. Nor is this the first disappointment of Obama's presidency. Earlier this month, a government lawyer stuck to the Bush line in a case brought by Binyam Mohamed, the British resident expected home from Guantanamo tomorrow -- about whom Clive Stafford Smith writes today. Mohamed and others are suing a subsidiary of Boeing for arranging "extraordinary rendition" flights, by which they were taken secretly to other countries where they say they were tortured.
iraqkim gamel
pbsthe newshourgwen ifill
iraq veterans against the wara.n.s.w.e.r.world can't wait
suzanne swift
kristoffer walker
ron jacobsashley smitheric ruder
tim king
dahr jamail
cbs news
green bay press-gazette
the new york times
steven lee myers
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Monday, February 23, 2009
Janis Joplin
Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Al Distraction"
That is Isaiah's comic from Sunday and he has one that went up today as well and, yes, is planning another. Let's move to his next one.
Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Domestic Arts Czar"
Al Sharpton can say, "I didn't ask for anyone to be fired!" Bull-f**king-s**t. You stirred it, you boiled it and now you want to blame someone else for the cooking? Doesn't work that way you uneducated moron -- whose father left his mother for Al's sister.
Is that correct? Do I have the lowlife's life correct? That was told to me by a journalist at the Chicago Tribune today when he called about another matter (he's a friend). Well that certainly explains a great deal, doesn't it? We already know the 'rev' became one at age nine or ten which goes to how uneducated he is and how little his title means (after the man who ordained him passed away, Al Sharpton switched religions and was ordained in another faith).
I'm sorry I can't cheer on Al's attacks on the arts.
When CBS fired the producer of the Hitler mini-series for publicly (and rightly) comparing George W. Bush to Hitler, I thought that was too far. I do support the arts, unlike Al Sharpton but then I have an education, an actual education. Of course, my parents didn't sleep with my siblings either which also puts me far above Al.
Is that harsh?
Too damn bad.
I'll play the snob I was raised to be when it comes to attacks on the arts.
Throw Vincent Warren, Center for Constitutional Rights, in with Al Sharpton. Vinnie didn't get an education, apparently. Probably didn't grow up around the arts anymore than Al did. Here's little Vinnie, " The monkey is supposed to be President Barack Obama -- the first African American president and the 44th president of the United States of America." Poor Vinnie, too uneducated to be an art critic or even know the difference between a monkey and a chimp. (Hint, Vinnie, it was a chimp, not a monkey. Your education system failed you because you don't grasp that there is a difference. Quelle surprise.)
At Third we did an "Animation roundtable" and, think about what Vinnie 'knows' ("The monkey is supposed to be . . .") when you read my comments:
Elaine: I can't stress enough how strongly I agree with what Isaiah's saying. Some may say, "Well it's subtle but I see racism in it." I can nod along with that. I can agree with that if we're looking at a piece of art. Someone telling me, however, that the piece is racist, not "I see," and basing it on their interpretation is someone that has no background in the arts and really is not suited or trained to offer criticism. I mean, there are many times Ava and C.I. could rip apart the way a scene is staged. For Hilda's Mix, sometimes, they'll offer that as "Interpretations." Clearly defined as such. They'll note the power dynamics and the violence of a scene that's not supposed to be violent and they'll explore what that could mean. But for their pieces here, they don't do that. And they don't ever --at Hilda's Mix -- offer, "This is what it has to mean!" They know art, they grasp art, they grasp that it is open to interpretations. I have no problem looking at illustrations or statues or whatever with friends and hearing them say "I see . . ." But I have a huge problem with anyone who offers their interpretation and tries to pass it off as something other than an interpretation.
Vincent Warren is a garbage dump of intellectual waste. How the hell dare he attack a cartoon? How the hell dare he decide that his interpretation -- his uneducated interpretation -- is what an artist -- any artist -- intended? He really crossed a line and CCR crossed one by allowing that garbage of Vinnie's to go up at their site.
I've really had it with the Barack Obama Lovers who think they are somehow doing a damn thing. I've had it with how their love for Barack -- the idea of Barack, their idea of him -- matters more to them than reality.
Who the hell does Vincent Warren think he is? Is he a psychic? He's not an art critic. But he 'knows,' he just 'knows' what an artist meant.
What an uneducated, unelightened buffoon.
As I was saying, the Cult of Barack has gotten more than a wee bit out of control. CCR is nothing but a radical organization -- read Marxist, Lennist, etc. -- and when they can't stop being cheerleaders for Barack, there's really no reason for them to exist.
It's amazing Vincent found time to defend his lover (take his balls out of your mouth, Vinnie, before speaking) -- the same lover he can't call out for Guantanamo.
It's past time that the left figured out whether they were independent or cheerleaders.
I was discussing that with a friend Friday night and he pointed out that if George McGovern had been elected in 1972 and made the promises Barack did in the leadup to the election, been sworn in and all this time later done nothing to end the illegal war, we would have been marching, protesting and a lot more.
But instead of bravery, we get punk ass Vinnie and the Cowardly Center for Barack's Rights. Michael Ratner, you should be ashamed of CCR and of yourself right now. How dare you? Where is your courage?
In 1976, do you know how many complaints the FCC received about alleged 'vulgarities' from radio airwaves? 2300. 1976. These reactionaries are always around and they will always try to impose their morality on the rest of us. Those complaints, it should be noted, included complaints against the Carly Simon hit "Nobody Does It Better." That was 'vulgar.' People just knew it was, like Vinnie just knows a chimp isn't a chimp. Excuse me, the educationally challenged Vinnie can't tell the difference between a monkey and a chimp.
Good, I got Janis. Ellen Willis as well -- and we could certainly use her on the left today -- we have no intellectuals among us apparently. This is a theme night post and we're doing music. The way it works is that we are all using one of three books. Selected because they were readily available to all. Mine is The Rolling Stone Illustrated History of Rock & Roll (Jim Miller, editor, Random House).
"Janis Joplin" (Ellen Willis):
Joplin belonged to that select group of pop figures who mattered as much for themselves as for their music; among American rock performers she was second only to Bob Dylan in importance as a creator/recorder/emobdiment of her generation's history and mythology. She was also the only woman to achieve that kind of stature in what was basically a male club, the only Sixties culture hero to make visible and public women's experience of the quest for individual liberation, which was very different from men's. If Janis's favorite metaphors -- singing as fucking (a first principle of rock and roll) and fucking as liberation (a first principle of the cultural revolution) -- were equally approved by her male peers, the congruence was only on the surface. Underneath -- just barely -- lurked a feminist (or prefeminist) paradox.
The male-dominated counterculture defined freedom for women almost exclusively in sexual terms. As a result, women endowed the idea of sexual liberation with immense symbolic importance; it became charged with all the secret energy of an as yet suppressed larger rebellion. Yet to express one's rebellion in that limited way was a painfully literal form of submission. Whether or not Janis understood that, her dual persona -- lusty hedonist and suffering victim -- suggested that she felt it. Dope, another term in her metaphorical equation (getting high as singing as fucking as liberation) was, in its more sinister aspect, a pain0killer and finally a killer. Which is not to say that the good times weren't real, as far as they went. Whatever the limitations of hippie/rock star life, it was better than being a provincial matron -- or a lonely weirdo.
If you don't know Ellen Willis, you may not grasp what a hole her death left. Janis? My two favorite songs are ones that rarely get noted. "Call On Me" is a song she recorded with Big Brother & The Holding Company. You can find a live version on the Janis boxed set (which also has another essay on Janis by Ellen). "A Woman Left Lonely" is my other all time favorite and I don't believe she's ever gotten the credit she deserves for the vocals on that song.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Monday, February 23, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces 5 deaths in Iraq since Friday (3 today), Iraq War veteran Kristoffer Walker says "no more" to the Iraq War, Iraq War veteran Suzanne Swift shares the stories of her harassment and command rape while serving in the military, Baghdad's museum re-opens . . . kind of, and more.
Starting with 28-year-old Kristoffer Walker who is saying no to returning to Iraq. Sarah Rasmussen (WEAU13 -- link has text and video) reports:
Sarah Rasmussen: Good evening, I'm Sarah Rasmussen and after serving after part of a duty in Iraq, the soldier in Wisconsin has decided not to rejoin his unit and faces possible arrest for that decision. We first told you about Specialist Kristoffer Walker [last] night on WEAU13 News at Six. He's serving with the 353rd transportation company that was supposed to ship out yesterday morning to return to Iraq after a two week leave; however, after his request for a transfer went unanswered by his superiors Walker opted not to return to Iraq for moral reasons Walker, who enlisted in the Army Reserve shortly after September 11, says after six years the US is still fighting a war they should have never been involved with. Kristoffer Walker: Operation Iraqi Freedom and the war in Iraq, is -- it's an immoral operation and it's also being poorly managed.Sarah Rasmussen: According to the United States Military, Specialist Walker has 30 days to report. After that he'll be considered a deserter and the military will issue a warrant for his arrest.
Kristoffer explained to Lou Hillman (Fox 11), "My beliefs haven't changed and nothing has changed between Friday and now in Iraq. I am not a pacifist. There is an absolute need for our armed forces" but Kristoffer believes the Iraq War is wrong. As for his opposition and how he should oppose, Kristoffer told Tony Walter (Appleton Post Crescent), "The Army's definition is a little different than mine. The Army's definition is that you have to be opposed to war and all its forms. That's not me. I absolutely support using military force to respond or retaliate to attack. By their standards, you're not allowed to object to one conflict over another." Adam Aaro (WBAY -- link has text video, quote is from video and is correct, text quote is inaccurate) visited with Kristoffer and Sierra Walker and Kristoffer told him, "And I figured if I were to go back to Iraq and do something again that's contrary to my belief structure, I wouldn't be able to really live with myself. . . . Obviously there's a little bit of nervousness there because it's a very real possibility, but what are the other consequences on the flip side if I decide to go back to Iraq and do something that's immoral?" Laura Smith (Fox 11) explains, "Walker says he is receiving suppot from friends and family -- that includes soldiers he served with in Iraq. US Army officials have said Walker still has time to change his mind but would likely face some internal consequences for not reporting." James A. Carlson (AP) reports Kristoffer sees the Iraq War as "an illegitimate, unnecessary campaign." He told WEAU13 that, "Operation Iraqi Freedom and the war in Iraq, is an immoral operation and it's also being poorly managed."
Kristoffer is standing up right now. He knows the Iraq War didn't end. He's not fooling himself into believing it ends tomorrow -- Oh, Blessed Day. Patrick Martin (WSWS) observes, "Meanwhile, there has been no action on Obama's election-year promises to pull out US combat troops from Iraq. Within weeks of the November 4 vote, Obama signaled his intention to maintain the US occupation by retaining Defense Secretary Robert Gates, the architect of the Bush administration's 'surge' policy in Iraq. No US troops have been withdrawn, and US military officers, including the overall commander in Iraq, General Raymond Odierno have dismissed as unviable Obama's pledge to withdraw all combat troops in 16 months." Those in the reality-based world who would like to stand up should know that next month, many people will be standing against the war and organizations participating include The National Assembly to End the Wars, the ANSWER coalition, World Can't Wait and Iraq Veterans Against the War. Here's IVAW's announcement of the March action:
IVAW's Afghanistan Resolution and National Mobilization March 21stAs an organization of service men and women who have served in Iraq, Afghanistan, stateside, and around the world, members of Iraq Veterans Against the War have seen the impact that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have had on the people of these occupied countries and our fellow service members and veterans, as well as the cost of the wars at home and abroad. In recognition that our struggle to withdraw troops from Iraq and demand reparations for the Iraqi people is only part of the struggle to right the wrongs being committed in our name, Iraq Veterans Against the War has voted to adopt an official resolution calling for the immediate withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan and reparations for the Afghan people. (To read the full resolution, click here.) To that end, Iraq Veterans Against the War will be joining a national coalition which is being mobilized to march on the Pentagon, March 21st, to demand the immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and further our mission and goals in solidarity with the national anti-war movement. This demonstration will be the first opportunity to show President Obama and the new administration that our struggle was not only against the Bush administration - and that we will not sit around and hope that troops are removed under his rule, but that we will demand they be removed immediately.For more information on the March 21st March on the Pentagon, and additional events being organized in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Orlando, to include transportation, meetings, and how you can get involved, please visit: www.pentagonmarch.org or www.answercoalition.org.
The illegal war is not ending on its own -- no matter how much time you waste "Wishin' & Hopin'". News of US soldiers dying in Iraq continues -- because the illegal war continues and pretending it ended with an election (in the US or Iraq) is something only a Crazy Ass Cockburn would do. Saturday the US miltary announced: "BAGHDAD -- A Multi-National Division--Baghdad Soldier died Feb. 21 while conducting a combat patrol near Baghdad. The Soldier's name is being withheld pending notification of next of kin and release by the Department of Defense. The incident is currently under investigation." Making that announcement was so tiring for M-NF that they allowed the Dept of Defense to make the other one yesterday, "The Department of Defense announced the death of a soldier who was supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom. PFC Cwislyn K. Walter, 19, of Honolulu died Feb. 19 in Kuwait City, Kuwait, of injuries sustained from a non-combat related incident. She was assigned to the 29th Special Troops Battalion, 29th Infantry Brigade Combat Team of the Hawaii National Guard. The circumstances surrounding the incident are under investigation." Today the US military announced: "TIKRIT, Iraq -- Three U.S. Coalition Soldiers and an interpreter died as a result of combat operations in Diyala Province, Iraq, Feb. 23." The announcements bring the number of deaths of US service members in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4250.
While 4250 US service members and approximately 1.6 million Iraqis have died, many more people have been injured. Some wounds are physical, some are mental wounds -- all are serious. One woman who fought back against command rape recently discussed that ordeal and the effects she carries with her today. Back in January, we noted IVAW's Suzanne Swift had finally been discharged. Courage to Resist interviewed her (link is audio only) earlier this month about her experiences and this is an excerpt:
Courage to Resist: Suzanne Swift joined the US Army in 2003 having been assured by her recruiter that she would not be deployed to Iraq. But almost immediately after her military police training, Swift's unit was ordered to deploy. Soon after she arrived in the Middle East, Suzanne began having to deal with the sexual advances of superiors. One of those superiors coerced her into a sexual relationship. After she returned to the states, Swift was due to deploy again but she chose to go AWOL instead. Eventually she was arrested and court-martialed and in early 2009, she was discharged from the military. She is talking with us today on the phone from her home in Oregon. Suzanne, thanks so much for speaking with Courage to Resist today. [. . .] Listen, let's go back to 2003, when you decided to join up. Tell me why you enlisted in the first place?
Suzanne Swift: I . . . I don't know. Honestly, it just had a really good recruiting pitch and I didn't have anything else to do and they'd give me a job where they said I wouldn't have to deploy to Iraq which I thought was a really good thing.
Courage to Resist: And the job was in the military police, right?
Suzanne Swift: Right. Military police, one of the most deployed MOSs [Military Occupation Specialties] in the US Army.
Courage to Resist: So would you say they misled you?
Suzanne Swift: Yeah, definitely.
