Saturday, November 07, 2015

Sam Smith's new album out now!!!!

I love Sam Smith.

I don't think I've been so excited about a male singer in years.

But he's something beyond excellent and great.

In The Lonely Hour is an amazing album and one I can't stop listening to.

Or couldn't.

A friend sent me Sam's new album.

It's got nine tracks.

It's actually a deluxe edition of the first album.

No, not the one that's called "deluxe" and offers four additional tracks.

This one is two discs -- the original album plus a disc of nine additional track.

It's entitled IN THE LONELY HOUR DROWNING SHADOWS EDITION.

So what do we get with this new disc?

There's a new version of "I'm Not The Only One" featuring a rapper and I don't care for it.  I don't hate it.  I just don't see the point.

Much better is the reworked "Stay With Me" -- as a duet with Mary J. Blige.

I love "Drowning Shadows."

You also have to hear his cover of Amy Winehouse's "Love Is A Losing Game."

He covers "How Will I Know" and you may have seen that on YouTube.  But this is a studio recording of the Whitney Houston classic and not some sing along version.

He and John Legend take "Lay Me Down" to another level and "Latch" is given the acoustic treatment.

It's just amazing.

I love Sam Smith and have been craving a new album.

Until that happens, this is the next best thing.

(Although I'd love it if he'd release a live album while we're waiting for the next studio one.)



"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Thursday, November 5, 2015.  Chaos and violence continue, rains stop the battle to retake Ramadi, Ahmed Chalabi continues to be remembered (and misremembered), and much more.



Starting with US President Barack Obama's Operation Inherent Failure, the US Defense Dept announced today:




Strikes in Iraq

Attack, bomber, fighter, remotely piloted aircraft and rocket artillery conducted 20 strikes in Iraq, coordinated with and in support of Iraq’s government:


-- Near Huwayjah, one strike struck an ISIL tactical unit.

-- Near Abu Hayat, one strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL vehicle bomb, an ISIL mortar position, an ISIL weapons cache, an ISIL building, and an ISIL fighting position.

-- Near Beiji, one strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL vehicle.

-- Near Fallujah, one strike struck a large ISIL tactical unit and destroyed two ISIL bunkers and an ISIL fighting position.

-- Near Mosul, two strikes struck two separate ISIL tactical units and destroyed an ISIL fighting position.

-- Near Ramadi, three strikes struck a large ISIL tactical unit, and destroyed 18 ISIL fighting positions, four ISIL heavy machine guns, an ISIL mortar position, an ISIL weapons cache, an ISIL motorcycle, two ISIL resupply warehouses, and damaged three ISIL buildings.

-- Near Sinjar, eight strikes struck four separate ISIL tactical units and destroyed three ISIL weapons caches, two ISIL assembly areas, eight ISIL fighting positions, and six ISIL staging areas.


-- Near Sultan Abdullah, three strikes struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed two ISIL fighting positions and an ISIL heavy machine gun.




This is month 16 of Barack's 'plan' to 'liberate' Iraq from the Islamic State . . . by bombing Iraq.  It has not been a success.


It's been a failure -- an inherent failure.

Since the operation began, there have been few true successes while there have been so many notable failures -- such as the April seizure of Ramadi.

Since May, the Iraqi forces have been fighting to retake Ramadi -- a city in Anbar Province -- and they have repeatedly failed.

As Xinhua reports today, the latest failure is penned on "heavy rains."

There is no success in Barack's 'plan' but the bombs dropped from planes flying overhead are destroying Iraq and terrorizing a people.

Barack's 'plan' faces mounting criticism.


Fox News offers:



British Prime Minister David Cameron reportedly has dropped plans for a parliamentary vote on extending anti-ISIS airstrikes to Syria, in the latest blow to President Obama’s attempts to form a stronger coalition against the Islamic terror group. 
Though the U.K. has joined the U.S. in conducting airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq since 2014, multiple U.K. media outlets including The Guardian and The Times of London reported Cameron was hoping to put a vote forward in the House of Commons on joining the U.S. as the Obama administration seeks to regain its foothold amid a surging Russian presence. Those outlets report Cameron has since shelved the move. 


Throughout the illegal war, the US government has been able to count on the British government.  What a blow to Barack should that prove to be no longer true.


In addition to talk of the 'coalition' possibly shrinking, there are other reactions as well.


Corky Siemaszko (New York Daily News) reports:


  President Obama’s strategy for taking on the murderous Islamic State is not getting much traction with voters.

Six in 10 now reject Obama’s handling of the ISIS crisis, according to a new Associated Press-GfK poll.




How will Barack continue the illegal war in the face of this majority American opinion?

A better question is: With 60% of Americans seeing the 'plan' as a failure, why is it there are no marches or rallies?

Why have the so-called 'leaders' of yesteryear -- Leslie Cagan in all her hirsute glory, for example -- failed to mount opposition and lead outcries?


Because they're unethical and dishonest.


Meanwhile Barack's bombings do nothing to stop the persecution of the Sunni population in Iraq.










  • Diyala governor said Shia militias crimes killed 78000 Iraqi Sunni & kidnapped 26000 Iraqi sunni in






  • The persecution continues.

    And they wonder why the Islamic State (a Sunni extremist group which practices terrorism) took hold in Iraq?




    Tuesday brought news that the vile Ahmed Chalabi died. Some idiots have taken to trying to redeem Chalabi by insisting he was taking on corruption.


    Really?


    The man whose corruption went unrivaled was now going to 'reform' Iraq?

    More likely he was just going to use corruption charges (whether they were true or false) to yet again go after his enemies.

    His enemies?

    Leave it the Whore of Baghdad Jane Arraf to prove just how low anyone can go in a piece for POLITICO.

    Jane deliberately did not report on the crimes of Saddam Hussein while he was in power.

    She sugar coated reality as whores like her always do to curry favor with a government.

    She refused to call out Nouri al-Maliki when he was in power as well.

    She's just a whore to whomever is in power.

    And today the old whore offers that Chalabi was a "patriot" who wanted an "integrated Iraq."


    The lying never stops with Jane Arraf.

    Chalabi went after Sunnis.

    He didn't want an integrated Iraq.

    She's a damn liar.

    And with her long history of false 'reporting,' it's really past time she was either expected to get honest or to get out of the business.


     Trudy Rubin (Philadelphia Inqurier) notes the life of Chalabi including his return to Iraq in 2003:


    Once the Iraq invasion began, U.S. forces airlifted Chalabi into the southern city of Nasiriyah, expecting a crowd of thousands to welcome him. To make sure the numbers turned out, CIA operatives distributed bags of money to tribal leaders, as I was told at the time via satellite phone by sheikhs in the area who had been offered cash to show up.
    But Chalabi - who had not stepped foot in Iraq since age 13 - had no support inside his country. The welcoming masses never appeared. Dreams of an Iraqi deGaulle were nothing but a mirage.
    Nonetheless, Chalabi set up office in Baghdad's Sporting Club, a onetime retreat for the Iraqi elite; he remained on the Pentagon payroll, to the tune of $340,000 a week, until 2004. He was the driving force behind the country's de-Baathification policy, which deepened Iraq's sectarian divisions.


    The editorial board of the Guardian newspaper also notes his return to Iraq and the reaction:

    It was only the disillusionment of the Iraqis themselves, like anyone else who had ever trusted him, that put an end to his political career. Still, he died old, and rich, and out of jail, and back after exile in the country he had done so much to help ruin.
    The obvious moral is that the wicked do sometimes prosper.



    US House Rep Ileana Ros-Lehtinen Tweeted this week on Iraq:




                            Retweeted 187 times


    I condemn the deadly terror attacks against + demand 's govt provide safety 4 its residents.
    Embedded image permalink




    What is she Tweeting about?  Yet another attack on the Ashraf community, Iranian dissidents who lived at Camp Ashraf and then were moved to Camp Liberty.

    For an overview, we'll offer the remarks Senator Jack Reed made at the October 7th Senate Armed Services Committee hearing:



    Senator Jack Reed: This morning, our hearing focuses on Iranian influence in Iraq and the plight of the nearly 2,400 residents at Camp Liberty in Iraq -- members of the Iranian dissident group the Mujahadeen-e-Khalq or MEK. The Iranian dissidents at Camp Liberty are in an increasingly perilous situation having repeatedly come under attack.  And these attacks, which have killed more than 100 MEK members since 2009, clearly indicate the threat to this group from Iran and Iranian-backed militias seeking to eliminate and silence these dissidents.  The deteriorating security situation in Iraq only highlights the urgent need to find safe refuge for these individuals outside that country.  The United States have had a special relationship with the MEK dating back to the height of the Iraq War in the mid 2000s.  This stems in part from the MEK's agreement at the US military's request to disarm and move into Camp Ashraf in north eastern Iraq.  The US military extended under the Geneva Conventions to the Camp Ashraf residents.  However, as the United States drew down its forces consistent with its obligations under the 2008 security agreements signed by President Bush and Prime Minister Maliki, US forces were no longer well positioned to provide for the safety and security of the Camp Ashraf residents.  In December of 2011, the government of Iraq signed a memorandum with the United Nations in which the Iraq government committed to ensure the safety and the security of these residents as part of the process of relocating them to Camp Liberty outside Baghdad to facilitate the settlement process.  However, the United States, through the State Dept, has had to repeatedly press the government of Iraq to live up to its obligations to provide for the safety and well being of the Camp Liberty residents and Camp Liberty residents remain in fear that the government of Iraq will extradite them to Iran at Tehran's request. The State Dept now is the lead US government agency advocating on behalf of the Camp Liberty residents. And the State Dept is working the United Nations Assistance Mission in Iraq and the United Nations High Commission for Refugees to find resettlement options for these residents outside of Iraq. It is my understanding that as of the beginning of this month, nearly 800 Camp Liberty residents have been processed by the UNHCR and resettled outside of Iraq.  Unfortunately, this resettlement process has dragged on for years and much more still needs to be done to find homes for the remaining Camp Liberty residents. I would urge all participants in the resettlement process to cooperate fully to advance the resettlement of these very vulnerable individuals.  One issue that I expect will arise this morning is whether the United States should accept more Camp Liberty residents for resettlement.  While the MEK was removed from the list of foreign terrorists organizations in 2012, group members continue to be barred from admission to the United States because of their Tier Three status under US anti-terrorism laws.  Nonetheless, I understand that the administration has adopted a policy that would allow Camp Liberty residents to be paroled in the United States if they renounce their affiliation with the MEK.  Under this policy, some 29 Camp Liberty residents have ultimately resettled in the United States making the United States one of the larger recipient countries for these refugees.  I hope the testimony of our witnesses this morning will help shine a light on what more can be done to accelerate the resettlement process so that the residents of Camp Liberty can be brought to safety outside of  Iraq once and for all.



    Reed is the Ranking Member of the Committee, Senator John McCain is the Chair of the Committee.  Yesterday, McCain's office issued the following:



    Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ), Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, today sent a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry expressing deep concern about the reported attack on the Iranian dissidents at Camp Liberty, Iraq on October 29th that killed more than 20 residents and injured dozens more.
    “As Iran’s malign involvement in Iraq grows, the security situation around Camp Liberty is increasingly dire. It is clear that immediate actions must be taken to ensure the safety and security of the residents of Camp Liberty,” writes Senator McCain. “Yet despite the atrocious conditions and continued danger to residents, the United States has remained ineffective, and even reluctant, in responding to our humanitarian obligations to protect the residents and facilitate their swift relocation to a secure location. Again, I urge you to continue to push for the protection of the residents of Camp Liberty and to expedite the refugee resettlement process. We made a commitment to protect these Iranian dissidents and, as we move forward, I look forward to working with you to fulfill this commitment.”
    The letter is below and here.