Courage to Resist: So you went to Fort Leonard Wood in Missouri for basic training and for MP training, is that right?
Suzanne Swift: Right.
Courage to Resist: And where was your duty station after that?
Suzanne Swift: I was stationed at Fort Lewis, Washington.
Courage to Resist: How long were you there before you went to Iraq?
Suzanne Swift: I would say about three, maybe four weeks.
Courage to Resist: Oh my goodness, that was fast.
Suzanne Swift: Yeah, it sure was. Kind of a whirlwind.
Courage to Resist: Did you have any troubles during basic or MP training or at Fort Lewis with other soldiers?
Suzanne Swift: No, not really. I had, at Fort Lewis, one squad leader who -- whose intentions were not -- I don't even know how to say that.
Courage to Resist: He - he- he didn't have honorable intentions?
Suzanne Swift: Yeah, exactly -- but that we find out later. Not at Fort Lewis, at Fort Leonard Wood.
Courage to Resist: Oh, that was at Fort Leonard Wood? But he never actually physically assaulted you or anything?
Suzanne Swift: No, not until we got to Iraq.
Courage to Resist: So -- so then you got to Iraq. Now tell me, when did the difficulties start?
Suzanne Swift: Almost immediately. We weren't even too Iraq yet. We were still staging in Kuwait and I had a platoon sergeant proposition me basically for sex and I was just completely in shock because, you know, these people are supposed to be like your parents -- especially when you're brand new, or like a brand new, young soldier. It's really appalling that someone would do that.
Courage to Resist: And how did you respond?
Suzanne Swift: Oh I told him no and then I told a couple of other people what had happened and kind of just like put it out there to see if he'd get any advice back. And I ended up talking to the Equal Opportunity Representative about it and he said that he would -- he would talk to the commander and that he would figure out what to do about it and then nothing ever came of that. Ever.
Courage to Resist: Nothing ever came of it? And did the propositions continue?
Suzanne Swift: Not from that particular person but from another person -- yeah, it sure did.
Courage to Resist: So you went from Kuwait to Iraq and where were you stationed in Iraq?
Suzanne Swift: Karbala, Iraq.
Courage to Resist: And that's where your more serious troubles began, is that right?
Suzanne Swift: Yeah.
Courage to Resist: Do you want to talk about some of that?
Suzanne Swift: Um. I -- it's kind of hard to talk about. I guess I've done it before though. I was basically coerced into a -- into a sexual relationship with -- with my superior. And when I tried to end it -- it went on for a few months -- when I tried to end it, he used every -- every resource he had available to make my life miserable -- to punish me for it.
Courage to Resist: And tell me the ways that he punished you.
Suzanne Swift: He would just -- he would tell me the wrong times to be at somewhere and then punish me for being late or not being at the right place and just do little things that would make me look bad. And he'd like spread rumors about -- about me and then like, I don't know. He just made me look bad in every possible way. And then would punish me for making me look bad.
Courage to Resist: Now what was his position in your unit?
Suzanne Swift: Uh, he was a squad leader. He was in a staff sergeant position but he was as a sergeant as an E-5.
Courage to Resist: So he was your squad leader and as your superior he did everything he could to make your life miserable when you refused to continue the relationship he had coerced you into?
Suzanne Swift: Right.
Courage to Resist: And what did you do about that?
Suzanne Swift: Nothing, honestly, you know, I just kept my head down and tried to stay out of trouble.
Courage to Resist: Did he continue his sexual pursuit of you?
Suzanne Swift: Not once the punishment started, no.
Courage to Resist: Did you ever try to report this?
Suzanne Swift: I told a bunch of people. Look, everybody knew what was going on. Just nobody wanted to fix it and plus what was the point? That was my frame of mind then. And he had -- he had also made it like -- with the way he was treating me -- he made it look like I was just a bad soldier. So even if I had reported it, he could have just told them like, "Oh, she's just not -- because I punish her, she's making it all up."
Courage to Resist: So he really had you in a bind.
Suzanne Swift: Yeah. I mean, I could have reported it but it probably wouldn't have come of anything even if it did, I also would have got in trouble, so what was the point?
Courage to Resist: And this continued all the time you were there?
Suzanne Swift: Mmm-hmm. It stopped right before we were heading back to the States and then he just pretended I wasn't there.
Courage to Resist: Were there any other incidents with your other superiors or was that it?Suzanne Swift: Yeah, once we got back to the States I moved to a new unit that was standing up and I had a squad leader who -- he didn't proposition me for sex, he would just say little nasty things to me
Courage to Resist: Did you have the sense that he knew about the other situation?
Suzanne Swift: No, I never really thought about it.
Courage to Resist: And the things he said to you, were they sexual innuendos?
Suzanne Swift: Right, he would -- yeah. He was my team leader and he would -- he would just say, he'd call me at night and be like, "What are you wearing?" And like he'd call me for work-related stuff and be like, "Oh, what color of panties do you have on?" Like, "What are you doing right now? Oh, you just got out of the shower? So you're naked right now?"
Courage to Resist: Oh my goodness.
Suzanne Swift: Yeah, he was just a pervy, little guy.
Courage to Resist: Did you report this guy?
Suzanne Swift: I absolutely did. I was in the States and I had been -- I had just been through enough that I was like, "You know what? This guy is not getting away with it."
Courage to Resist: And who'd you report him to?
Suzanne Swift: I reported it to the Equal Opportunity Representative and he did his job for once and took it up higher to the commander.
Courage to Resist: What did the commander do?
Suzanne Swift: They did an investigation during which they accused me of sleeping with him and gave me a class from my commander on how to prevent sexual harassment from happening to me.
Courage to Resist: And they did nothing to the guy that was harassing you?Suzanne Swift: He got -- he got a very harshly worded letter of reprimand. But that was it.
Courage to Resist: That was it and you were seen as colluding in his sexual aggression. You were treated the way many women are when the victim of sexual aggression is blamed.
Suzanne Swift: Yeah. 'Okay, let me figure out really quick how to prevent sexual harassment -- cause it's my fault when it happens, right?'
The way the military treated Suzanne Swift is appalling and inexcusable; however, it needs to be noted that this is typical and for those who doubt it, zoom in on a class to 'teach' women how not to be sexually harassed which goes to the problems with the military. The person who needs instruction is not the victim. By pushing the burden off on the victim, the military is stating that harassment has two willing parties -- the harasser and the harasseree. As long as they're allowed to push that lie, don't ever expect the culture to improve. And there's no improvement for women in Iraq. Timothy Williams (New York Times) reports 23-year-old Nachman Jaleel Kadhim is a widow who also lost her twin sisters to the illegal war, one of her own five-month twins and now barely surived in a trailer park with "her remaining daughter." Williams notes she's "one of the lucky ones" underscoring how horrible things are for Iraqi widows. Williams tells you the Iraqi economy is hurting but leaves out the puppet government's big-money purchases. Multi-National Forces noted Valentine's Day (their idea of candy and flowers?), "To this end, the Government of Iraq has spent more than $5 billion to buy military equipment, supplies and training from the U.S. through the Foreign Military Sales program." And they're putting in a new pier for the Iraqi navy (yes, that is laughable -- Iraqi navy) which will cost $53 million.
Equally hilarious is to hear the Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs managing director (not minister) Leila Kadhim insist that it's impossible to help everyone. Wait, al-Maliki's puppet government cut the meager budget for the Interior of Women's Affairs from $7,500 a month to $1,000 and another ministry wants to whine? That's hilarious.Williams informs you that Iraqi women (ages fifteen to eighty) are widows in a 1 to 11 ratio. It's a growth industry for Iraqi women. Williams notes some widows end up "coerced" into marriage -- but forgets to note that one of al-Maliki's puppets -- a woman at that, Phyllis Schlafly's spiritual sister? -- has proposed governmental programs to force widows into marriages. This one especially should provide laughter, "The Iraqi military estimates that the number of widows who have become suicide bombers may be in the dozens." Which is it? The female suicide bombers -- less than 40 last year -- are young virgins who were raped or they're widows? Pick a narrative, New York Times, because you've insisted both this month. Amazing and typical, Williams report starts talking about raising the profile of women in Iraq and includes the widows mark during the one-two shoe toss and songs sang during the provincial elections but forgets Nawal al Samurrai who resigned (but is reconsidering) this month as the Minister of Women's Affairs when the meager budget for her ministry was cut from $7,500 a month to 1,500 a month. Tina Susman and Caser Ahmed (Los Angeles Times), Corey Flintoff (NPR), To The Contrary's Bonnie Erbe at US News & World Reports, Feminist Wire Daily, wowOwow and Kim Gamel (AP) have covered Nawal. It's only the New York Times -- with all their reporters in Iraq -- who've never managed to file a story on her. wowOwow zooms in on the nonsense Mazin al-Shihan (Baghdad Displacement Committee) gives Timothy Williams (for paying men to marry widows, "If we give the money to the widows, they will spend it unwisely because they are uneducated and they don't know about budgeting. But if we find her a husband, there will be a person in charge of her and her chilrden for the rest of their lives." wowOwow observes, "No wonder the state's not doing enough for women."
No wonder. But a power struggle that took up a great deal of time for the puppet government has been resolved. Wednesday's snapshot noted: "Monday, Steven Lee Myers (New York Times) covered the power struggle between the Ministry for Tourism and Antiquities and the Culture Ministry as to whether or not the museum will open next Monday. The Culture Ministry's Jabir al-Jabiri is stating that the museum is not opening and his ministry is over the Ministry for Tourism and Antiquties while MfTaA's Baha al-Mayahi states yes, they are opening next Monday. Aseel Kami (Reuters) explains today that nothing's changed. MfTaA's maintains that the museum will open Monday and Jaber al-Jaberi continues to insist that it won't and that 'is the official and final position.' Kami observes, 'The feud illustrates some of the challenges facing Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's government as it seeks to capitalise on a drop in violence and unify a country shattered by war'." Today Sameer N. Yacoub (AP) reports, "Iraq's restored National Museum was formally dedicated on Monday, nearly six years after looters carried away priceless antiquities and treasures in the chaos following the U.S.-led invasion." CNN notes that post-war looting resulted in "15,000 irreplaceable artifacts" being lost with "only about 6,000 . . . recovered." Nouri al-Maliki attended the grand opening -- wearing yet another of those tired blue ties he so favors. BBC offers a photo essay on the reopening of the museum. Gina Chon (Wall St. Journal's Baghdad Life) offers this description, "
The museum includes halls displaying items delivered or returned by Iraqi citizens or regained from other nations. There is also an Assyrian room, a hall of Manuscripts showing ancient books of the Quran and an Islamic Hall. Magnificent wall-size stone carvings and statues, ancient coins and glazed pottery were among the antiquities on display. However, a room that had displayed ancient gold jewelry only showed pictures of the treasures. The jewelry had been on display during the early part of the Coalition Provisional Authority, which governed Iraq after the U.S. invasion in 2003. But the museum feared that the gold jewelry may tempt thieves so the pieces are now kept in a vault." Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) explains how the power struggle was resolved, ". . . a compromise: The museum will reopen Monday for the first time in six years. But only eight of the museum's 26 galleries will be accessible, and for only a few hours". The Los Angeles Times' Babylon & Beyond blog informs, "As for when the rest of Iraq will be able to see the museum, that's unclear. Iraqi guards Monday afternoon told journalists it would be a couple of months."
On Iraq's prison-industrial-complex, Dona and Jim observed last night: "More prisons means Iraq needs more prisoners and Tina Susman (Los Angeles Times) reports that Sunni member of Parliament, Mohammed Daini, has been fingered publicly by al-Maliki's puppet government as responsible for an April 2007 bombing of Parliament and many 'other crimes'. As usual, no evidence was produced to back up these assertions though they did whine that the alleged criminal would remain free because member of Parliament have immunity. Immunity apparently also extends to al-Maliki's officials who make charges in public which they cannot back up." Mohammed al Dyni is another spelling. Trenton Daniels (McClatchy Newspapers) quotes the MP responding to the charges today by declaring, "The injustice against us is because of our national positions. We knew that were were going to pay a price for that." He maintains that the confessions the government is trumpeting are false because his bodyguards "were tortured heavily. These confessions need proof." Newsday reports, "As the videos were played, forces surrounded al-Dayni's home in western Baghdad and confiscated weapons, explosives and other items, including the passport of former Sunni lawmaker Abdul Nasser al-Janabi, who was forced out of parliament in 2007 after declaring he would join insurgents. Al-Dayni was at a hotel in the Green Zone, where he was effectively placed under house arrest." Meanwhile Ahmed Rasheed (Reuters) reports on at least 12 Shi'ite police officers being arrested today on violence charges.
Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing "near the Technology University" which left seven people injured, another Baghdad roadside bombing which claimed 2 lives and left four people injured and a Mosul sticky bombing attack on "a candidate of the National Iraqi list" which left the candidate injured.
Shootings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 people shot dead in Baghdad with eight more injured.
The Academy Awards ceremony was held last night and Academy Award nominee (for 1979's Starting Over) Candice Bergen live-blogged them for wowOwow. Staying with film, David Zeiger, the director of the amazing Sir! No Sir!, notes that the long suppressed documentary FTA -- directed by Francine Parker and featuring Jane Fonda (back on Broadway in 33 Variations at the Eugene O'Neill Theatre through May 24th -- with Samantha Mathis, Colin Hanks), Donald Sutherland, Holly Near, Rita Martinson, the late Peter Boyle and Paul Mooney among others -- airs tonight on the Sundance Channel (9:00 pm EST). The film Tricky Dick Nixon never wanted America to see not only airs tonight, it can be ordered on DVD.
In US politics, Kimberly Wilder (On the Wilder Side) continues exploring her place in the political landscape, "I still have hopes for the Green Party. But, not patience for them now. As for Cynthia McKinney...I will follow her almost anywhere. And, I intend to help her with her next campaign for any office, with a party I admire, or just dedicated to her and her message."
Lastly Kat's "Kat's Korner: The art of india.arie" went up Sunday as did Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Al Distraction" and Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Domestic Arts Czar" went up this morning. Isaiah archives his comics at The World Today Just Nuts -- he started his site Thursday.
iraqkristoffer walkerweau13sarah rasmussen
james a. carlsonlou hillmanmark lelandlaura smithtony waltersadam aaro
iraq veterans against the wara.n.s.w.e.r.world can't wait
suzanne swift
patrick martin
the los angeles timestina susmancaeser ahmed
nprcorey flintoff
bonnie erbe
timothy williamsthe new york times
gina chon
the wall street journal
kimberly wilder
david zeigersir! no sir!fta
jane fonda
holly near
kats kornerthe world today just nuts
the third estate sunday review
That is Isaiah's comic from Sunday and he has one that went up today as well and, yes, is planning another. Let's move to his next one.
Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Domestic Arts Czar"
Al Sharpton can say, "I didn't ask for anyone to be fired!" Bull-f**king-s**t. You stirred it, you boiled it and now you want to blame someone else for the cooking? Doesn't work that way you uneducated moron -- whose father left his mother for Al's sister.