    November 4, 2015
    The Honorable John F. Kerry
    Secretary of State
    U.S. State Department
    2201 C Street, N.W.
    Washington, D.C. 20520

    Dear Secretary Kerry,
    I am writing you to register my deep concerns over reports of the October 29 attack on Camp Liberty that killed more than 20 residents and injured dozens more.
    The Mukhtar Army, a Shiite militia supported by Iran, has claimed responsibility for the rocket attack on Camp Liberty and threatened more strikes as long as residents remain in Iraq. These threats are especially troubling as Iranian-backed Shia paramilitary groups have grown increasingly active and influential in Iraq, and they must be taken seriously. Moreover, continued attacks on residents and other recent events call into question the Iraqi government’s commitment to uphold its agreement to ensure the safety and well-being of these residents.
    As Iran’s malign involvement in Iraq grows, the security situation around Camp Liberty is increasingly dire. It is clear that immediate actions must be taken to ensure the safety and security of the residents of Camp Liberty. With this in mind, please respond to the following questions:
    1. What information does the Administration have concerning the attack and the current security situation of Camp Liberty?
    2. Has the Administration undertaken an investigation to ascertain the full extent of this unprovoked attack and identify those responsible?
    3. Has the Administration investigated allegations that Iraqi government officials, including National Security Advisor Falah Fayyad who is responsible for oversight of Camp Liberty, were complicit in the attack?
    4. Is the Administration working with the Government of Iraq to procure protective T-walls, sandbags, bulletproof vests, and other non-lethal protective equipment to protect residents in the case of future rocket attacks?
    5. What further actions will be taken by the Administration to ensure the future safety of the residents?
    6. Given Camp Liberty’s proximity to Baghdad International Airport, has the Administration considered the requirements to bring Camp Liberty within the aerial perimeter of U.S. air protection to ensure that the firing of missiles or mortars would not be permitted on the camp?
    7. Why has the refugee resettlement process not been completed to date, and what is now being done to expedite the resettlement of the men, women, and children of Camp Liberty who continue to be under direct threat? 
    Given the deteriorating conditions in Iraq, I believe our current efforts should focus on the approximately 2,300 residents whose lives are at stake in Camp Liberty. In a recent Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, multiple witnesses testified to the fragile security conditions and vulnerability of the Camp’s residents. Their testimony made clear that these residents have repeatedly been the victims of daily harassments that have decreased quality of life, blocked access to food and critical medical care, denied of non-lethal protective equipment, and endured rocket attacks and violent raids that have resulted in the deaths of more than 100 men, women, and children. Yet despite the atrocious conditions and continued danger to residents, the United States has remained ineffective, and even reluctant, in responding to our humanitarian obligations to protect the residents and facilitate their swift relocation to a secure location.
    Again, I urge you to continue to push for the protection of the residents of Camp Liberty and to expedite the refugee resettlement process. We made a commitment to protect these Iranian dissidents and, as we move forward, I look forward to working with you to fulfill this commitment.

    Sincerely,
    John McCain
    ###






















    Thursday, November 05, 2015

    Fake ass Jill Stein

    Information Clearing House has an interview with Jill Stein who wants to be the Green Party's presidential nominee in 2016 (she is not that currently -- despite liars claiming otherwise).

    She's such a hideous person.

    [Jill Stein} If Bernie does lose the nomination, he will encourage his followers to embrace the Democratic nominee, who would likely be Hillary Clinton in this scenario. I didn’t find the “look at how scary the Republicans are” argument very compelling when it was Barack Obama versus Mitt Romney, given that Romney governed like a moderate Democrat when he actually had power. But this time there are the likes of Ben Carson and Donald Trump who I don’t think it’s unfair to say have overtly fascist campaigns.

    So what would you say to that Bernie supporter who’s listening to the senator that they have supported and trust, and who’s telling them, “look at how scary the Republicans are, let’s rally behind Hillary.” What do you say to that? Because this time around it does seem more persuasive than in previous years.


    [Jill Stein:]  One, Hillary is pretty scary, just look at her policies. She’ll do it with a smile, just like Obama, and if you look at what Obama delivered, it’s horrible, whether you’re looking at the bailouts for Wall Street, the offshoring of our jobs, the massive spread of the war on terror, so called, the attack on our civil liberties. I mean this has been a disaster and far worse than George Bush delivered.


    The fake assery wafting off that liar.

    She didn't see a big diff between Barack and Mitt?

    Then why did she use her campaign to attack Romney?

    Especially after Barack flopped in that one debate, it was Jill to the rescue with non-stop attacks on Romney and silence on Obama.

    She's a fake ass liar.


    "Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
    Wednesday, November 4, 2015.  Chaos and violence continue, Ahmed Chalabi has left the earth, the media keeps selling war on Iraq, and much more.


    We're going to start with US politics.  Cynthia McKinney is a former member of the US House of Representatives and was the 2008 Green Party presidential candidate.  There are many people urging her to run again for the 2016 Green Party presidential nomination.


    If you don't understand why there is a growing chorus of voices asking Cynthia to yet again step up again, note the opening of her latest column:



    The one question that has not been answered during Hillary Clinton’s grilling before a US Congress committee over the deadly 2012 attack in Benghazi, was: “What was the policy that was being carried out that led to the deaths of these four men?”
    The attack on the US consulate in Libya resulted in the deaths of four US citizens on September 11, 2012.
    The four who were found dead in the aftermath of the Benghazi chaos of that night were the US Ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens; Sean Smith who, significantly, was known as “Vile Rat” in his online gaming community; and two former US Navy SEALs and Central Intelligence Agency contractors (CIA), Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods.
    These four public servants answered the call to serve the policy of the US government. Their deaths in the service of their country are truly tragic. However, the question that has not been answered in all of the hoopla over the proceedings of the Select Committee are: “What was the policy that was being carried out that led to the deaths of these four men?” It is the avoidance of even asking that question in public, let alone answering it, that is the proverbial elephant in the room.

    The top Democrat on the Select Committee is Representative Elijah Cummings from Maryland, who in a moment of selective outrage, exclaimed to rousing applause from the audience, “We’re better than that! We are so much better! We’re a better country! We’re better than using taxpayer dollars to try to destroy a campaign! That’s not what America is all about!” But, apparently, using taxpayer dollars to destroy one country and literally wipe another country off the map – that’s OK, I guess. Because, at the time of the televised hearings, U.S. Embassy in Libya personnel weren’t even in Libya! They’re operating from Malta, after President Obama’s policy to destroy Libya was so effective. How much questioning about that took place in the eleven-hour hearing?



    Contrast that straight talk, that strong voice of humanity with the gauze covered piffle Jill Stein -- who is not the 2016 Green Party presidential nominee (the nominee will be selected in August of 2016 at the national convention) -- regularly offers.

    Cynthia McKinney is a leader.


    Turning to Iraq . . . 
    The failed Operation Inherent Resolve continues with US President Barack Obama promising 'liberation' to Iraq via bombs dropped from overhead.  The Defense Dept announced today:

    Strikes in Iraq

    Attack, bomber, fighter, ground attack and remotely piloted aircraft conducted 19 strikes in Iraq, coordinated with and in support of Iraq’s government:

    -- Near Baghdadi, one strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL fighting position.

    -- Near Albu Hayat, two strikes struck two separate large ISIL tactical units and destroyed an ISIL vehicle bomb, an ISIL mortar system, an ISIL building, and four ISIL fighting positions.

    -- Near Beiji, one strike wounded an ISIL fighter.

    -- Near Mosul, one strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL fighting position.

    -- Near Ramadi, five strikes struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed seven ISIL fighting positions, an ISIL vehicle bomb, an ISIL weapons cache, an ISIL vehicle, an ISIL building and denied ISIL access to terrain.

    -- Near Sinjar, nine strikes struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL bomb-making facility, an ISIL staging facility, three ISIL staging areas, four ISIL weapons caches, an ISIL headquarters location, an ISIL bed-down location, 10 ISIL fighting positions, and two ISIL vehicles.
    Since August of 2014, these bombings have taken place.
    And the Islamic State is still not on the run.

    All the money wasted on these bombs and the Islamic State is still not on the run.

    All the civilians killed in these bombings and the Islamic State is still not on the run.

    All this destruction to Iraq -- yes, bombs dropped from the air landing on Iraq causes destruction -- and the Islamic State is still not on the run.

    Operation Inherent Failure is Barack's big solution.
    It it any wonder a growing chorus of voices register that they are unimpressed with Barack's plan or 'plan.'  
    For example, Nicholas Watt (Guardian) reports, "Jeremy Corbyn has suggested Britain should review its involvement in coalition airstrikes against Islamic State targets in Iraq, as the government confirmed it had no current plans to seek parliamentary approval to extend the bombing campaign to Syria."
    ITV's Chris Ship interviewed Corbyn and they note:

    "I'm not sure how successful it [military action in Iraq] has been because most of the action appears to have moved into Syria so I think we have to look again at that decision," the Labour leader told Chris Ship.
    Mr Corbyn was speaking as Downing Street denied reports that Prime Minister David Cameron has abandoned hope of winning parliamentary approval to extend RAF operations into Syria.
    The name changes of the groups fighting in Syria and Iraq should not fool anyone. In essence they are the same forces; they are “agents of chaos” being using to create insecurity against U.S. rivals and any governments or entities that are resisting U.S. edicts. With the erosion of Al-Qaeda and the fading of Osama bin Laden from the limelight, Washington created new legends or myths to replace them in the eyes of the public and the world as a means to sustain its foreign policy. Soon Jubhat Al-Nusra, ISIL/ISIS, and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi were all conjured up and fostered as new bogeymen and monsters to sustain Washington’s “long war” and to justify the militarism of the United States. These bogymen also have been used to fan the flames of sedition, drive out Christians and other minorities, and fuel sectarianism among Muslims with the objective of dividing the region and pushing Sunni Muslims and Shiite Muslims to kill one another.

    He was a destructive force who did huge damage.

    We noted his role in fueling the Iraq War Tuesday.  We did not blame him for the Iraq War.


    Adam Johnson (FAIR) and a 'writer' at Salon are among a group of xenophobic and, yes, racist whiners.

    They're offended that some news outlets are taking so much blame to Chalabi.

    They whine that Bully Boy Bush and Dick Cheney are getting off easy.

    Bully Boy Bush is a War Criminal and Dick Cheney is so much worse that there's not even a term -- not one we can use in a work safe environment -- that can describe him.

    But let's stop being so damn xenophobic.

    America is not the great god of the world.

    Every thing that happens does not require an American lead or guide.

    For Sunnis in Iraq, Chalabi was a bigger obstacle than Bully Boy Bush.

    Bully Boy Bush (with aid from Democrats and Republicans in Congress) went to war on Iraq.

    Guess what?

    The history of Iraq is a history of western countries going to war on it.

    Bully Boy Bush is just one in a long parade of ants masking as leaders who tried to destroy Iraq.

    He inflicted harm, no question.

    But stop pretending that the story begins and ends there.

    Chalabi destroyed Iraq and did so in many ways.  Most notoriously, there was his role in de-Ba'athification.  Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) notes:

    While the original decision to bar Baathists from senior government positions was an American one, driven by the goal of ensuring that Hussein’s political bloc never returned to power, it was Mr. Chalabi who became its champion and quickly seized the reins as the implementer of the new policy.
    “He used it as a political weapon,” said Ryan Crocker, a former United States ambassador to Iraq, who knew Mr. Chalabi from before the invasion as well as afterward.
    “I never could figure out if he had the deep anti-Baathist passion of some of the other political figures or whether this was just a tool to be used,” added Mr. Crocker, who is now the dean of the Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University.

    And he used the Justice and Accountability Commission to do further damage.

    This included when the supposed-to-have-disbanded commission popped back up ahead of the 2010 parliamentary elections and Ahmed used it to go after Sunni politicians.  One politician he went after was Saleh al-Mutlaq.

    al-Mutlaq discussed this with Jassim al-Azzawi on a January broadcast of Al Jazeera's Inside Iraq:

     
     
    Jassim al-Azzawi: [Overlapping] Yes, I shall come to the scare tactics and the fear politics that you mention but before that, I guess our international audience would like to know, who stands behind this campaign to disbar more then 500 people?  Some of them such senior figures as yourself. The National Dialogue Front has about 12 members in Parliament.  You've been in politics for many, many years. I guess the logical question is: Who's behind it? It is my role as a presenter and a journalist to ask the tough questions and perhaps it's your role as a politician and even your perogative not to answer.  Let me give you a couple of options and see which one you lean on.  Is it Ahmed Chalabi, the former head of the de-Ba'athification?  Is it Prime Minister [Nouri] al-Maliki fearing that Saleh al-Mutlaq has the wind behind him and one day he might even become the president of Iraq?  Or is it another force? Who is exactly orchestrating this?
     