Is that correct? Do I have the lowlife's life correct? That was told to me by a journalist at the Chicago Tribune today when he called about another matter (he's a friend). Well that certainly explains a great deal, doesn't it? We already know the 'rev' became one at age nine or ten which goes to how uneducated he is and how little his title means (after the man who ordained him passed away, Al Sharpton switched religions and was ordained in another faith).
I'm sorry I can't cheer on Al's attacks on the arts.
When CBS fired the producer of the Hitler mini-series for publicly (and rightly) comparing George W. Bush to Hitler, I thought that was too far. I do support the arts, unlike Al Sharpton but then I have an education, an actual education. Of course, my parents didn't sleep with my siblings either which also puts me far above Al.
Is that harsh?
Too damn bad.
I'll play the snob I was raised to be when it comes to attacks on the arts.
Throw Vincent Warren, Center for Constitutional Rights, in with Al Sharpton. Vinnie didn't get an education, apparently. Probably didn't grow up around the arts anymore than Al did. Here's little Vinnie, " The monkey is supposed to be President Barack Obama -- the first African American president and the 44th president of the United States of America." Poor Vinnie, too uneducated to be an art critic or even know the difference between a monkey and a chimp. (Hint, Vinnie, it was a chimp, not a monkey. Your education system failed you because you don't grasp that there is a difference. Quelle surprise.)
At Third we did an "Animation roundtable" and, think about what Vinnie 'knows' ("The monkey is supposed to be . . .") when you read my comments:
Elaine: I can't stress enough how strongly I agree with what Isaiah's saying. Some may say, "Well it's subtle but I see racism in it." I can nod along with that. I can agree with that if we're looking at a piece of art. Someone telling me, however, that the piece is racist, not "I see," and basing it on their interpretation is someone that has no background in the arts and really is not suited or trained to offer criticism. I mean, there are many times Ava and C.I. could rip apart the way a scene is staged. For Hilda's Mix, sometimes, they'll offer that as "Interpretations." Clearly defined as such. They'll note the power dynamics and the violence of a scene that's not supposed to be violent and they'll explore what that could mean. But for their pieces here, they don't do that. And they don't ever --at Hilda's Mix -- offer, "This is what it has to mean!" They know art, they grasp art, they grasp that it is open to interpretations. I have no problem looking at illustrations or statues or whatever with friends and hearing them say "I see . . ." But I have a huge problem with anyone who offers their interpretation and tries to pass it off as something other than an interpretation.
Vincent Warren is a garbage dump of intellectual waste. How the hell dare he attack a cartoon? How the hell dare he decide that his interpretation -- his uneducated interpretation -- is what an artist -- any artist -- intended? He really crossed a line and CCR crossed one by allowing that garbage of Vinnie's to go up at their site.
I've really had it with the Barack Obama Lovers who think they are somehow doing a damn thing. I've had it with how their love for Barack -- the idea of Barack, their idea of him -- matters more to them than reality.
Who the hell does Vincent Warren think he is? Is he a psychic? He's not an art critic. But he 'knows,' he just 'knows' what an artist meant.
What an uneducated, unelightened buffoon.
As I was saying, the Cult of Barack has gotten more than a wee bit out of control. CCR is nothing but a radical organization -- read Marxist, Lennist, etc. -- and when they can't stop being cheerleaders for Barack, there's really no reason for them to exist.
It's amazing Vincent found time to defend his lover (take his balls out of your mouth, Vinnie, before speaking) -- the same lover he can't call out for Guantanamo.
It's past time that the left figured out whether they were independent or cheerleaders.
I was discussing that with a friend Friday night and he pointed out that if George McGovern had been elected in 1972 and made the promises Barack did in the leadup to the election, been sworn in and all this time later done nothing to end the illegal war, we would have been marching, protesting and a lot more.
But instead of bravery, we get punk ass Vinnie and the Cowardly Center for Barack's Rights. Michael Ratner, you should be ashamed of CCR and of yourself right now. How dare you? Where is your courage?
In 1976, do you know how many complaints the FCC received about alleged 'vulgarities' from radio airwaves? 2300. 1976. These reactionaries are always around and they will always try to impose their morality on the rest of us. Those complaints, it should be noted, included complaints against the Carly Simon hit "Nobody Does It Better." That was 'vulgar.' People just knew it was, like Vinnie just knows a chimp isn't a chimp. Excuse me, the educationally challenged Vinnie can't tell the difference between a monkey and a chimp.
Good, I got Janis. Ellen Willis as well -- and we could certainly use her on the left today -- we have no intellectuals among us apparently. This is a theme night post and we're doing music. The way it works is that we are all using one of three books. Selected because they were readily available to all. Mine is The Rolling Stone Illustrated History of Rock & Roll (Jim Miller, editor, Random House).
"Janis Joplin" (Ellen Willis):
Joplin belonged to that select group of pop figures who mattered as much for themselves as for their music; among American rock performers she was second only to Bob Dylan in importance as a creator/recorder/emobdiment of her generation's history and mythology. She was also the only woman to achieve that kind of stature in what was basically a male club, the only Sixties culture hero to make visible and public women's experience of the quest for individual liberation, which was very different from men's. If Janis's favorite metaphors -- singing as fucking (a first principle of rock and roll) and fucking as liberation (a first principle of the cultural revolution) -- were equally approved by her male peers, the congruence was only on the surface. Underneath -- just barely -- lurked a feminist (or prefeminist) paradox.
The male-dominated counterculture defined freedom for women almost exclusively in sexual terms. As a result, women endowed the idea of sexual liberation with immense symbolic importance; it became charged with all the secret energy of an as yet suppressed larger rebellion. Yet to express one's rebellion in that limited way was a painfully literal form of submission. Whether or not Janis understood that, her dual persona -- lusty hedonist and suffering victim -- suggested that she felt it. Dope, another term in her metaphorical equation (getting high as singing as fucking as liberation) was, in its more sinister aspect, a pain0killer and finally a killer. Which is not to say that the good times weren't real, as far as they went. Whatever the limitations of hippie/rock star life, it was better than being a provincial matron -- or a lonely weirdo.
If you don't know Ellen Willis, you may not grasp what a hole her death left. Janis? My two favorite songs are ones that rarely get noted. "Call On Me" is a song she recorded with Big Brother & The Holding Company. You can find a live version on the Janis boxed set (which also has another essay on Janis by Ellen). "A Woman Left Lonely" is my other all time favorite and I don't believe she's ever gotten the credit she deserves for the vocals on that song.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Monday, February 23, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces 5 deaths in Iraq since Friday (3 today), Iraq War veteran Kristoffer Walker says "no more" to the Iraq War, Iraq War veteran Suzanne Swift shares the stories of her harassment and command rape while serving in the military, Baghdad's museum re-opens . . . kind of, and more.
Starting with 28-year-old Kristoffer Walker who is saying no to returning to Iraq. Sarah Rasmussen (WEAU13 -- link has text and video) reports:
Sarah Rasmussen: Good evening, I'm Sarah Rasmussen and after serving after part of a duty in Iraq, the soldier in Wisconsin has decided not to rejoin his unit and faces possible arrest for that decision. We first told you about Specialist Kristoffer Walker [last] night on WEAU13 News at Six. He's serving with the 353rd transportation company that was supposed to ship out yesterday morning to return to Iraq after a two week leave; however, after his request for a transfer went unanswered by his superiors Walker opted not to return to Iraq for moral reasons Walker, who enlisted in the Army Reserve shortly after September 11, says after six years the US is still fighting a war they should have never been involved with. Kristoffer Walker: Operation Iraqi Freedom and the war in Iraq, is -- it's an immoral operation and it's also being poorly managed.Sarah Rasmussen: According to the United States Military, Specialist Walker has 30 days to report. After that he'll be considered a deserter and the military will issue a warrant for his arrest.
Kristoffer explained to Lou Hillman (Fox 11), "My beliefs haven't changed and nothing has changed between Friday and now in Iraq. I am not a pacifist. There is an absolute need for our armed forces" but Kristoffer believes the Iraq War is wrong. As for his opposition and how he should oppose, Kristoffer told Tony Walter (Appleton Post Crescent), "The Army's definition is a little different than mine. The Army's definition is that you have to be opposed to war and all its forms. That's not me. I absolutely support using military force to respond or retaliate to attack. By their standards, you're not allowed to object to one conflict over another." Adam Aaro (WBAY -- link has text video, quote is from video and is correct, text quote is inaccurate) visited with Kristoffer and Sierra Walker and Kristoffer told him, "And I figured if I were to go back to Iraq and do something again that's contrary to my belief structure, I wouldn't be able to really live with myself. . . . Obviously there's a little bit of nervousness there because it's a very real possibility, but what are the other consequences on the flip side if I decide to go back to Iraq and do something that's immoral?" Laura Smith (Fox 11) explains, "Walker says he is receiving suppot from friends and family -- that includes soldiers he served with in Iraq. US Army officials have said Walker still has time to change his mind but would likely face some internal consequences for not reporting." James A. Carlson (AP) reports Kristoffer sees the Iraq War as "an illegitimate, unnecessary campaign." He told WEAU13 that, "Operation Iraqi Freedom and the war in Iraq, is an immoral operation and it's also being poorly managed."
Kristoffer is standing up right now. He knows the Iraq War didn't end. He's not fooling himself into believing it ends tomorrow -- Oh, Blessed Day. Patrick Martin (WSWS) observes, "Meanwhile, there has been no action on Obama's election-year promises to pull out US combat troops from Iraq. Within weeks of the November 4 vote, Obama signaled his intention to maintain the US occupation by retaining Defense Secretary Robert Gates, the architect of the Bush administration's 'surge' policy in Iraq. No US troops have been withdrawn, and US military officers, including the overall commander in Iraq, General Raymond Odierno have dismissed as unviable Obama's pledge to withdraw all combat troops in 16 months." Those in the reality-based world who would like to stand up should know that next month, many people will be standing against the war and organizations participating include The National Assembly to End the Wars, the ANSWER coalition, World Can't Wait and Iraq Veterans Against the War. Here's IVAW's announcement of the March action:
IVAW's Afghanistan Resolution and National Mobilization March 21stAs an organization of service men and women who have served in Iraq, Afghanistan, stateside, and around the world, members of Iraq Veterans Against the War have seen the impact that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have had on the people of these occupied countries and our fellow service members and veterans, as well as the cost of the wars at home and abroad. In recognition that our struggle to withdraw troops from Iraq and demand reparations for the Iraqi people is only part of the struggle to right the wrongs being committed in our name, Iraq Veterans Against the War has voted to adopt an official resolution calling for the immediate withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan and reparations for the Afghan people. (To read the full resolution, click here.) To that end, Iraq Veterans Against the War will be joining a national coalition which is being mobilized to march on the Pentagon, March 21st, to demand the immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and further our mission and goals in solidarity with the national anti-war movement. This demonstration will be the first opportunity to show President Obama and the new administration that our struggle was not only against the Bush administration - and that we will not sit around and hope that troops are removed under his rule, but that we will demand they be removed immediately.For more information on the March 21st March on the Pentagon, and additional events being organized in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Orlando, to include transportation, meetings, and how you can get involved, please visit: www.pentagonmarch.org or www.answercoalition.org.
The illegal war is not ending on its own -- no matter how much time you waste "Wishin' & Hopin'". News of US soldiers dying in Iraq continues -- because the illegal war continues and pretending it ended with an election (in the US or Iraq) is something only a Crazy Ass Cockburn would do. Saturday the US miltary announced: "BAGHDAD -- A Multi-National Division--Baghdad Soldier died Feb. 21 while conducting a combat patrol near Baghdad. The Soldier's name is being withheld pending notification of next of kin and release by the Department of Defense. The incident is currently under investigation." Making that announcement was so tiring for M-NF that they allowed the Dept of Defense to make the other one yesterday, "The Department of Defense announced the death of a soldier who was supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom. PFC Cwislyn K. Walter, 19, of Honolulu died Feb. 19 in Kuwait City, Kuwait, of injuries sustained from a non-combat related incident. She was assigned to the 29th Special Troops Battalion, 29th Infantry Brigade Combat Team of the Hawaii National Guard. The circumstances surrounding the incident are under investigation." Today the US military announced: "TIKRIT, Iraq -- Three U.S. Coalition Soldiers and an interpreter died as a result of combat operations in Diyala Province, Iraq, Feb. 23." The announcements bring the number of deaths of US service members in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4250.
While 4250 US service members and approximately 1.6 million Iraqis have died, many more people have been injured. Some wounds are physical, some are mental wounds -- all are serious. One woman who fought back against command rape recently discussed that ordeal and the effects she carries with her today. Back in January, we noted IVAW's Suzanne Swift had finally been discharged. Courage to Resist interviewed her (link is audio only) earlier this month about her experiences and this is an excerpt:
Courage to Resist: Suzanne Swift joined the US Army in 2003 having been assured by her recruiter that she would not be deployed to Iraq. But almost immediately after her military police training, Swift's unit was ordered to deploy. Soon after she arrived in the Middle East, Suzanne began having to deal with the sexual advances of superiors. One of those superiors coerced her into a sexual relationship. After she returned to the states, Swift was due to deploy again but she chose to go AWOL instead. Eventually she was arrested and court-martialed and in early 2009, she was discharged from the military. She is talking with us today on the phone from her home in Oregon. Suzanne, thanks so much for speaking with Courage to Resist today. [. . .] Listen, let's go back to 2003, when you decided to join up. Tell me why you enlisted in the first place?
Suzanne Swift: I . . . I don't know. Honestly, it just had a really good recruiting pitch and I didn't have anything else to do and they'd give me a job where they said I wouldn't have to deploy to Iraq which I thought was a really good thing.
Courage to Resist: And the job was in the military police, right?
Suzanne Swift: Right. Military police, one of the most deployed MOSs [Military Occupation Specialties] in the US Army.
Courage to Resist: So would you say they misled you?
Suzanne Swift: Yeah, definitely.
Courage to Resist: So you went to Fort Leonard Wood in Missouri for basic training and for MP training, is that right?
Suzanne Swift: Right.
Courage to Resist: And where was your duty station after that?
Suzanne Swift: I was stationed at Fort Lewis, Washington.
Courage to Resist: How long were you there before you went to Iraq?
Suzanne Swift: I would say about three, maybe four weeks.
Courage to Resist: Oh my goodness, that was fast.
Suzanne Swift: Yeah, it sure was. Kind of a whirlwind.
Courage to Resist: Did you have any troubles during basic or MP training or at Fort Lewis with other soldiers?
Suzanne Swift: No, not really. I had, at Fort Lewis, one squad leader who -- whose intentions were not -- I don't even know how to say that.
Courage to Resist: He - he- he didn't have honorable intentions?
Suzanne Swift: Yeah, exactly -- but that we find out later. Not at Fort Lewis, at Fort Leonard Wood.
Courage to Resist: Oh, that was at Fort Leonard Wood? But he never actually physically assaulted you or anything?
Suzanne Swift: No, not until we got to Iraq.
Courage to Resist: So -- so then you got to Iraq. Now tell me, when did the difficulties start?
Suzanne Swift: Almost immediately. We weren't even too Iraq yet. We were still staging in Kuwait and I had a platoon sergeant proposition me basically for sex and I was just completely in shock because, you know, these people are supposed to be like your parents -- especially when you're brand new, or like a brand new, young soldier. It's really appalling that someone would do that.
Courage to Resist: And how did you respond?
Suzanne Swift: Oh I told him no and then I told a couple of other people what had happened and kind of just like put it out there to see if he'd get any advice back. And I ended up talking to the Equal Opportunity Representative about it and he said that he would -- he would talk to the commander and that he would figure out what to do about it and then nothing ever came of that. Ever.
Courage to Resist: Nothing ever came of it? And did the propositions continue?
Suzanne Swift: Not from that particular person but from another person -- yeah, it sure did.
Courage to Resist: So you went from Kuwait to Iraq and where were you stationed in Iraq?
Suzanne Swift: Karbala, Iraq.
Courage to Resist: And that's where your more serious troubles began, is that right?
Suzanne Swift: Yeah.
Courage to Resist: Do you want to talk about some of that?
Suzanne Swift: Um. I -- it's kind of hard to talk about. I guess I've done it before though. I was basically coerced into a -- into a sexual relationship with -- with my superior. And when I tried to end it -- it went on for a few months -- when I tried to end it, he used every -- every resource he had available to make my life miserable -- to punish me for it.
Courage to Resist: And tell me the ways that he punished you.
Suzanne Swift: He would just -- he would tell me the wrong times to be at somewhere and then punish me for being late or not being at the right place and just do little things that would make me look bad. And he'd like spread rumors about -- about me and then like, I don't know. He just made me look bad in every possible way. And then would punish me for making me look bad.
Courage to Resist: Now what was his position in your unit?
Suzanne Swift: Uh, he was a squad leader. He was in a staff sergeant position but he was as a sergeant as an E-5.
Courage to Resist: So he was your squad leader and as your superior he did everything he could to make your life miserable when you refused to continue the relationship he had coerced you into?
Suzanne Swift: Right.
Courage to Resist: And what did you do about that?
Suzanne Swift: Nothing, honestly, you know, I just kept my head down and tried to stay out of trouble.
Courage to Resist: Did he continue his sexual pursuit of you?
Suzanne Swift: Not once the punishment started, no.
Courage to Resist: Did you ever try to report this?
Suzanne Swift: I told a bunch of people. Look, everybody knew what was going on. Just nobody wanted to fix it and plus what was the point? That was my frame of mind then. And he had -- he had also made it like -- with the way he was treating me -- he made it look like I was just a bad soldier. So even if I had reported it, he could have just told them like, "Oh, she's just not -- because I punish her, she's making it all up."
Courage to Resist: So he really had you in a bind.
Suzanne Swift: Yeah. I mean, I could have reported it but it probably wouldn't have come of anything even if it did, I also would have got in trouble, so what was the point?
Courage to Resist: And this continued all the time you were there?
Suzanne Swift: Mmm-hmm. It stopped right before we were heading back to the States and then he just pretended I wasn't there.
Courage to Resist: Were there any other incidents with your other superiors or was that it?Suzanne Swift: Yeah, once we got back to the States I moved to a new unit that was standing up and I had a squad leader who -- he didn't proposition me for sex, he would just say little nasty things to me
Courage to Resist: Did you have the sense that he knew about the other situation?
Suzanne Swift: No, I never really thought about it.
Courage to Resist: And the things he said to you, were they sexual innuendos?
Suzanne Swift: Right, he would -- yeah. He was my team leader and he would -- he would just say, he'd call me at night and be like, "What are you wearing?" And like he'd call me for work-related stuff and be like, "Oh, what color of panties do you have on?" Like, "What are you doing right now? Oh, you just got out of the shower? So you're naked right now?"
Courage to Resist: Oh my goodness.
Suzanne Swift: Yeah, he was just a pervy, little guy.
Courage to Resist: Did you report this guy?
Suzanne Swift: I absolutely did. I was in the States and I had been -- I had just been through enough that I was like, "You know what? This guy is not getting away with it."
Courage to Resist: And who'd you report him to?
Suzanne Swift: I reported it to the Equal Opportunity Representative and he did his job for once and took it up higher to the commander.
Courage to Resist: What did the commander do?
Suzanne Swift: They did an investigation during which they accused me of sleeping with him and gave me a class from my commander on how to prevent sexual harassment from happening to me.
Courage to Resist: And they did nothing to the guy that was harassing you?Suzanne Swift: He got -- he got a very harshly worded letter of reprimand. But that was it.
Courage to Resist: That was it and you were seen as colluding in his sexual aggression. You were treated the way many women are when the victim of sexual aggression is blamed.
Suzanne Swift: Yeah. 'Okay, let me figure out really quick how to prevent sexual harassment -- cause it's my fault when it happens, right?'
The way the military treated Suzanne Swift is appalling and inexcusable; however, it needs to be noted that this is typical and for those who doubt it, zoom in on a class to 'teach' women how not to be sexually harassed which goes to the problems with the military. The person who needs instruction is not the victim. By pushing the burden off on the victim, the military is stating that harassment has two willing parties -- the harasser and the harasseree. As long as they're allowed to push that lie, don't ever expect the culture to improve. And there's no improvement for women in Iraq. Timothy Williams (New York Times) reports 23-year-old Nachman Jaleel Kadhim is a widow who also lost her twin sisters to the illegal war, one of her own five-month twins and now barely surived in a trailer park with "her remaining daughter." Williams notes she's "one of the lucky ones" underscoring how horrible things are for Iraqi widows. Williams tells you the Iraqi economy is hurting but leaves out the puppet government's big-money purchases. Multi-National Forces noted Valentine's Day (their idea of candy and flowers?), "To this end, the Government of Iraq has spent more than $5 billion to buy military equipment, supplies and training from the U.S. through the Foreign Military Sales program." And they're putting in a new pier for the Iraqi navy (yes, that is laughable -- Iraqi navy) which will cost $53 million.
Equally hilarious is to hear the Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs managing director (not minister) Leila Kadhim insist that it's impossible to help everyone. Wait, al-Maliki's puppet government cut the meager budget for the Interior of Women's Affairs from $7,500 a month to $1,000 and another ministry wants to whine? That's hilarious.Williams informs you that Iraqi women (ages fifteen to eighty) are widows in a 1 to 11 ratio. It's a growth industry for Iraqi women. Williams notes some widows end up "coerced" into marriage -- but forgets to note that one of al-Maliki's puppets -- a woman at that, Phyllis Schlafly's spiritual sister? -- has proposed governmental programs to force widows into marriages. This one especially should provide laughter, "The Iraqi military estimates that the number of widows who have become suicide bombers may be in the dozens." Which is it? The female suicide bombers -- less than 40 last year -- are young virgins who were raped or they're widows? Pick a narrative, New York Times, because you've insisted both this month. Amazing and typical, Williams report starts talking about raising the profile of women in Iraq and includes the widows mark during the one-two shoe toss and songs sang during the provincial elections but forgets Nawal al Samurrai who resigned (but is reconsidering) this month as the Minister of Women's Affairs when the meager budget for her ministry was cut from $7,500 a month to 1,500 a month. Tina Susman and Caser Ahmed (Los Angeles Times), Corey Flintoff (NPR), To The Contrary's Bonnie Erbe at US News & World Reports, Feminist Wire Daily, wowOwow and Kim Gamel (AP) have covered Nawal. It's only the New York Times -- with all their reporters in Iraq -- who've never managed to file a story on her. wowOwow zooms in on the nonsense Mazin al-Shihan (Baghdad Displacement Committee) gives Timothy Williams (for paying men to marry widows, "If we give the money to the widows, they will spend it unwisely because they are uneducated and they don't know about budgeting. But if we find her a husband, there will be a person in charge of her and her chilrden for the rest of their lives." wowOwow observes, "No wonder the state's not doing enough for women."
No wonder. But a power struggle that took up a great deal of time for the puppet government has been resolved. Wednesday's snapshot noted: "Monday, Steven Lee Myers (New York Times) covered the power struggle between the Ministry for Tourism and Antiquities and the Culture Ministry as to whether or not the museum will open next Monday. The Culture Ministry's Jabir al-Jabiri is stating that the museum is not opening and his ministry is over the Ministry for Tourism and Antiquties while MfTaA's Baha al-Mayahi states yes, they are opening next Monday. Aseel Kami (Reuters) explains today that nothing's changed. MfTaA's maintains that the museum will open Monday and Jaber al-Jaberi continues to insist that it won't and that 'is the official and final position.' Kami observes, 'The feud illustrates some of the challenges facing Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's government as it seeks to capitalise on a drop in violence and unify a country shattered by war'." Today Sameer N. Yacoub (AP) reports, "Iraq's restored National Museum was formally dedicated on Monday, nearly six years after looters carried away priceless antiquities and treasures in the chaos following the U.S.-led invasion." CNN notes that post-war looting resulted in "15,000 irreplaceable artifacts" being lost with "only about 6,000 . . . recovered." Nouri al-Maliki attended the grand opening -- wearing yet another of those tired blue ties he so favors. BBC offers a photo essay on the reopening of the museum. Gina Chon (Wall St. Journal's Baghdad Life) offers this description, "
The museum includes halls displaying items delivered or returned by Iraqi citizens or regained from other nations. There is also an Assyrian room, a hall of Manuscripts showing ancient books of the Quran and an Islamic Hall. Magnificent wall-size stone carvings and statues, ancient coins and glazed pottery were among the antiquities on display. However, a room that had displayed ancient gold jewelry only showed pictures of the treasures. The jewelry had been on display during the early part of the Coalition Provisional Authority, which governed Iraq after the U.S. invasion in 2003. But the museum feared that the gold jewelry may tempt thieves so the pieces are now kept in a vault." Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) explains how the power struggle was resolved, ". . . a compromise: The museum will reopen Monday for the first time in six years. But only eight of the museum's 26 galleries will be accessible, and for only a few hours". The Los Angeles Times' Babylon & Beyond blog informs, "As for when the rest of Iraq will be able to see the museum, that's unclear. Iraqi guards Monday afternoon told journalists it would be a couple of months."
On Iraq's prison-industrial-complex, Dona and Jim observed last night: "More prisons means Iraq needs more prisoners and Tina Susman (Los Angeles Times) reports that Sunni member of Parliament, Mohammed Daini, has been fingered publicly by al-Maliki's puppet government as responsible for an April 2007 bombing of Parliament and many 'other crimes'. As usual, no evidence was produced to back up these assertions though they did whine that the alleged criminal would remain free because member of Parliament have immunity. Immunity apparently also extends to al-Maliki's officials who make charges in public which they cannot back up." Mohammed al Dyni is another spelling. Trenton Daniels (McClatchy Newspapers) quotes the MP responding to the charges today by declaring, "The injustice against us is because of our national positions. We knew that were were going to pay a price for that." He maintains that the confessions the government is trumpeting are false because his bodyguards "were tortured heavily. These confessions need proof." Newsday reports, "As the videos were played, forces surrounded al-Dayni's home in western Baghdad and confiscated weapons, explosives and other items, including the passport of former Sunni lawmaker Abdul Nasser al-Janabi, who was forced out of parliament in 2007 after declaring he would join insurgents. Al-Dayni was at a hotel in the Green Zone, where he was effectively placed under house arrest." Meanwhile Ahmed Rasheed (Reuters) reports on at least 12 Shi'ite police officers being arrested today on violence charges.
Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing "near the Technology University" which left seven people injured, another Baghdad roadside bombing which claimed 2 lives and left four people injured and a Mosul sticky bombing attack on "a candidate of the National Iraqi list" which left the candidate injured.
Shootings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 people shot dead in Baghdad with eight more injured.
The Academy Awards ceremony was held last night and Academy Award nominee (for 1979's Starting Over) Candice Bergen live-blogged them for wowOwow. Staying with film, David Zeiger, the director of the amazing Sir! No Sir!, notes that the long suppressed documentary FTA -- directed by Francine Parker and featuring Jane Fonda (back on Broadway in 33 Variations at the Eugene O'Neill Theatre through May 24th -- with Samantha Mathis, Colin Hanks), Donald Sutherland, Holly Near, Rita Martinson, the late Peter Boyle and Paul Mooney among others -- airs tonight on the Sundance Channel (9:00 pm EST). The film Tricky Dick Nixon never wanted America to see not only airs tonight, it can be ordered on DVD.
In US politics, Kimberly Wilder (On the Wilder Side) continues exploring her place in the political landscape, "I still have hopes for the Green Party. But, not patience for them now. As for Cynthia McKinney...I will follow her almost anywhere. And, I intend to help her with her next campaign for any office, with a party I admire, or just dedicated to her and her message."
Lastly Kat's "Kat's Korner: The art of india.arie" went up Sunday as did Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Al Distraction" and Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Domestic Arts Czar" went up this morning. Isaiah archives his comics at The World Today Just Nuts -- he started his site Thursday.
iraqkristoffer walkerweau13sarah rasmussen
james a. carlsonlou hillmanmark lelandlaura smithtony waltersadam aaro
iraq veterans against the wara.n.s.w.e.r.world can't wait
suzanne swift
patrick martin
the los angeles timestina susmancaeser ahmed
nprcorey flintoff
bonnie erbe
timothy williamsthe new york times
gina chon
the wall street journal
kimberly wilder
david zeigersir! no sir!fta
jane fonda
holly near
kats kornerthe world today just nuts
the third estate sunday review
Friday, February 20, 2009
Natalie Wood, Isaiah
"Liz Smith: Remembering Natalie Wood, On Screen and Off" (Liz Smith, wowOwow):
You will have a chance to watch Natalie in action in “Gypsy” and a few other classics, if you pick up “The Natalie Wood Collection” — six beautifully re-mastered DVDs, including a separate release of her last, “Brainstorm,” which she had not quite completed at the time of her tragic death in 1981. (The rest of the bunch includes “Splendor In The Grass,” “Sex and the Single Girl,” “Inside Daisy Clover,” “Cash McCall” and “Bombers B-52.”)Wood was one of the very few child stars who grew up to become an adult sensation and box-office draw (her good friend and movie-queen role model Elizabeth Taylor was the other). Natalie began in the sentimental perfection of “Miracle on 34th Street” as the skeptical little girl who gradually comes to believe in Santa Claus. More films followed, but unlike Miss Taylor, Natalie did not develop as quickly. She was not pushed into adult roles before her time. Eventually Warner Bros. snatched her up, and cast her opposite James Dean in “Rebel Without a Cause.” She and Dean became instant symbols of 1950’s teenage angst and discontent. Now, she was a star. (And an Oscar nominee for Best Actress!) But Warner Bros. didn’t handle her especially well.
Two of the films included in this DVD set, “Cash McCall” and “Bombers B-52” were indicative of the studio’s odd choices for the young beauty. (Warner Bros. make-up — heavy base and lurid lips, also did nothing for her. At her age, she hardly needed a cosmetic mask!)