    Saleh al-Mutlaq: Well Ahmed Chalabi could not do what was done alone.  I think there's a power behind that and my belief is that Iran is behind that and Ahmed Chalabi is only a tool -- Ahmed Chalabi agenda is a tool to do this.  And Ahmed Chalabi is not alone. We discovered that Ahmed Chalabi now has an intelligence association in Iraq and he worked with so many people outside the Iraqi government. And what happened really surprised everybody.  The same day that this decision was taken, everybody was saying, "I know nothing about it." You ask al-Maliki, he says, "I know nothing about it." You ask the president [Jalal Talabani], he says he knows nothing about it.  You ask the Chairman of the Parliament, he knows nothing about it. Then who is doing that?  We discover there is a small organization which does not exist legally.  The de-Ba'athification committee has been frozen -- including Ahmed Chalabi himself -- has been frozen by the prime minister and by the president.  And another committee, which is the Accountability, came in but it was not formed because the Parliament did not vote on the names that were being proposed by the prime minister because most of them are from al Dahwa Party [Nouri's party].


     
    And in a Inside Iraq broadcast at the end of February 2010, Jasim faced off against a very loud Ahmed:
      
    Jasim al-Azawi: And now I'm delighted to welcome from Baghdad, Ahmed Chalabi, chairman of the Accountability and Justice Commission and a candidate of the Iraqi National Alliance for Parliament.  Ahmed Chalabi, welcome to Inside Iraq.  And let me start from the beginning and that is Prime Minister [Nouri] al-Malliki has decided to rescind a recent act issued by your commission.  Lately you have submitted a list of 376 members of the army, the police and the intelligence. They are supposed to be Ba'athists and you are going to remove them. al-Maliki is saying, "Stop it, Ahmed Chalabi. You have no idea the damage you are cuasing."
     

    Ahmed Chalabi: The prime minister has no authority on his own to exempt anyone from the decisions of the Justice and Accountability Commission. Article 12 of Law Number 10 from 2008 specifies that the Council of Ministers has the authority to request exemption for anybody who is uh subject to the Justice and Accountability law provided he gets the approval of the Parliament.
     

    Jasim al-Azawi: What makes you think that he cannot get the ministers to sanction his authority and more significantly --
     
    Ahmed Chalabi: He may get the ministers to sanction his authority but he needs to get Parliament to approve what he does.
     
    Jasim al-Azawi: Well since you mentioned Parliament, in that case let me turn the table on you. Parliament has never sanctioned your commission -- the Justice and Accountability -- that bill never went to Parliament and more importantly you and your executive director Mr. Ali al-Lami were never appointed by Parliament so on what authority you are expunging people and banning people?
     
    Ahmed Chalabi: On the authority of Law Number 10, Justice and Accountability Law of 2008. This argument has been settled by the uh Appeals Commission of the uhm uh Justice and Accountability that was appointed by Parliament a few weeks ago. In their ruling on the case of Mr. Saleh al-Mutlaq, they said that the Justice and Accountability Commission is valid and is active and is authorized by the law --
     
    Jasim al-Azawi: Ahmed Chalabi, you know very well, you know very well,
     
    Ahmed Chalabi: -- so therefore this argument does not hold water anymore because the highest court in Iraq has approved the legality of the current commission.
     
    Jasim al-Azawi: Ahmed Chalabi, that is -- that is absolutely not right, not true. Parliament has --
     
    Ahmed Chalabi: How do you know that!
     
    Jasim al-Azawi: Because --
     
    Ahmed Chalabi: I read you -- I read you the statement!
     
    Jasim al-Azawi: Before you read me that statement, Parliament has never voted on the Accountability and Justice Commission --
     
    Ahmed Chalabi: I will tell you! I will read the statement!
     
    Jasim al-Azawi: -- and --
     
    Ahmed Chalabi: I will readyyou the statement! It doesn't matter what you say.  It's just an argument to detract from the legality of the commission. It says here that the law, Law Number 10 will only specify that they rename the de-Ba'athification Comission into the Justice and Accountability Commission -- rename. Therefore, this commission is working according to the law and has the legality for the reasons specified above.'  That's the decision of the court.
     
    Jasim al-Azawi:  At any rate, we don't want to get into the legal aspect, we will let the viewers to judge -- We will let the viewers and the Iraqis --
     
    Ahmed Chalibi: It's not the viewers! It's the Iraqi court!
     
    [too much cross talk and too much shouting by Ahmed]
     
    Jasim al-Azawi: -- by Parliament, but the federal government has not given it's final verdict yet.
     
    [too much cross talk and too much shouting by Ahmed, we'll skip ahead]
     
    Jasim al-Azawi: Fine. Let us go to the second gentleman in this commission. I am talking to you but there is somebody behind you, your executive director, Mr. Ali al-Lami.  Just for the viewers to know who Mr. al-Lami is, correct me if the statement and the story I'm going to tell is wrong. This gentleman was released by US forces back in August of 2009 [Ahmed giggles -- giggles is the term, watch and see] under the charges of terrorism.  He was --
     
    Ahmed Chalabi: [Waving finger] No charges!
     
    Jasim al-Azawi:  He was -- he was released from prison --
     
    Ahmed Chalabi: No charges!
     
    Jasim al-Azawi: I will come to the story completely, but now let's just say, now he finds --
     
    Ahmed Chalabi: He was kidnapped!
     
    Jasim al-Azawi: He was captured by the Americans because they think --
     
    Ahmed Chalabi: He was kidnapped!
     
    Jasim al-Azawi: Hold on --
     
    Ahmed Chalabi: By contractors at the airpot.
     
    Jasim al-Azawi: Hold on, Mr. Chalabi. He was -- he was not charged directly --
     
    Ahmed Chalabi: He was not charged.
     
    Jasim al-Azawi: I am the first one to say that. Mr. Odierno --
     
    Ahmed Chalabi: He was not charged!
     
    Jasim al-Azawi: I said that. I said that. Let me finish the story. He was believed to be the mastermind of a terrorist act that happened in al-Sadr City where American forces and civilian administrations along with Iraqi officials, they were meeting with some council members in Sadr City  the American officials they were on the way out there was an IED and there was an explosion and many people killed. Odierno believes that Mr. al-Lami is directly responsible for that.
     
    Ahmed Chalabi: This is patent nonsense. There is no charge. They have no evidence. And it is based on an intelligence report of one unreliable informer for the American tactical units in the area. They -- Mr. Lami was not arrested. He was kidnapped at the airport by US contractors, taken to a US prison, put under pressure and almost tortured for 38 days and they could get nothing from him on this issue. They have no evidence. He stayed 351 days in jail. And the Iraqi government has no case, n-n-n-n-n-o authority, no legal entity and no intelligence entity of the Iraqi government, there is any charge against Mr. Ali --- Ali al-Lami.  And the US has not charged him and he was released without charges. Therefore, legally, he was kidnapped. And as for this issue of the uh-buh-uh-uh people who were killed by-by the IED, he had nothing to do with it. I am certain he had nothing to do with it. And this charge has not been proven.