Liz gets back into the crazy after that point so you're not missing anything. (Back into the crazy? Anyone remember in the leadup to Ellen's coming out how Liz was swearing another woman on TV would be coming out as well? Liz, the world still waits.)
I met Natalie Wood twice. Both times with C.I. Once at a luncheon (a large luncheon) and we probably exchanged seven sentences that evening. (I was not seated near her.) The second time was even larger group of people, however, we were at her home with Robert Wanger for a party and she was just the most wonderful hostess. Even with more people (a lot more), she made time for every guest. She worked that party and made sure that everyone felt welcomed.
C.I. knew her, I just knew her from her films (and the occassional story C.I. shared about her).
But I agree that she is one of the most underrated actresses American films produced in the 20th century. There are very few women who will be remembered as well as Natalie Wood. There is the Natalie we know who wanted to believe in Santa Clause, the Judy who really loved James Dean, Gypsy (Rose Lee), West Side Story, Splendor In the Grass and so many other films.
Bob, Carol, Ted and Alice was a strong film and, in my limited encounters with Natalie, that's who she was most like. In that movie, she's able to take the worst situation (her husband announcing he had an affair) and turn it into good news and throughout she's going around making sure everyone is comfortable -- not just in the party scenes. I also do not think she ever looked better in a film. The hair, the make up, the clothes, everything worked.
That's how she was at the luncheon (with a huge pair of sunglasses which I do not believe she ever took off) and that's how she was at her home at the party. Only more so at her home where she just beamed. Not because she was the center of the attention (though she was, eyes naturally went to her), but because she was just so happy to make so many guests happy and to ensure that everyone had a wonderful time.
Amazon has the collection for less than fifty dollars currently.
One more thing. She made an entrance (at the party) coming down the staircase. She pulled it off and not only pulled it off, managed to look as if she found the idea of the big entrance amusing -- it was very charming. I'd forgotten that and was just about to post when I flashed on her entrance. It's probably disjointed to toss it in here but it's here or at the end of my comments regarding Isaiah.
The World Today Just Nuts. What about Isaiah's comic strip? Actually, that is the website Isaiah just started (yesterday) named after his comic strip. "Interview with Isaiah" is the discussion Mike and Isaiah had last night and worth reading. The website is going to be a place for Isaiah to put the archived comics. He has posted three so far:
Swingin' John Bolton eyes the U.N.
Bully is . . .
Condi Rice, Dangerous Fashion Plate
It is hard for me to believe he started drawing The World Today Just Nuts nearly four years ago (four years in May). There are so many wonderful comics and I can't wait to see them all. He plans to do just one a week. That's what he plans.
He writes a little something (usually no more than two paragraphs) about the comic and that's what he's doing. I hope you'll check it out because it really is something.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Friday, February 20, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, a US soldier is convicted in a murder case, Britian claims Iran made an offer (they could or couldn't refuse?), KBR has more problems (of their own making) and more.
Starting with one-time Halliburton subsidary Kellogg Brown & Root, US House Rep Carol Shea-Porter's office announced that a letter was sent to US Secretary of Defense "Robert Gates asking why defense contractor KBR, Inc. was recently awarded a new $35.4 million contract involving electrical work in Iraq. KBR is currently under investigation by the Department of Defense Inspector General for the deaths of 18 Americans, who were electrocuted in buildings that KBR held a contract to mainatin. Military criminal investigators have reopened five cases, and the Army Criminal Investigate Services has classified one of them as 'ngeligent homicide'." The letter, signed by 18 other members of the House, notes:
As you are aware, KBR has held a contract for building maintenance for U.S. military facilities in Iraq since 2003. During this time, there have been numerous investigations into the dangers KBR's faulty electrical work is creating for our military personnel. The Department of Defense Inspector General is currently investigating the electrocution deaths of 18 Americans (16 soldiers and 2 contractors) in KBR-maintained facilities. KBR is under criminal investigation for the electrocution deaths of several U.S. soldiers in Iraq. The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform conducted an in-depth investigation into the problem of electrocutions in U.S. facilities in Iraq and the death of Staff Sgt. Ryan Maseth, 24, a decorated Green Beret electrocuted in his shower on January 2, 2008. The Committee's investigation showed that KBR was alerted to the deficiencies in this and other cases, but failed to take corrective action. In 2008, the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) issued a "Level III Corrective Action Request" to KBR, indicating that the contractor was in "serious non-compliance." This action request, the final warning before a contract is terminated, points to KBR's continuing failure to ensure electrical safety for our troops. With this history, it is not surprising that Capt. David J. Graff, commander of the DCMA's International Division, was quoted in an Associated Press article, stating that "many within DOD have lost or are losing all remaining confidence in KBR's ability to successfully and repeatedly perform the required electrical support services mission in Iraq."
Despite these serious, ongoing concerns, the Department of Defense has awarded KBR a new contract that includes the type of work that KBR failed to perform adequately for years. Threats to the safety and lives of soldiers or others because of known hazards and negligent performance of work are not acceptable.
US House Rep Betty McCollum is among the 18 signing the letter and she released this statement earlier this week, "Secretary Gates should immediately rescind any new awards to KBR. It is irresponsible and negligent for the Department of Defense to grant additional contracts to a company facing such serious allegations. We recently learned, after five years of scrutiny, that a Minnesota sailor was electrocuted to death by faulty wiring. Who can trust KBR's work? . . . We have a moral responsibility to esnure the safety for our troops at home and abroad -- not pad the pocket of a negligent military contractor." CorpWatch's Pratap Chatterjee (writing in Asia Times) explains that $35.4 million contract is "for the design and construction of a convoy support center at Camp Adder in Iraq. The center will include a power plant, an electrical distribution center, a water purification and distribution system, a waste-water colleciton system, and associated information systems, along with paved roads, all to be built by KBR." KBR is being entrusted with a project that has to do with electrocity? It should not be getting any contracts but you'd think that just the term "electricity" in a KBR contract would be more than enough to make one pause.
Those actions are on the House side of Congress. December 23rd, we last noted what the Senate was working on. KBR was involved in that as well. For an update, we'll note that Senator Evan Bayh's office issued the following statement last week:
Washington -- Senators Evan Bayh (D-IN) and Byron Dorgan (D-ND) are taking issue with the conclusions of an Army investigation into the exposure of hundreds of U.S. soldiers to a deadly carcinogen, sodium dichromate, at Qarmat Ali in Iraq in 2003. Since September 2008, Bayh has pushed to ensure the Army conducts a thorough investigation to ascertain whether every precaution was taken to protect Indiana National Guardsmen serving in Iraq.
"I am still unsatisfied with the information provided by the Army about their response to the exposure of U.S. service members to sodium dichromate at the Qarmat Ali water injection facility in Iraq," Bayh said. "We are asking again for a complete account of how our service members were exposed to these conditions and what went wrong. If there's criminal negligence, people must be held accountable. If there was a lack of oversight by Army Corps of Engineers, people ought to be fired."
Senators Bayh and Dorgan released a letter Thursday to Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of the Army Pete Geren, saying the conclusions reached by the Army study the senators requested only raise new questions on the exposure of U.S. troops from Indiana, North Dakota, Oregon, West Virginia and South Carolina.
The senators say the Army's evidence and their own investigations indicate that exposure of the troops appears to be far more severe than the Army or KBR have acknowledged.
Bayh said he still has many unanswered questions about KBR's role in the original exposure and contamination.
"The company needs to be held to account for its behavior in this incident. We have a moral obligation to the men and women who were put in harm's way. We need to make sure to never find ourselves in this situation again," Bayh said.
They also asked Gates and Geren to explain how the Army could pronounce itself "satisfied" with its own oversight of contractor KBR, and with the response by KBR and the Army to the exposure, given that:
Some soldiers, exposed to the deadly chemical in the spring and summer of 2003, still have not been informed by either the Army or KBR that they were exposed.
For months, KBR failed to identify the presence of the chemical, even though it was required to conduct an "environmental risk assessment" at the site.
According to the Army's own timeline, nearly three months passed after the initial detection before KBR began testing at the site. KBR waited two more weeks to start to start remediation of the site, and protective gear was not provided to soldiers until nearly a month after that.
Indiana National Guard personnel were not told of the exposure until they saw KBR employees using PPE (personal protective equipment) at the site.
"It looks like conclusions were made, without regard to the facts," Dorgan said. "We owe our soldiers much more than that. Given the well documented and serious failures at the site, I don't understand how the Army can claim KBR acted appropriately.
"We have to identify those service members who were exposed to sodium dichromate and other lethal chemicals and make sure they get the kind of long-term care and treatment they deserve," Bayh concluded.
That is KBR, a corporation that Pratap Chatterjee points out has raked in "more than $25 billion" from the US government. KBR announced another contract this week. They're currently being sued by ten contract employees over the exposure to the carcinogen and AP notes of that lawsuit, "The KBR contractors' complaint in Houston is scheduled to be heard by an arbiter at a March hearing that will be closed at KBR's request. Contractors with complaints about work in Iraq generally have gone to arbitration as part of KBR's contract with the U.S. government in Iraq."
Despite the above, UPI reported that the corporation won a contract "from the Army Contracting Command" worth $`9.2 million to "provide bulk fuel farm support for the Army in Kuwait". Tom Fowler (Houston Chronicle) reported last week on KBR's guilty plea to bribing "Nigerian officials to win contracts to build a massive natural das project in that country". Zachary A. Goldfarb (Washington Post) reports the $579 million fines agreed to are "the biggest fines ever paid by U.S. companies in a foreign corruption case". We're not done with KBR. The February 10th snapshot included thi
Meanwhile Deborah Haynes and Sonai Verma (Times of London) report that "a British manager for the services company Kellogg Brown and Root" is accused of an inappropriate sexual relationship with an Iraqi women working for the British embassy and that the manager "was also accused of sexual harassment more than 18 months ago by an Iraqi cleaner and two cooks at the embassy." The reportes quote the cleaner who charged sexual harassment a year and a half ago stating today, "I was in the British Embassy and under the British flag and I was oppressed but nobody did anything about that."
Today Afif Sarhan (Islam Online) reports the woman described above "is locking herself home, refusing to meet anyone and sinking into despair over what she describes as sexual abuse and bullying at the British Embbassy and notes serious questions being raised as to why the British Embassy is allowing KBR to (again) investigate themselves? British attorney Anna Areen declares, "The UK has long been very serious on the law of conduct inside government and similar places. If they don't take on their hands the investigation in Baghdad, they will be saying that it is sllowed in Britain on the coming future. [Those] responsible should pay for what they did and it will be honorable if UK officials take head of the investigation and punishment." .
The January 9th snapshot highlighted Laurel Brubaker Calkins and Margaret Cronin Fisk (Bloomberg News) report that KBR and Halliburton decided that the an attack on a KBR truck in 2004 was not due to lack of security provided by the mega-rich corporations, the attack -- resulting in deaths and injuries -- was the fault of "the U.S. Army and Iraqi terrorists". Which was a low even for them. Throughout the illegal war, KRB has put the US military at risk -- not just by electrocuting them or exposing them to dangerous chemicals. When the KBR trucks would have a flat, get stuck or whatever, KBR employees would be able to leave the scene while US service members would have to stay there and wait for orders on what to do. Stay there and be sitting ducks. Kelly Dougherty (IVAW) has explained repeatedly, they would wait and wait and then finally be told to destroy the trucks and any cargo on it. Which would frequently anger the local populations. In March of last year, Iraq Veterans Against the War held their Winter Soldier Investigation. KPFA carried the hearings live for the bulk of the four days and Aaron Glantz and Aimee Allison were the on air moderators. One of the ways to hear the audio of the hearings is to go to Glatnz' War Comes Home site. [Allison is co-host of the station's The Morning Show and co-author with David Solnit of Army Of None.] March 14th was the first day of panels (the previous day was the opening of the hearings) and one of the afternoon panels was on corruption and war profiteering. Appearing on that panel was Doughtery and we'll note this from the March 14, 2008 snapshot:
KBR was the focus of Kelly Dougherty's testimony. She discussed how she and others serving in Iraq assigned to protect convoys were repeatedly put at risk when a KBR vehicle broke down, how they were told it was an asset to be protected even if that meant killing someone and then they would be told to forget it, to destroy the vehicle and move out. Iraqis desperate for fuel or the contents of the truck were not a concern and, if pressed, the US military command would instruct service members that distributing something in the trucks (before destroying them) could cause a riot. All of which goes to Doughtery's statement of Iraqis, "I'm looking at people I can't even look in the eye." Moving to Kuwait after serving in Iraq and while waiting to be sent back homes, service members were living in a KBR tent city. Doughtery explained, "When we were leaving . . . we were put in these tent cities. Our tents were completely covered with mold on the inside." The tents had bunk beds and not cots so service members were not allowed to (as some wanted) sleep outside the tents to avoid what appeared to be Black Mold. Instead, they suffered from respitory infections. Dougherty noted "this living condition where we couldn't even be in the place were we were supposed to live without getting sick." KBR made a big profit of the illegal war. KBR provided the troops with tents that made them sick. Where's the audit on that?
Marcia also covered Kelly Doughtery's testimony:
They were dealing with KBR trucks -- which were worth about $80,000, chump change to KBR. You may remember the stories of contractors abandoning trucks and cars and the cost for new ones (usually on a cost-plus contract) being passed back on to you and me the tax payers. Doughtery noted that KBR's trucks "would break down a lot, would get in accidents a lot." They'd stop for flat tries or because they got stuck in the mud,things like that as well. The drivers were treated horribly by KBR and were from countries such as Pakistan, India, etc. The truck would break down, the driver would hop out of the truck and get a ride with someone else in the convoy and the MPs would be called in to secure the abandoned trucks. Doughtery explained, "For us as miltary police, we're told when we get into Iraq and when we're getting on these convoy missions" that KBR's trucks are United States assets and "need to be protected, with force, with deadly force if necessary." The drill was always the same: secure the trucks and wait. Then came the call that they couldn't find anyone to come get the trucks so they should just leave it.That didn't mean, "Hop in your vehicles and leave!" That meant disable the vehicles (fire grenades into the engine blocks) and destroy whatever cargo it had. That meant setting fuel on fire in front of Iraqis who had no fuel. That meant burning produce in front of Iraqis who were hungry. That meant destroying a brand new ambulance in an area that had none and really needed one. Doughtery explained that even the local sheiks were out on the last one, trying to convince US soldiers that if they would leave the ambulance alone, they (Iraqis) would figure out how to get it off its side and out of the mud."That was pretty much a daily occurence," said Dougherty. "Where we were abandoning vehicles by KBR contractors on a daily basis."
And we'll use Kelly Dougherty's testimony as the transition to Iraq Veterans Against the War in order to note:
IVAW's Afghanistan Resolution and National Mobilization March 21st
As an organization of service men and women who have served in Iraq, Afghanistan, stateside, and around the world, members of Iraq Veterans Against the War have seen the impact that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have had on the people of these occupied countries and our fellow service members and veterans, as well as the cost of the wars at home and abroad. In recognition that our struggle to withdraw troops from Iraq and demand reparations for the Iraqi people is only part of the struggle to right the wrongs being committed in our name, Iraq Veterans Against the War has voted to adopt an official resolution calling for the immediate withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan and reparations for the Afghan people. (To read the full resolution, click here.)
To that end, Iraq Veterans Against the War will be joining a national coalition which is being mobilized to march on the Pentagon, March 21st, to demand the immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and further our mission and goals in solidarity with the national anti-war movement. This demonstration will be the first opportunity to show President Obama and the new administration that our struggle was not only against the Bush administration - and that we will not sit around and hope that troops are removed under his rule, but that we will demand they be removed immediately.
For more information on the March 21st March on the Pentagon, and additional events being organized in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Orlando, to include transportation, meetings, and how you can get involved, please visit: www.pentagonmarch.org or www.answercoalition.org.
Click here for more IVAW Updates
That is next month and World Can't Wait is another organization participating. Hopefully someone will ask President Barack Obama about the speech he gave in Danville, immediately after the 2004 DNC convention, where he declared, "I'd pick up arms right now to defend this country. But if I'm going to ask someone else's son and daughter to go to war, I want to make sure it's the right war." Did Iraq suddenly become "the right war"? And what makes Afghanistan the right one as well? (Barack's always said this is where the fight must be -- but aside from a lot of 9-11 spin, he's never said why. Yes, Barack is the new Bully Boy and, just like the other one, hides behind 9-11 to justify his actions. (Has everyone forgotten that Bush insisted some pages not be released to the public -- regarding the Saudis and 9-11 -- in the official report? If Barack's going to toss around 9-11, he might need to order those papers released -- as Congress had intended for them to be.)
While some pretend things are great or even good or even okay in Iraq, Dahr Jamail, back in Iraq, offers some realities:
"We only want a normal life," says Um Qasim, sitting in a bombed out building in Baghdad. She and others around have been saying that for years.
Um Qasim lives with 13 family members in a brick shanty on the edge of a former military intelligence building in the Mansoor district of Baghdad.
Five of her children are girls. Homelessness is not easy for anyone, but it is particularly challenging for women and girls.
"Me and my girls have to be extra careful living this way," Um Qasim told IPS. "We are tired of always being afraid, because any day, any time, strange men walk through our area, and there is no protection for us. Each day brings a new threat to us, and all the women here."
She rarely leaves her area, she says. Nor do her girls, for fear of being kidnapped or raped.
Meanwhile CBS Radio News' Tammy McCormick explained in this afternoon's newscast, "And anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr is hailing the Iraqi election results as a new chapter. He now says religious leaders and others should work together to put the needs of the country first. al-Sadr has long backed rebellions against the invasion and occupation." AP quotes al-Sadr stating (through a spokesperson -- like when Michael Jackson was interviewed by Rolling Stone and he whispered all his answers to Janet), "Iraq has turned a new page after the elections, which I hope will be a gate for liberation, a gate to serve the Iraqis and not keep occupiers to divide Iraqis. Goals are unified between politicians and the resistance to push out the occupiers." I guess the press could pretend al-Sadr's statements meant something if they hadn't all spent the week leading up to the election and the days immediately after telling their news consumers that al-Sadr was nothing, that he had no pull and that he was a relic or at least, as Tanya Tucker once sang, a faded rose from days gone by. Of Anbar Province, AP notes, "The so-called Awakening Councils won eight of 29 provincial seats in Anbar - giving them a strong hand to form a governing coalition with smaller Sunni groups across a province that was once a major al Qaeda stronghold." Alsumaria reports, "While Independent High Electoral Commission of Iraq (IHEC) was announcing the provincial elections final results a constitutional controversy was raised regarding the conditions of electing a new House Speaker. In fact, Accordance Front insists that its candidate Iyad Assamarrai won while some other blocs say that Saturday's session will decide who won the seat of Speaker of House." That's yesterday but they have video and it's worth nothing again that there is no Speaker all this time later.
In other news, Bridget Kendall (BBC) reports on the claims that Iran has floated a proposal to England: They will "stop attacking British troops in Iraq to try to get the West to drop objections to Tehran's uranium project, a UK official says." That is England's United Nations Ambassador John Sawers. Sawers claims, "There were various Iranians who would come to London and suggest we had tea in some hotel or other. They'd do the same in Paris, they'd do the same in Berlin, and then we'd compare notes among the three of us." Damien McElroy (Telegraph of London) adds, "As Iran marks the 30th anniversary of the revolution that turned out the Shah and installed a cleric-led regime, senior figures have openly discussed a series of secret deals with West. Iran had used its involvement in hostage taking during the Lebanese war to break its isolation in the 1980s."
In some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baquba sticky bombing that resulted in the death of 1 Iraqi soldier and a Kirkuk roadside bombing which left another injured.
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 Iraqi soldier wounded in a Baghdad shooting. Reuters notes the US military announcement on 1 woman and 2 children killed in a bombing outside Baghdad last night.
In Germany a US soldier has been convicted. Seth Robson (Stars and Stripes) reports the US Army's Rose Barracks Courthouse court-martial saw the vidoe of Sgt Michael Leahy Jr "confessing an hour and 10 minutes into an interview with a Criminal Investigation Command special agent" found Leahy stating, "I shot one of them" -- Iraqi prisoners -- "I shot two shots. It was my decision. I always kenw this . . . would come back to me." In an update, Robson notes that Leahy was found guilty and "could face the death penalty after being found guilty . . . of premeditated murder and conspiracy to commit premeditated murder in the deaths of four Iraqi detainees in March 2007." BBC notes that the 4 Iraqi prisoners' corpses were "dumped in a Baghdad canal" after they were shot. Leahy confessed to murdering one. AP notes this was not Leahy's first time being accused of murdering an Iraqi: "Leahy, 28, was acquitted of murder in a separate incident involving the death of another Iraqi in January 2007."
Staying with the Iraq War, libertarian Justin Raimondo (Antiwar.com) has a piece responding to Joan Walsh (Salon) and her review of Thomas E. Ricks' new book The Gamble. I wrote about the book last night, that's not the reason for bringing up Justin. If Justin quotes Walsh accurately (I have neither the time nor the inclination to read Walsh), then Walsh has reviewed a book she doesn't understand. Justin has her praising the 'surge' and saying it worked and she was wrong to doubt it. That can be her opinion. If so, I disagree. But that's not the opinion Ricks expresses in the book. You can't just read a few pages, Walsh, nor can you skim. The 'surge' was a failure -- Thomas E. Ricks is quite clear -- because it was supposed to allow that 'progress' to happen. Not on a military field, on the political field. If Joan Walsh is quoted accurately by Justin, then Walsh needs to re-read the book she reviewed because she missed one of its biggest points. (I have no reason to doubt Justin's honesty or accuracy. I am repeating the "if" because I haven't read Walsh and I have no interest in reading her.) The 'surge' was supposed to allow those now-forgotten benchmarks to be reached. That never happened. That is a part of the story Ricks tells in the book. Justin doesn't claim to have read the book so I'll just note that in quotes he attributes to Joan Walsh, she has some serious comprehension difficulties including an inclination to attribute to Thomas Ricks statements and opinions of others quoted in his book. As they might word it in Annie Hall, "How you ever got to review a book on anything is totally amazing."
Anthony Fenton (Asia Times via ZNet) explores Barack and the counterinsurgency:
Early signals indicate that United States President Barack Obama will continue driving the "counter-insurgency era" that began under his predecessor George W Bush. Less than one month into his administration, the most significant indicators that Obama will continue implementing a foreign policy transformation that began under the Bush administration may be found in and around his National Security appointments. Strikingly, the very rhetoric that is being used to signify change is representative of this continuity. The first key signal came on December 1, when Obama confirmed that he would continue with Robert M Gates as secretary of defense. That day, Obama also announced that (retired) marine general James L Jones would become his national security advisor, and that Hillary Clinton would be secretary of state. Subsequent appointments, including (retired) navy admiral Dennis Blair to director of national intelligence, and Michele Flournoy as under secretary of defense for policy, along with keeping Michael Vickers on at under secretary of defense for special operations and low-intensity conflict, are all linked to Obama's assurances that "irregular warfare" will remain at the forefront of US policy, strategy and operations for the foreseeable future. To help solidify matters, on December 1, Gates quietly signed Department of Defense
Directive (DoDD) 3000.07, establishing the policy that "irregular warfare is as strategically important as traditional warfare". [1] According to the directive, irregular warfare (IW) encompasses "Counter-terrorism operations, foreign internal defense, unconventional warfare, counter-insurgency, and stability operations". Under 3000.07, Vickers, a former special forces and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operative who is considered one of the key architects behind the CIA's covert war with the Afghan mujahideen against the Soviet Union in the 1980s, becomes Gates' "principal advisor" on irregular warfare and the person who will provide "overall policy oversight" to ensure the US military establishment is transformed to be "as effective in IW as it is in traditional warfare".
And finally -- LANGUAGE WARNING if you use the link to follow -- Bob Somerby (Daily Howler) addresses the clowns who live to lie to you:
By now, the governor was a "house of hypocrisy" -- though Olbermann still hadn't made the slightest attempt to explain the unflattering claim. In the world of Big Stupid Cable, it's all about handing the rubes preferred narratives, the ones they turn on your program to hear -- and Olbermann seems to love nothing more than beating up on Palin. He no longer gets to mock the young blondes, something he used to do every night, but Palin seems suitable as a replacement. And he doesn't waste much time explaining what's actually wrong with Palin's views -- or even what they are. It's all about calling the lady stupid -- and it's all about calling her a hypocrite, without quite explaining why. And of course, the tasteless insults fly. This is the way the chat began when he introduced the evening's tough moll, Flanders. Note: In his question, he's still pretending that Sarah Palin has somehow changed her stance on education, now that her own daughter's pregnant:
OLBERMANN: Is this not the mirror image of the conservative`s joke about reality, that "a liberal is just a conservative who hasn't been mugged yet?"
FLANDERS: I think there is a name for people who only teach their kids about abstinence and that's "grandparents." And Sarah Palin is finding that out. The scariest thing in that conversation with Greta Van Susteren was -- well, I thought the scariest thing was the part where Bristol Palin said that talking with her mother was worse than labor. I mean, I guess Katie Couric found that out. Can any of us imagine what a Palin presidency would be like? Like a Nadya Suleman labor?
A Palin presidency would be "like a Nadya Suleman labor." Laura Flanders was keeping it classy -- and respectful feminist that she of course is, she was crawling up Suleman's sn**ch in pursuit of prime insults for Palin.
The two weren't bound by facts and, were Flanders not a lesbian (a self-loathing one) and Keith not already in a significant and longterm relationship with his own ego, she and Olbermann would be perfect for each other. Flanders can't keep it classy, Bob. And she's not a feminist. She claims she is. But a feminist doesn't repeatedly refer to Hillary's laugh as a "cackle" -- which Flanders did on KPFA at the end of February. It was that little fact-free stunt (which also included Flanders -- like all other 'expert' 'analysts' booked by KPFA for that two hour broadcst -- not revealing she had already endoresed Barack Obama -- real easy to call a debate for Barack when the only ones 'evaluating' have all endorsed Barack). That was when Ava and I began using the term Panhandle Media to describe the beggar media. Good for Bob Somerby for calling Flanders out and today's post has him explaining his use of the term that may be objectionable. I dispute his reasoning (Flanders reads everything written about her -- she's obsessive -- and she will love the term Somerby used, not be offended by it) but don't feel he was 'wrong' to use the term. Just as I don't feel there's any term that's off-limits when it comes to Arianna after she allowed (in 2007) her Aging Socialite's Cat Litter Box to be used to attack special-needs children.
Public TV notes, NOW on PBS begins airing on most PBS stations tonight (check local listings) and this week offers a look at sexual harassment: "This week, NOW collaborates with the Schuster Institute for Investigative Journalism at Brandeis University to bring you an unprecedented broadcast investigation of teen sexual harassment in the workplace. In the program, abused teenagers share their own stories with Senior Correspondent Maria Hinojosa. We track their legal journeys to justic, and how the issue impacts hundreds of thousands of teenagers across the country -- many of whom don't know how to report workplace abuse, or to even recognize when their bosses cross the line. This is the first report in a new NOW on PBS beat on women and men in the twenty-first centurey we call 'Life Now'." Late Friday night, NOW should be available online for those who'd like to watch online. On Washington Week, Gwen continues to demonstrate how difficult it is for her -- despite PBS' mandate -- to offer up a panel with an equal number of men and women. Four slots open and yet again Gwen's only been able to find one woman. Jeanne Cummings stands by while Gwen and the boys have a measuring contest. NPR's Tom Gjelten, New York Times' David Sanger and the Associated Press' Charles Babington. (Though who knows what Gwen's packing, smart money is on Charlie as the winner.) This will be available online for streaming Monday afternoon and a transcript will be posted then as well. If you podcast, the show will be available either late tonight or Saturday morning -- podcasts for Washington Week are available at iTunes (for free) in audio or video form (audio downloads faster).Moving over to broadcast TV (CBS) Sunday, on 60 Minutes:The Drinking AgeLesley Stahl examines the debate over lowering the drinking age to 18, a controversial idea embraced by some people and roundly criticized by groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving. Watch Video
Kidnapped In BasraWhen the Iraqi army regained control of the city of Basra from warring religious militias, it meant peace for the city's war-torn residents and rescue for CBS News producer Richard Butler, who had been held captive there for three months. Lara Logan reports. Watch Video
The MascotA young Jewish boy who fled into the forest after his family was killed by the Nazis was later captured by Nazi soldiers who, not knowing he was Jewish, gave him a little uniform and a gun and made him their mascot. Bob Simon reports. Watch Video
60 Minutes, Sunday, Feb. 22 at 7 p.m. ET/PT.
60 Minutes Update:
The Kanzius MachineOn Wednesday, Feb. 18, John Kanzius, a retired radio technician who invented a possible cancer fighting machine in his garage, died after a long battle with leukemia. In April 2008, Lesley Stahl reported on Kanzius and his machine, which had been dreamed up while he was battling the side effects of chemotherapy treatment. Experiments building on John Kanzius' research continue. Video
iraq
the washington postzachary a. goldfarb
deborah haynes
laurel brubaker calkinsmargaret cronin fiskbloomberg news
iraq veterans against the war
kelly dougherty
aimeee allisondavid solnit
aaron glantz
kpfa
damien mcelroy
pbswashington weeknow on pbs
You will have a chance to watch Natalie in action in “Gypsy” and a few other classics, if you pick up “The Natalie Wood Collection” — six beautifully re-mastered DVDs, including a separate release of her last, “Brainstorm,” which she had not quite completed at the time of her tragic death in 1981. (The rest of the bunch includes “Splendor In The Grass,” “Sex and the Single Girl,” “Inside Daisy Clover,” “Cash McCall” and “Bombers B-52.”)Wood was one of the very few child stars who grew up to become an adult sensation and box-office draw (her good friend and movie-queen role model Elizabeth Taylor was the other). Natalie began in the sentimental perfection of “Miracle on 34th Street” as the skeptical little girl who gradually comes to believe in Santa Claus. More films followed, but unlike Miss Taylor, Natalie did not develop as quickly. She was not pushed into adult roles before her time. Eventually Warner Bros. snatched her up, and cast her opposite James Dean in “Rebel Without a Cause.” She and Dean became instant symbols of 1950’s teenage angst and discontent. Now, she was a star. (And an Oscar nominee for Best Actress!) But Warner Bros. didn’t handle her especially well.