     
    In the US press, they note that he supported Shi'ite militias and offer excuses for him.
    He didn't just support them from afar.  Ali al-Lami was a militia member.  Actually, he was a terrorist and he died a terrorist's death.

    Dina al-Shibeeb's Al Arabiya column is headlined "Iraqi warmonger Ahmad Chalabi dies."
    But with all the damage Ahmed did two Americans want to whine that their pin up Bully Boy Bush isn't getting enough attention.

    They want to insist that America must be injected into every story ever reported and that the US must always be the lead in any play or the star in any film.

    They want to whine that the US is not dominating a narrative about an Iraqi politician (a crooked one) who died in Iraq.


    They don't have the good sense to grasp that everything that happens in the world is not about them or their personal likes or dislikes.

    Pity the uninformed helpers . . . 
    Brian Bomberger (Bay Area Reporter) uses the release of Hasan Namir's novel God in Pink to flaunt his own ignorance:
    The plight of gay and lesbian Iraqis has been much in the news in the last five years, mainly because they are at great risk for being killed, having little to no family or community support and no legal rights or government protection. LGBTQ Iraqis are hated by both the Islamic State (ISIS) forces and the pro-government militias, especially the infamous Shiite Asaib Ahl al-Haq, currently engaging in a civil war. This places them in a no-win situation. Among the terrible tortures/deaths inflicted on them: gang rape, beheading (with their heads tossed onto garbage dumps), bludgeoning (i.e., beaten with concrete blocks), stoning, being thrown from the rooftop of high-rise buildings, and the most ghastly of all, having their anuses closed up with a crazy glue-type substance that can only be removed by surgery, then being forced to drink a laxative causing diarrhea resulting in a painful death. Because coming out can be fatal, gay and lesbian Iraqis are virtually publicly invisible, which is why former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made his infamous comment years ago that "there are no gays in Iraq."
    Who will help the uniformed helpers?
    First off, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said there were no gays in Iran.  This inspired the Saturday Night Live short "Iran So Far Away" in which Andy Samberg makes a plea for love to Mahmoud.
    You're crazy for this one Mahmoud
    you can deny the holocaust all you want 
    but you can't deny that there's something between us
    I know you say there's no gays in Iran
    but you're in New York now, baby
    it's time to stop hiding
    and start living
    -- "Iran So Far Away," written by Andy Samberg, Jorma Taccone and Akiva Schaffer (The Lonely Island), first aired on Saturday Night Live's September 29, 2007 broadcast
    Iran.
    Iran so far away. 
    Check it out if you have to -- it was Iran, not Iraq.  
    Iran.
    Then there's this: LGBTQ Iraqis are hated by both the Islamic State (ISIS) forces and the pro-government militias, especially the infamous Shiite Asaib Ahl al-Haq, currently engaging in a civil war.
    Islamic State, huh?
    They've tossed suspected gay men to their deaths off tall buildings, yes.
    But this list?
    This: 
    Among the terrible tortures/deaths inflicted on them: gang rape, beheading (with their heads tossed onto garbage dumps), bludgeoning (i.e., beaten with concrete blocks), stoning, being thrown from the rooftop of high-rise buildings, and the most ghastly of all, having their anuses closed up with a crazy glue-type substance that can only be removed by surgery, then being forced to drink a laxative causing diarrhea resulting in a painful death. 
    Gang rape, beheading, bludgeoning, stoning, anuses glued shut?
    This was Shi'ites.
    And it really isn't fair to say it was Shi'ite militias.
    It was the government.
    The government of Iraq.
    Specifically, it was the Minister of the Interior -- which Nouri al-Maliki was in charge of.
    As prime minister, he refused (in his second term) to nominate anyone to head it.  This allowed him to bypass Parliamentary approval and control the ministry himself.
    Which allowed him to send Interior employees -- including police -- into Iraqi schools to encourage the harm and deaths of gay people.
    Now, of course, when questions were asked, the Ministry of Interior denied these visits.
    But then Alsumaria and Al Mada got a hold of the handouts the Ministry had provided to the students.  They called for the death of gays.  They carried lies about gays and encouraged people to 'purge' them from Iraq.

    As noted this morning in "The media: Still selling war on Iraq all these years later," certain elements of the US press are suddenly interested in activities if they can express outrage over the Islamic State.  But they have little to no outrage over the crimes of the Iraqi government.


    And we'll close with this Tweet on violence . . .





  •   

    Monday, November 02, 2015

    The professor has a heart attack

    At ZNet, Lawrence Wittner is practically having a coronary in text as he insists that Democratic Socialists are part of the fabric of America and moves on to insist:

    If the political pundits would look around, they would even discover a significant number of prominent U.S. democratic socialists at work in a variety of fields.  They include muckraking authors like Barbara Ehrenreich, journalists like Harold Meyerson, actors like Ed Asner and Wallace Shawn, intellectuals like Noam Chomsky and Cornel West, documentary film-makers like Michael Moore, TV commentators like Lawrence O’Donnell, science fiction writers like Kim Stanley Robinson, feminist leaders like Gloria Steinem, peace movement veterans like David McReynolds, and academics like Frances Fox Piven.
    These and many other democratic socialists, among them Bernie Sanders, have played an important role in American life.  It’s a shame that so many political “experts” haven’t noticed it.


    What I've noticed is that Democratic Socialist Gloria Steinem has endorsed Hillary Clinton and not her fellow Democratic Socialist Bernie Sanders.

    What I've also noticed is that Gloria has presented herself for decades as a Democrat.

    Yes, she's a Socialist.

    But she's lied to the world repeatedly.

    So maybe if pundits are puzzled by Democratic Socialists, it could possibly be due to members like Gloria Steinem lying about their affiliations for decades?



    "Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
    Saturday, October 31, 2015.  Chaos and violence continue, the Cult of St. Barack plays cat-got-their-tongue while Obama ramps up more war, Amnesty International calls out the attack on the Ashraf community at Camp Liberty, and much more.




    The silence is deafening.


    More war is declared and the so-called leaders of what was once a peace movement are playing duck-and-cover to avoid standing up.



    The New York Daily News declares, "Mark another awkward milestone in President Obama’s foreign policy: The United States of America has kind of, sort of backed into combat operations in Syria and Iraq."  Trevor Timm (Guardian) goes further:


    In 2012, Obama unequivocally said he would end the war in Afghanistan, and chided Mitt Romney the Republican nominee for not promising that. In 2013, Obama said: “I will not put American boots on the ground in Syria.” In 2014, Obama said: “We will not be sending US troops back into combat in Iraq”. At this point, all of those promises have been completely broken.
    Worse, the Obama administration has effectively removed the democratic process (and Congress) from any decision making on whether to go to war. We now have ground troops inside Syria without any sort of legal authorization from Congress. Obama explicitly campaigned in 2012 on ending the Afghanistan war, which he has now extended beyond his term. The Obama administration also went into Libya and removed Muammar Gaddafi, despite the House voting against it beforehand. 




    The war against the Islamic State is morphing yet again despite Operation Inherent Failure's lack of measurable success.  Bill van Auken (WSWS) reminds:

    When ISIS headed eastward from Syria and overran roughly a third of Iraq, including its third-largest city, Mosul, the Obama administration launched its direct intervention in both countries, conducting air strikes and redeploying some 3,500 US troops to Iraq. Now the intervention has morphed into a war against ISIS dubbed “Operation Inherent Resolve.”
    More than a year after that “war” was launched, the grip of ISIS over large swathes of both Iraq and Syria remains virtually unchanged. The desultory character of the US campaign is explicable only from the standpoint that Washington has no desire to destroy the Islamist militia, which it still counts as one of the main fighting forces in the war for regime change, which remains the principal US objective.




    The White House announced troops would be sent into Syria.


    Repeating, the White House announced troops would be sent into Syria.


    Barack declared,  "I will not put American boots on the ground in Syria."

    But, too bad, that was September 10, 2013.

    So many broken promises.



    And all those promises
    that you made me from the start
    were filled with emptiness
    from the desert of your heart
    Every sweet caress
    was just your second best
    Broken promises


    Baby, I'm amazed
    at how long I still believed
    How many lies it takes
    before someone like me sees
    All the tears you cried
    They never could deny
    that you made love a lie
    All those tears you cried
    They never could deny
    that you made love a lie

    -- "All Those Promises," written by Janis Ian, first appears on her album Folk Is The New Black



    It's as though Janis composed the theme song for the deprogrammed members of The Cult of St. Barack.


    Dan Roberts (Guardian) explains the pretzel 'logic' liars now find themselves in:


    Administration officials were left squirming on Friday to explain how sending special forces to work alongside Syrian rebels fighting the Islamic State was compatible with Obama’s earlier promises not to “put boots on the ground” in Syria or “engage in combat operations” against Isis.
    White House spokesman Josh Earnest claimed there was still a difference of “night and day” compared with the Bush administration’s invasions, but in the space of a few short weeks a central promise of Obama’s presidential campaign has been undermined: first by conceding that he will not meet his pledge of removing troops from Afghanistan before he leaves office and now by acknowledging a long-term ground presence is necessary not just in Iraq, but Syria too.
    Earnest would not say whether the deployments were permanent or would be bolstered, insisting: “I don’t want to try to predict the future here.”

    Yet arguably that was exactly what Obama claimed he could do when he ran for office promising to bring US troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan.



    In light of all this, all the broken promises, all the wars, Tom Hayden Tweeted:





  • Hillary will gain presidential stature


  • Oh, that wasn't in response to that.


    The old drunk couldn't Tweet in response to the White House plans because he's never had the spine to stand up to anyone.  He's just an ugly gigolo who took his second wife for all the millions he could -- despite his non-stop cheating -- and now bills himself as the "leader of sixties peace, justice and environmental movement."


    That's hilarious.

    His colleague Katrina vanden Heuvel also couldn't call out Barack.

    What of 'brave' Ruth Conniff, the editor of The Progressive?

    The woman, the trash, that once bragged on KPFA's The Morning Show that no one she knew had been touched by the Iraq War managed to Tweet or re-Tweet 37 times during the CNBC GOP presidential aspirants debate but on Iraq and Syria on Friday or even today . . .


    That's right, boys and girls, zero.

    Zilch.

    Nada.


    Remember: No one she knows was touched by the Iraq War.

    Jill Stein's a liar.  She's a lot of things but mainly she's a liar.   October saw Amy Goodman again announce Jill's appearance in the NYC studio of Democracy Now -- with Goodman hailing her as the Green Party's 2016 nominee.

    For Jill's failure to correct that -- repeatedly, she's failed with every media outlet -- the Green Party should select someone else . . . when they pick a presidential candidate in August 2016.

    Jill Stein is a liar.

    She's not the Green Party's presidential candidate.

    Goody Whore and her ilk get so upset when the press does something like this -- the real press, not the beggar media crying "send money!" -- but they have no ethics themselves.

    Nor does Jill.

    When she started campaigning for the nomination (2016 nomination) we noted her silence on Iraq here and that prompted her to pretend she cared.

    But we were right: She doesn't.

    And if you doubt it grasp that she's been Tweeting but has nothing to say about Iraq or Syria.

    This is an alternative to Democratic Party candidates?


    The person who should be the nominee noted:




  • Frustrated with the treatment of events in Syria? Listen to CPR News that really needs your support!




  • Cynthia may run for the Green Party's 2016 presidential nomination.


    Until then, Senator Bernie Sanders is the only candidate running for a political party's presidential nomination who is issuing any sort of statement on the White House's plans:


    DERRY, N.H. – U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders on Friday expressed concern about President Barack Obama’s decision to dispatch U.S. special operations forces to Syria to help battle the Islamic State, a spokesman said.
    “Sen. Sanders expressed concern about the United States being drawn into the quagmire of the Syrian civil war which could lead to perpetual warfare in that region,” spokesman Michael Briggs said. “The senator believes that the crisis in Syria will be solved diplomatically, not militarily.”

    Sanders also expressed strong support for the effort by Secretary of State John Kerry to bring Iran, Saudi Arabia, Russia and other nations into discussions on how to end the bloody civil war, his spokesman added.



    For those wondering, I checked Senator Rand Paul's campaign site as well as his Twitter feed -- nothing.