Two of the films included in this DVD set, “Cash McCall” and “Bombers B-52” were indicative of the studio’s odd choices for the young beauty. (Warner Bros. make-up — heavy base and lurid lips, also did nothing for her. At her age, she hardly needed a cosmetic mask!)
Liz gets back into the crazy after that point so you're not missing anything. (Back into the crazy? Anyone remember in the leadup to Ellen's coming out how Liz was swearing another woman on TV would be coming out as well? Liz, the world still waits.)
I met Natalie Wood twice. Both times with C.I. Once at a luncheon (a large luncheon) and we probably exchanged seven sentences that evening. (I was not seated near her.) The second time was even larger group of people, however, we were at her home with Robert Wanger for a party and she was just the most wonderful hostess. Even with more people (a lot more), she made time for every guest. She worked that party and made sure that everyone felt welcomed.
C.I. knew her, I just knew her from her films (and the occassional story C.I. shared about her).
But I agree that she is one of the most underrated actresses American films produced in the 20th century. There are very few women who will be remembered as well as Natalie Wood. There is the Natalie we know who wanted to believe in Santa Clause, the Judy who really loved James Dean, Gypsy (Rose Lee), West Side Story, Splendor In the Grass and so many other films.
Bob, Carol, Ted and Alice was a strong film and, in my limited encounters with Natalie, that's who she was most like. In that movie, she's able to take the worst situation (her husband announcing he had an affair) and turn it into good news and throughout she's going around making sure everyone is comfortable -- not just in the party scenes. I also do not think she ever looked better in a film. The hair, the make up, the clothes, everything worked.
That's how she was at the luncheon (with a huge pair of sunglasses which I do not believe she ever took off) and that's how she was at her home at the party. Only more so at her home where she just beamed. Not because she was the center of the attention (though she was, eyes naturally went to her), but because she was just so happy to make so many guests happy and to ensure that everyone had a wonderful time.
Amazon has the collection for less than fifty dollars currently.
One more thing. She made an entrance (at the party) coming down the staircase. She pulled it off and not only pulled it off, managed to look as if she found the idea of the big entrance amusing -- it was very charming. I'd forgotten that and was just about to post when I flashed on her entrance. It's probably disjointed to toss it in here but it's here or at the end of my comments regarding Isaiah.
The World Today Just Nuts. What about Isaiah's comic strip? Actually, that is the website Isaiah just started (yesterday) named after his comic strip. "Interview with Isaiah" is the discussion Mike and Isaiah had last night and worth reading. The website is going to be a place for Isaiah to put the archived comics. He has posted three so far:
Swingin' John Bolton eyes the U.N.
Bully is . . .
Condi Rice, Dangerous Fashion Plate
It is hard for me to believe he started drawing The World Today Just Nuts nearly four years ago (four years in May). There are so many wonderful comics and I can't wait to see them all. He plans to do just one a week. That's what he plans.
He writes a little something (usually no more than two paragraphs) about the comic and that's what he's doing. I hope you'll check it out because it really is something.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Friday, February 20, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, a US soldier is convicted in a murder case, Britian claims Iran made an offer (they could or couldn't refuse?), KBR has more problems (of their own making) and more.
Starting with one-time Halliburton subsidary Kellogg Brown & Root, US House Rep Carol Shea-Porter's office announced that a letter was sent to US Secretary of Defense "Robert Gates asking why defense contractor KBR, Inc. was recently awarded a new $35.4 million contract involving electrical work in Iraq. KBR is currently under investigation by the Department of Defense Inspector General for the deaths of 18 Americans, who were electrocuted in buildings that KBR held a contract to mainatin. Military criminal investigators have reopened five cases, and the Army Criminal Investigate Services has classified one of them as 'ngeligent homicide'." The letter, signed by 18 other members of the House, notes:
As you are aware, KBR has held a contract for building maintenance for U.S. military facilities in Iraq since 2003. During this time, there have been numerous investigations into the dangers KBR's faulty electrical work is creating for our military personnel. The Department of Defense Inspector General is currently investigating the electrocution deaths of 18 Americans (16 soldiers and 2 contractors) in KBR-maintained facilities. KBR is under criminal investigation for the electrocution deaths of several U.S. soldiers in Iraq. The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform conducted an in-depth investigation into the problem of electrocutions in U.S. facilities in Iraq and the death of Staff Sgt. Ryan Maseth, 24, a decorated Green Beret electrocuted in his shower on January 2, 2008. The Committee's investigation showed that KBR was alerted to the deficiencies in this and other cases, but failed to take corrective action. In 2008, the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) issued a "Level III Corrective Action Request" to KBR, indicating that the contractor was in "serious non-compliance." This action request, the final warning before a contract is terminated, points to KBR's continuing failure to ensure electrical safety for our troops. With this history, it is not surprising that Capt. David J. Graff, commander of the DCMA's International Division, was quoted in an Associated Press article, stating that "many within DOD have lost or are losing all remaining confidence in KBR's ability to successfully and repeatedly perform the required electrical support services mission in Iraq."
Despite these serious, ongoing concerns, the Department of Defense has awarded KBR a new contract that includes the type of work that KBR failed to perform adequately for years. Threats to the safety and lives of soldiers or others because of known hazards and negligent performance of work are not acceptable.
US House Rep Betty McCollum is among the 18 signing the letter and she released this statement earlier this week, "Secretary Gates should immediately rescind any new awards to KBR. It is irresponsible and negligent for the Department of Defense to grant additional contracts to a company facing such serious allegations. We recently learned, after five years of scrutiny, that a Minnesota sailor was electrocuted to death by faulty wiring. Who can trust KBR's work? . . . We have a moral responsibility to esnure the safety for our troops at home and abroad -- not pad the pocket of a negligent military contractor." CorpWatch's Pratap Chatterjee (writing in Asia Times) explains that $35.4 million contract is "for the design and construction of a convoy support center at Camp Adder in Iraq. The center will include a power plant, an electrical distribution center, a water purification and distribution system, a waste-water colleciton system, and associated information systems, along with paved roads, all to be built by KBR." KBR is being entrusted with a project that has to do with electrocity? It should not be getting any contracts but you'd think that just the term "electricity" in a KBR contract would be more than enough to make one pause.
Those actions are on the House side of Congress. December 23rd, we last noted what the Senate was working on. KBR was involved in that as well. For an update, we'll note that Senator Evan Bayh's office issued the following statement last week:
Washington -- Senators Evan Bayh (D-IN) and Byron Dorgan (D-ND) are taking issue with the conclusions of an Army investigation into the exposure of hundreds of U.S. soldiers to a deadly carcinogen, sodium dichromate, at Qarmat Ali in Iraq in 2003. Since September 2008, Bayh has pushed to ensure the Army conducts a thorough investigation to ascertain whether every precaution was taken to protect Indiana National Guardsmen serving in Iraq.
"I am still unsatisfied with the information provided by the Army about their response to the exposure of U.S. service members to sodium dichromate at the Qarmat Ali water injection facility in Iraq," Bayh said. "We are asking again for a complete account of how our service members were exposed to these conditions and what went wrong. If there's criminal negligence, people must be held accountable. If there was a lack of oversight by Army Corps of Engineers, people ought to be fired."
Senators Bayh and Dorgan released a letter Thursday to Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of the Army Pete Geren, saying the conclusions reached by the Army study the senators requested only raise new questions on the exposure of U.S. troops from Indiana, North Dakota, Oregon, West Virginia and South Carolina.
The senators say the Army's evidence and their own investigations indicate that exposure of the troops appears to be far more severe than the Army or KBR have acknowledged.
Bayh said he still has many unanswered questions about KBR's role in the original exposure and contamination.
"The company needs to be held to account for its behavior in this incident. We have a moral obligation to the men and women who were put in harm's way. We need to make sure to never find ourselves in this situation again," Bayh said.
They also asked Gates and Geren to explain how the Army could pronounce itself "satisfied" with its own oversight of contractor KBR, and with the response by KBR and the Army to the exposure, given that:
Some soldiers, exposed to the deadly chemical in the spring and summer of 2003, still have not been informed by either the Army or KBR that they were exposed.
For months, KBR failed to identify the presence of the chemical, even though it was required to conduct an "environmental risk assessment" at the site.
According to the Army's own timeline, nearly three months passed after the initial detection before KBR began testing at the site. KBR waited two more weeks to start to start remediation of the site, and protective gear was not provided to soldiers until nearly a month after that.
Indiana National Guard personnel were not told of the exposure until they saw KBR employees using PPE (personal protective equipment) at the site.
"It looks like conclusions were made, without regard to the facts," Dorgan said. "We owe our soldiers much more than that. Given the well documented and serious failures at the site, I don't understand how the Army can claim KBR acted appropriately.
"We have to identify those service members who were exposed to sodium dichromate and other lethal chemicals and make sure they get the kind of long-term care and treatment they deserve," Bayh concluded.
That is KBR, a corporation that Pratap Chatterjee points out has raked in "more than $25 billion" from the US government. KBR announced another contract this week. They're currently being sued by ten contract employees over the exposure to the carcinogen and AP notes of that lawsuit, "The KBR contractors' complaint in Houston is scheduled to be heard by an arbiter at a March hearing that will be closed at KBR's request. Contractors with complaints about work in Iraq generally have gone to arbitration as part of KBR's contract with the U.S. government in Iraq."
Despite the above, UPI reported that the corporation won a contract "from the Army Contracting Command" worth $`9.2 million to "provide bulk fuel farm support for the Army in Kuwait". Tom Fowler (Houston Chronicle) reported last week on KBR's guilty plea to bribing "Nigerian officials to win contracts to build a massive natural das project in that country". Zachary A. Goldfarb (Washington Post) reports the $579 million fines agreed to are "the biggest fines ever paid by U.S. companies in a foreign corruption case". We're not done with KBR. The February 10th snapshot included thi
Meanwhile Deborah Haynes and Sonai Verma (Times of London) report that "a British manager for the services company Kellogg Brown and Root" is accused of an inappropriate sexual relationship with an Iraqi women working for the British embassy and that the manager "was also accused of sexual harassment more than 18 months ago by an Iraqi cleaner and two cooks at the embassy." The reportes quote the cleaner who charged sexual harassment a year and a half ago stating today, "I was in the British Embassy and under the British flag and I was oppressed but nobody did anything about that."
Today Afif Sarhan (Islam Online) reports the woman described above "is locking herself home, refusing to meet anyone and sinking into despair over what she describes as sexual abuse and bullying at the British Embbassy and notes serious questions being raised as to why the British Embassy is allowing KBR to (again) investigate themselves? British attorney Anna Areen declares, "The UK has long been very serious on the law of conduct inside government and similar places. If they don't take on their hands the investigation in Baghdad, they will be saying that it is sllowed in Britain on the coming future. [Those] responsible should pay for what they did and it will be honorable if UK officials take head of the investigation and punishment." .
The January 9th snapshot highlighted Laurel Brubaker Calkins and Margaret Cronin Fisk (Bloomberg News) report that KBR and Halliburton decided that the an attack on a KBR truck in 2004 was not due to lack of security provided by the mega-rich corporations, the attack -- resulting in deaths and injuries -- was the fault of "the U.S. Army and Iraqi terrorists". Which was a low even for them. Throughout the illegal war, KRB has put the US military at risk -- not just by electrocuting them or exposing them to dangerous chemicals. When the KBR trucks would have a flat, get stuck or whatever, KBR employees would be able to leave the scene while US service members would have to stay there and wait for orders on what to do. Stay there and be sitting ducks. Kelly Dougherty (IVAW) has explained repeatedly, they would wait and wait and then finally be told to destroy the trucks and any cargo on it. Which would frequently anger the local populations. In March of last year, Iraq Veterans Against the War held their Winter Soldier Investigation. KPFA carried the hearings live for the bulk of the four days and Aaron Glantz and Aimee Allison were the on air moderators. One of the ways to hear the audio of the hearings is to go to Glatnz' War Comes Home site. [Allison is co-host of the station's The Morning Show and co-author with David Solnit of Army Of None.] March 14th was the first day of panels (the previous day was the opening of the hearings) and one of the afternoon panels was on corruption and war profiteering. Appearing on that panel was Doughtery and we'll note this from the March 14, 2008 snapshot:
KBR was the focus of Kelly Dougherty's testimony. She discussed how she and others serving in Iraq assigned to protect convoys were repeatedly put at risk when a KBR vehicle broke down, how they were told it was an asset to be protected even if that meant killing someone and then they would be told to forget it, to destroy the vehicle and move out. Iraqis desperate for fuel or the contents of the truck were not a concern and, if pressed, the US military command would instruct service members that distributing something in the trucks (before destroying them) could cause a riot. All of which goes to Doughtery's statement of Iraqis, "I'm looking at people I can't even look in the eye." Moving to Kuwait after serving in Iraq and while waiting to be sent back homes, service members were living in a KBR tent city. Doughtery explained, "When we were leaving . . . we were put in these tent cities. Our tents were completely covered with mold on the inside." The tents had bunk beds and not cots so service members were not allowed to (as some wanted) sleep outside the tents to avoid what appeared to be Black Mold. Instead, they suffered from respitory infections. Dougherty noted "this living condition where we couldn't even be in the place were we were supposed to live without getting sick." KBR made a big profit of the illegal war. KBR provided the troops with tents that made them sick. Where's the audit on that?
Marcia also covered Kelly Doughtery's testimony:
They were dealing with KBR trucks -- which were worth about $80,000, chump change to KBR. You may remember the stories of contractors abandoning trucks and cars and the cost for new ones (usually on a cost-plus contract) being passed back on to you and me the tax payers. Doughtery noted that KBR's trucks "would break down a lot, would get in accidents a lot." They'd stop for flat tries or because they got stuck in the mud,things like that as well. The drivers were treated horribly by KBR and were from countries such as Pakistan, India, etc. The truck would break down, the driver would hop out of the truck and get a ride with someone else in the convoy and the MPs would be called in to secure the abandoned trucks. Doughtery explained, "For us as miltary police, we're told when we get into Iraq and when we're getting on these convoy missions" that KBR's trucks are United States assets and "need to be protected, with force, with deadly force if necessary." The drill was always the same: secure the trucks and wait. Then came the call that they couldn't find anyone to come get the trucks so they should just leave it.That didn't mean, "Hop in your vehicles and leave!" That meant disable the vehicles (fire grenades into the engine blocks) and destroy whatever cargo it had. That meant setting fuel on fire in front of Iraqis who had no fuel. That meant burning produce in front of Iraqis who were hungry. That meant destroying a brand new ambulance in an area that had none and really needed one. Doughtery explained that even the local sheiks were out on the last one, trying to convince US soldiers that if they would leave the ambulance alone, they (Iraqis) would figure out how to get it off its side and out of the mud."That was pretty much a daily occurence," said Dougherty. "Where we were abandoning vehicles by KBR contractors on a daily basis."