    And I checked Jim Webb's Twitter and site.  He can hint that he's considering a third party run (after failing to take off among Democratic Party voters), he just can't weigh in on Iraq and/or Syria.


    To be clear, Donald Trump (running for the GOP's presidential nomination) had something to say on the matter -- but like CNN, I can't make sense of it.


    Though they have nothing to say about Iraq, CodePink, to their credit, did rebuke the Syrian part of the plan:


    CODEPINK condemns the decision by the Obama Administration to send US special forces into Syria.
    By CODEPINK Staff
    CODEPINK condemns the decision by the Obama Administration on Friday, October 30, to send special forces into Kurdish-held areas of Syria.
    This decision by the administration moves the United States away from pursuing a political solution and instead follows a failed pattern of using short-term military tactics to address conflicts in the Middle East. We know that "special forces" means putting boots on the ground, something Obama promised in 2013 he wouldn't do in Syria, and puts more American lives at risk. 
    Alternatives exist to increasing United States' military involvement in the region, which, for over a decade, has delivered death, destruction, and increased extremism including the rise of ISIL . Instead, the U.S. government CAN:
    Diplomacy works. Military “solutions” create more problems and tragedies.





    And US House Rep Adam Schiff had something to say:



      1. My statement on Obama Administration's decision to send U.S. special operations forces into Syria to fight .
        Embedded image permalink



    CNN notes that Barack is getting criticism from both Democrats and Republicans over his latest move:

    And both parties called for the administration to sketch out a more detailed strategy for taking on ISIS, also called ISIL.
    "This commitment of U.S. forces must come with a coherent strategy to defeat ISIL. Otherwise, we are likely to see the same results in the region," newly elected House Speaker Paul Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican, said in a statement Friday. "I look forward to reviewing the details of this announcement."
    Sen. Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat and once Obama's handpicked chairman of the Democratic National Committee, urged the administration "to detail to the America people a comprehensive strategy to bring both the conflicts in Iraq and Syria, which are metastasizing around the globe, to a peaceful end."




    Though he couldn't respond to calls for clarification, Barack did make a call to Haider al-Abadi on Friday.  The White House announced:


    President Obama today spoke by phone with Iraqi Prime Minister Haidar al-Abadi to discuss the political and security situation in Iraq and underscore the United States' enduring support for Iraq in its fight against ISIL.  The President commended the recent progress that Iraqi forces have made against ISIL in Bayji and welcomed the ongoing campaign to isolate ISIL in Ramadi, noting that the United States in partnership with the Iraqi Government will intensify support for the Iraqi Security Forces in these efforts.  The President also voiced support for Prime Minister al-Abadi's leadership in his efforts to combat corruption and implement governance reforms critical to promoting Iraq's political stability and economic prosperity.  The two leaders noted their full support for the U.S.-led Global Coalition to Counter ISIL, emphasizing that both the United States and Iraq are fully committed to partnering with the international community to degrade and ultimately destroy ISIL.  They also reaffirmed their commitment to the strategic partnership between the United States and Iraq.


    If you missed it, with former prime minister and forever thug Nouri attempting to use the Iraqi Parliament to unseat Haider, al-Abadi's openly fleeing Russia for the warm hug from Barack that might, if he's lucky, quell the rebellion he's facing from a growing number of Shi'ite law makers.



    Lastly, Amnesty International issued a statement on this week's attack on Camp Liberty:


    A rocket attack on a camp of Iranian exiles in Iraq is a despicable and callous crime, Amnesty International said as it called for an immediate investigation, urgent protection and assistance for the camp’s residents.
    Camp Liberty, in north-east Baghdad, was struck by a barrage of rockets last night, which killed at least 23 people, including one woman, and injured dozens. An Iraqi Shi’a militia, the al-Mukhtar Army, claimed responsibility for the attack and warned that the attack may be repeated.
    The camp is home to around 2,250 unarmed Iranian exiles, mostly members and supporters of the Iranian opposition group, the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI). 
    “This was a horrific act of violence against the residents of Camp Liberty, which cannot simply be ignored by the Iraqi authorities. They must ensure a prompt, independent and effective investigation into this attack and ensure that those responsible are brought to justice,” said Said Boumedouha, Deputy Director of Amnesty International’s Middle East and North Africa Programme. 
    “Their utter failure to investigate previous deadly attacks against the camp sends the message that its residents can be murdered with impunity.”
    Eyewitnesses told Amnesty International that the attack started around 7.40pm local time as camp residents were gathering for dinner. Twenty people were killed instantly while another three later died from injuries in a Baghdad hospital.
    Residents said around 80 rockets hit the camp, which they identified as Iranian built Falaq Katyusha rockets, though Iraqi media reported that between 12 and 38 rockets were fired.
    The attack caused widespread destruction as it hit the camp’s electricity generators while hundreds of residents have been left homeless after at least 200 trailers were destroyed. The Iraqi government has yet to make a statement on the events, but other governments as well as the UN Refugee Agency – which considers Camp Liberty residents “people of concern” – have condemned the attack.
    “The Iraqi authorities’ silence about the killing of 23 people is inexcusable. They are manifestly failing in their duty under international law to protect everyone in the camp, many of whom are asylum-seekers. On top of the loss of life, the destruction caused by the attack has left many residents facing desperate conditions,” said Said Boumedouha.
    “The government must urgently ensure that electricity and water are restored, and that those whose homes have been destroyed are provided with adequate temporary shelter without delay.”
    Background
    All the exiles living in Camp Liberty had lived in Camp Ashraf since the mid-1980s. After the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq the camp and its residents were placed under US protection but this ended in mid-2009 following an agreement between the US authorities and the Iraqi government.
    Barely a month later, on 28-29 July 2009, Iraqi security forces stormed into the camp; at least nine residents were killed and many more were injured. Thirty-six residents who were detained were allegedly tortured and beaten.
    In 2011 the Iraqi government announced the closure of Camp Ashraf after relocating its residents to Camp Liberty in the north-east of Baghdad.
    According to a December 2011 memorandum of understanding between the UN and the government of Iraq, the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) may process requests for international protection from residents of the camps. Those residents who apply for international protection are asylum-seekers under international law.
    The government failed to investigate previous attacks on Camp Ashraf and Camp Liberty, and no one has ever been brought to account. In fact, senior Iraqi government officials have in the past made it clear that the camp residents were not welcomed in Iraq. 






    iraq
    bill van auken