And we'll use Kelly Dougherty's testimony as the transition to Iraq Veterans Against the War in order to note:
IVAW's Afghanistan Resolution and National Mobilization March 21st
As an organization of service men and women who have served in Iraq, Afghanistan, stateside, and around the world, members of Iraq Veterans Against the War have seen the impact that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have had on the people of these occupied countries and our fellow service members and veterans, as well as the cost of the wars at home and abroad. In recognition that our struggle to withdraw troops from Iraq and demand reparations for the Iraqi people is only part of the struggle to right the wrongs being committed in our name, Iraq Veterans Against the War has voted to adopt an official resolution calling for the immediate withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan and reparations for the Afghan people. (To read the full resolution, click here.)
To that end, Iraq Veterans Against the War will be joining a national coalition which is being mobilized to march on the Pentagon, March 21st, to demand the immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and further our mission and goals in solidarity with the national anti-war movement. This demonstration will be the first opportunity to show President Obama and the new administration that our struggle was not only against the Bush administration - and that we will not sit around and hope that troops are removed under his rule, but that we will demand they be removed immediately.
For more information on the March 21st March on the Pentagon, and additional events being organized in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Orlando, to include transportation, meetings, and how you can get involved, please visit: www.pentagonmarch.org or www.answercoalition.org.
Click here for more IVAW Updates
That is next month and World Can't Wait is another organization participating. Hopefully someone will ask President Barack Obama about the speech he gave in Danville, immediately after the 2004 DNC convention, where he declared, "I'd pick up arms right now to defend this country. But if I'm going to ask someone else's son and daughter to go to war, I want to make sure it's the right war." Did Iraq suddenly become "the right war"? And what makes Afghanistan the right one as well? (Barack's always said this is where the fight must be -- but aside from a lot of 9-11 spin, he's never said why. Yes, Barack is the new Bully Boy and, just like the other one, hides behind 9-11 to justify his actions. (Has everyone forgotten that Bush insisted some pages not be released to the public -- regarding the Saudis and 9-11 -- in the official report? If Barack's going to toss around 9-11, he might need to order those papers released -- as Congress had intended for them to be.)
While some pretend things are great or even good or even okay in Iraq, Dahr Jamail, back in Iraq, offers some realities:
"We only want a normal life," says Um Qasim, sitting in a bombed out building in Baghdad. She and others around have been saying that for years.
Um Qasim lives with 13 family members in a brick shanty on the edge of a former military intelligence building in the Mansoor district of Baghdad.
Five of her children are girls. Homelessness is not easy for anyone, but it is particularly challenging for women and girls.
"Me and my girls have to be extra careful living this way," Um Qasim told IPS. "We are tired of always being afraid, because any day, any time, strange men walk through our area, and there is no protection for us. Each day brings a new threat to us, and all the women here."
She rarely leaves her area, she says. Nor do her girls, for fear of being kidnapped or raped.
Meanwhile CBS Radio News' Tammy McCormick explained in this afternoon's newscast, "And anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr is hailing the Iraqi election results as a new chapter. He now says religious leaders and others should work together to put the needs of the country first. al-Sadr has long backed rebellions against the invasion and occupation." AP quotes al-Sadr stating (through a spokesperson -- like when Michael Jackson was interviewed by Rolling Stone and he whispered all his answers to Janet), "Iraq has turned a new page after the elections, which I hope will be a gate for liberation, a gate to serve the Iraqis and not keep occupiers to divide Iraqis. Goals are unified between politicians and the resistance to push out the occupiers." I guess the press could pretend al-Sadr's statements meant something if they hadn't all spent the week leading up to the election and the days immediately after telling their news consumers that al-Sadr was nothing, that he had no pull and that he was a relic or at least, as Tanya Tucker once sang, a faded rose from days gone by. Of Anbar Province, AP notes, "The so-called Awakening Councils won eight of 29 provincial seats in Anbar - giving them a strong hand to form a governing coalition with smaller Sunni groups across a province that was once a major al Qaeda stronghold." Alsumaria reports, "While Independent High Electoral Commission of Iraq (IHEC) was announcing the provincial elections final results a constitutional controversy was raised regarding the conditions of electing a new House Speaker. In fact, Accordance Front insists that its candidate Iyad Assamarrai won while some other blocs say that Saturday's session will decide who won the seat of Speaker of House." That's yesterday but they have video and it's worth nothing again that there is no Speaker all this time later.
In other news, Bridget Kendall (BBC) reports on the claims that Iran has floated a proposal to England: They will "stop attacking British troops in Iraq to try to get the West to drop objections to Tehran's uranium project, a UK official says." That is England's United Nations Ambassador John Sawers. Sawers claims, "There were various Iranians who would come to London and suggest we had tea in some hotel or other. They'd do the same in Paris, they'd do the same in Berlin, and then we'd compare notes among the three of us." Damien McElroy (Telegraph of London) adds, "As Iran marks the 30th anniversary of the revolution that turned out the Shah and installed a cleric-led regime, senior figures have openly discussed a series of secret deals with West. Iran had used its involvement in hostage taking during the Lebanese war to break its isolation in the 1980s."
In some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baquba sticky bombing that resulted in the death of 1 Iraqi soldier and a Kirkuk roadside bombing which left another injured.
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 Iraqi soldier wounded in a Baghdad shooting. Reuters notes the US military announcement on 1 woman and 2 children killed in a bombing outside Baghdad last night.
In Germany a US soldier has been convicted. Seth Robson (Stars and Stripes) reports the US Army's Rose Barracks Courthouse court-martial saw the vidoe of Sgt Michael Leahy Jr "confessing an hour and 10 minutes into an interview with a Criminal Investigation Command special agent" found Leahy stating, "I shot one of them" -- Iraqi prisoners -- "I shot two shots. It was my decision. I always kenw this . . . would come back to me." In an update, Robson notes that Leahy was found guilty and "could face the death penalty after being found guilty . . . of premeditated murder and conspiracy to commit premeditated murder in the deaths of four Iraqi detainees in March 2007." BBC notes that the 4 Iraqi prisoners' corpses were "dumped in a Baghdad canal" after they were shot. Leahy confessed to murdering one. AP notes this was not Leahy's first time being accused of murdering an Iraqi: "Leahy, 28, was acquitted of murder in a separate incident involving the death of another Iraqi in January 2007."
Staying with the Iraq War, libertarian Justin Raimondo (Antiwar.com) has a piece responding to Joan Walsh (Salon) and her review of Thomas E. Ricks' new book The Gamble. I wrote about the book last night, that's not the reason for bringing up Justin. If Justin quotes Walsh accurately (I have neither the time nor the inclination to read Walsh), then Walsh has reviewed a book she doesn't understand. Justin has her praising the 'surge' and saying it worked and she was wrong to doubt it. That can be her opinion. If so, I disagree. But that's not the opinion Ricks expresses in the book. You can't just read a few pages, Walsh, nor can you skim. The 'surge' was a failure -- Thomas E. Ricks is quite clear -- because it was supposed to allow that 'progress' to happen. Not on a military field, on the political field. If Joan Walsh is quoted accurately by Justin, then Walsh needs to re-read the book she reviewed because she missed one of its biggest points. (I have no reason to doubt Justin's honesty or accuracy. I am repeating the "if" because I haven't read Walsh and I have no interest in reading her.) The 'surge' was supposed to allow those now-forgotten benchmarks to be reached. That never happened. That is a part of the story Ricks tells in the book. Justin doesn't claim to have read the book so I'll just note that in quotes he attributes to Joan Walsh, she has some serious comprehension difficulties including an inclination to attribute to Thomas Ricks statements and opinions of others quoted in his book. As they might word it in Annie Hall, "How you ever got to review a book on anything is totally amazing."
Anthony Fenton (Asia Times via ZNet) explores Barack and the counterinsurgency:
Early signals indicate that United States President Barack Obama will continue driving the "counter-insurgency era" that began under his predecessor George W Bush. Less than one month into his administration, the most significant indicators that Obama will continue implementing a foreign policy transformation that began under the Bush administration may be found in and around his National Security appointments. Strikingly, the very rhetoric that is being used to signify change is representative of this continuity. The first key signal came on December 1, when Obama confirmed that he would continue with Robert M Gates as secretary of defense. That day, Obama also announced that (retired) marine general James L Jones would become his national security advisor, and that Hillary Clinton would be secretary of state. Subsequent appointments, including (retired) navy admiral Dennis Blair to director of national intelligence, and Michele Flournoy as under secretary of defense for policy, along with keeping Michael Vickers on at under secretary of defense for special operations and low-intensity conflict, are all linked to Obama's assurances that "irregular warfare" will remain at the forefront of US policy, strategy and operations for the foreseeable future. To help solidify matters, on December 1, Gates quietly signed Department of Defense
Directive (DoDD) 3000.07, establishing the policy that "irregular warfare is as strategically important as traditional warfare". [1] According to the directive, irregular warfare (IW) encompasses "Counter-terrorism operations, foreign internal defense, unconventional warfare, counter-insurgency, and stability operations". Under 3000.07, Vickers, a former special forces and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operative who is considered one of the key architects behind the CIA's covert war with the Afghan mujahideen against the Soviet Union in the 1980s, becomes Gates' "principal advisor" on irregular warfare and the person who will provide "overall policy oversight" to ensure the US military establishment is transformed to be "as effective in IW as it is in traditional warfare".
And finally -- LANGUAGE WARNING if you use the link to follow -- Bob Somerby (Daily Howler) addresses the clowns who live to lie to you:
By now, the governor was a "house of hypocrisy" -- though Olbermann still hadn't made the slightest attempt to explain the unflattering claim. In the world of Big Stupid Cable, it's all about handing the rubes preferred narratives, the ones they turn on your program to hear -- and Olbermann seems to love nothing more than beating up on Palin. He no longer gets to mock the young blondes, something he used to do every night, but Palin seems suitable as a replacement. And he doesn't waste much time explaining what's actually wrong with Palin's views -- or even what they are. It's all about calling the lady stupid -- and it's all about calling her a hypocrite, without quite explaining why. And of course, the tasteless insults fly. This is the way the chat began when he introduced the evening's tough moll, Flanders. Note: In his question, he's still pretending that Sarah Palin has somehow changed her stance on education, now that her own daughter's pregnant:
OLBERMANN: Is this not the mirror image of the conservative`s joke about reality, that "a liberal is just a conservative who hasn't been mugged yet?"
FLANDERS: I think there is a name for people who only teach their kids about abstinence and that's "grandparents." And Sarah Palin is finding that out. The scariest thing in that conversation with Greta Van Susteren was -- well, I thought the scariest thing was the part where Bristol Palin said that talking with her mother was worse than labor. I mean, I guess Katie Couric found that out. Can any of us imagine what a Palin presidency would be like? Like a Nadya Suleman labor?
A Palin presidency would be "like a Nadya Suleman labor." Laura Flanders was keeping it classy -- and respectful feminist that she of course is, she was crawling up Suleman's sn**ch in pursuit of prime insults for Palin.
The two weren't bound by facts and, were Flanders not a lesbian (a self-loathing one) and Keith not already in a significant and longterm relationship with his own ego, she and Olbermann would be perfect for each other. Flanders can't keep it classy, Bob. And she's not a feminist. She claims she is. But a feminist doesn't repeatedly refer to Hillary's laugh as a "cackle" -- which Flanders did on KPFA at the end of February. It was that little fact-free stunt (which also included Flanders -- like all other 'expert' 'analysts' booked by KPFA for that two hour broadcst -- not revealing she had already endoresed Barack Obama -- real easy to call a debate for Barack when the only ones 'evaluating' have all endorsed Barack). That was when Ava and I began using the term Panhandle Media to describe the beggar media. Good for Bob Somerby for calling Flanders out and today's post has him explaining his use of the term that may be objectionable. I dispute his reasoning (Flanders reads everything written about her -- she's obsessive -- and she will love the term Somerby used, not be offended by it) but don't feel he was 'wrong' to use the term. Just as I don't feel there's any term that's off-limits when it comes to Arianna after she allowed (in 2007) her Aging Socialite's Cat Litter Box to be used to attack special-needs children.
Public TV notes, NOW on PBS begins airing on most PBS stations tonight (check local listings) and this week offers a look at sexual harassment: "This week, NOW collaborates with the Schuster Institute for Investigative Journalism at Brandeis University to bring you an unprecedented broadcast investigation of teen sexual harassment in the workplace. In the program, abused teenagers share their own stories with Senior Correspondent Maria Hinojosa. We track their legal journeys to justic, and how the issue impacts hundreds of thousands of teenagers across the country -- many of whom don't know how to report workplace abuse, or to even recognize when their bosses cross the line. This is the first report in a new NOW on PBS beat on women and men in the twenty-first centurey we call 'Life Now'." Late Friday night, NOW should be available online for those who'd like to watch online. On Washington Week, Gwen continues to demonstrate how difficult it is for her -- despite PBS' mandate -- to offer up a panel with an equal number of men and women. Four slots open and yet again Gwen's only been able to find one woman. Jeanne Cummings stands by while Gwen and the boys have a measuring contest. NPR's Tom Gjelten, New York Times' David Sanger and the Associated Press' Charles Babington. (Though who knows what Gwen's packing, smart money is on Charlie as the winner.) This will be available online for streaming Monday afternoon and a transcript will be posted then as well. If you podcast, the show will be available either late tonight or Saturday morning -- podcasts for Washington Week are available at iTunes (for free) in audio or video form (audio downloads faster).Moving over to broadcast TV (CBS) Sunday, on 60 Minutes:The Drinking AgeLesley Stahl examines the debate over lowering the drinking age to 18, a controversial idea embraced by some people and roundly criticized by groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving. Watch Video
Kidnapped In BasraWhen the Iraqi army regained control of the city of Basra from warring religious militias, it meant peace for the city's war-torn residents and rescue for CBS News producer Richard Butler, who had been held captive there for three months. Lara Logan reports. Watch Video
The MascotA young Jewish boy who fled into the forest after his family was killed by the Nazis was later captured by Nazi soldiers who, not knowing he was Jewish, gave him a little uniform and a gun and made him their mascot. Bob Simon reports. Watch Video
60 Minutes, Sunday, Feb. 22 at 7 p.m. ET/PT.
60 Minutes Update:
The Kanzius MachineOn Wednesday, Feb. 18, John Kanzius, a retired radio technician who invented a possible cancer fighting machine in his garage, died after a long battle with leukemia. In April 2008, Lesley Stahl reported on Kanzius and his machine, which had been dreamed up while he was battling the side effects of chemotherapy treatment. Experiments building on John Kanzius' research continue. Video
iraq
the washington postzachary a. goldfarb
deborah haynes
laurel brubaker calkinsmargaret cronin fiskbloomberg news
iraq veterans against the war
kelly dougherty
aimeee allisondavid solnit
aaron glantz
kpfa
damien mcelroy
pbswashington weeknow on pbs
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)