The chatty post

Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Debutante Barack"


Do I like "Stars" by Janis Ian?

I must have mentioned Janis a lot last week. I was listening to Folk Is The New Black. Let's back up.

"2008 in books (Martha & Shirley)" (Martha and Shirley, The Common Ills):
Which brings us to music, doesn't it? A good thing because the first book published in 2008 that members got excited about was a music book, Janis Ian's Society's Child: My Autobiography. It can be purchased at Amazon where it's currently selling for $16.98 ($26.95 list price). You can read an excerpt from the book here (HTML) or here (PDF).
Janis Ian is a gifted singer-songwriter who began her recording career long before she was an adult. (The title of her book comes from the song she first made her name with.) Kat reviewed Janis Ian's Folk Is The New Black in 2006. Those who prefer or need audio can click here for NPR, where she discussed the book with Robert Siegel for All Things Considered.At her site, a fact sheet notes:
JANIS' SONGS HAVE BEEN RECORDED BY (partial list):
Elisabeth Andreasson, Chet Atkins, Charles Aznavour, Joan Baez, Suzi Beatty, Glen Campbell, Cher, Chicago, Cynthia Clawson, Barbara Cook, Charlie Daniels, Roberta Flack, Kye Fleming, Ronnie Gilbert, Amy Grant, Lee Greenwood, Nanci Griffith, Michael Johnson, Marti Jones, Ute Lemper, Eddie Marnay, Hugh Masakela, Kathy Mattea, John Mellencamp, Bette Midler, Misao, Buddy Mondlock, Nana Mouskouri, Nick Mundy, Holly Near, Maura O’Connell, Maria Ortiz, Michele Pilar, Puff Daddy, Katja Riemann, Judy Rodman, Diane Schuur, Marilyn Sellars, Nina Simone, Spooky Tooth, Dusty Springfield, Jeff Stevens & The Bullets, Lisa Stewart, Russ Taff, Mel Torme, Conny V.D.Bos, Vanilla Fudge, Cheryl Wheeler, Windows, Mare Winningham, Phil Woods, Michelle Wright.
Inspired by Jim's questioning in Third's book feature on Sunday, we asked C.I. to name one other artist, not listed, who has recorded Janis Ian's songs? "Read the names to me again," C.I. said. "Okay, here's one not on the list. Barbi Benton. She did a surprisingly strong cover of 'In The Winter' back in the mid-seventies."

The community voted Janis Ian's autobiography the best book of 2008 and it really is a wonderful book (and it was my vote for best book in the poll as well). The link Martha and Shirley provided to Kat's 2006 review of Folk Is The New Black had me pulling that from the CD shelves and I just fell in love with it all over again. It's such a beautiful album. My favorite song is the one Mike described Friday (see his "Gaza, Janis Ian, more"). The entire CD is amazing but I could listen to that one track over and over. Fortunately, Mike doesn't mind that so I can (and have) programmed the song over and over. When C.I., Rebecca and I lived together in college (the days of vinyl), I know that could get very irritating. (When I did it. Rebecca would fall in love with some obscure song and want C.I. to play it on piano or guitar so Rebecca would play it over and over so C.I. could pick out the notes.)

But there are a few artists who can provide a groove that I can hear repeatedly. For Janis Ian, her songs "At Seventeen" and, yes, "Stars" would fall in that. Those were the ones mentioned in e-mails (Sunny's back from vacation and she read the e-mails for me -- repeating, that is not her job duty, she just enjoys doing it) with "Stars" being asked of 9 more times than "At Seventeen." You can probably put "Jesse" in there as well.

I would assume "In The Winter" but I can't hear that in my head. Martha and Shirley tried to stump C.I. who will never be stumped. C.I. tossed out Barbi Benton's "In The Winter" and I love that choice because, yes, I do laugh, but I also know Benton did do a strong recording on that. I believe that album was called Something New. I believe we (C.I. and I) had a friend who played on that session but I could be wrong and it could have been some guy one of us was sleeping with -- and, yes, my memory is that bad. C.I. could tell you right now and, if either of us slept with the guy, could tell you how long the affair lasted and a hundred other details. I am not Rebecca (who truly has a bad memory -- always had) but I don't have C.I.'s Memorac brain. (Rebecca and I dubbed C.I.'s brain that in college, after the computer in the film Desk Set with Katharine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy.) Point, since C.I. mentioned the Benton recording, I can't hear any version (and a lot of people recorded that song) but Benton's. I feel like I can almost hear Phoebe Snow singing it so I'm wondering if Phoebe recorded it?

Maybe I'm confusing that with "Hymn"? That's a song recorded by Janis Ian, Phoebe Snow and Odetta.

Anyway.

I'm tired so I'm saying "Anyway." This is nothing but a chatty post anyway. So "anyway." We used to tease C.I. about that years and years ago and it's now something you hear all the time. I can remember if we were all dragging in finals week, C.I. would say "Anyway" and, if really tired, get stuck on it. "Anyway, anyway, anyway, anyyyyyyywaaaaaaaay." If you've seen After Hours, it's like the scene where Rosanna Arquette explains she broke up with a guy because when they made love, he'd have to exclaim "Surrender, Dorothy!" Like in The Wizard of Oz? So Roseanna explains, "He couldn't stop. He couldn't stop. He couldn't stop. He. Couldn't. Stop." Like that, C.I. would get the needle stuck on "anyway."

When Rebecca was tired? She would play with that hair. I believe she's written about this at her site. But all that blonde hair. She'd start playing with it. She'd twirl it, she'd do this to it, she'd do that to it. These days Ava and C.I. do that with their hair when they are exhausted in a way but not really. With them, they are trying to keep their hair off their faces. Rebecca would grab a lock of hair, drape it across her face or bring it all to the front and over covering her face like she was trying to be Cousin It from the Adams Family.

This would go on and on. We might all be at the table studying our notes and texts for a final and could be at the table for hours and hours. She would be playing with hair the entire time. When she started twisting a pencil in her hair, she'd eventually have one pencil holding up the right side, one holding up the left side, one for the back and three or four going across the top.

Someone offering far deeper thoughts than I can is Sol Bellel. The links below are some of his pieces on the unqualified to be a senator Caroline Kennedy:

http://dbellel.blogspot.com/2008/12/sweet-caroline-for-senator-1.html
http://dbellel.blogspot.com/2008/12/sweet-caroline-for-senator-2.html
http://dbellel.blogspot.com/2008/12/sweet-caroline-for-senator-3.html
http://dbellel.blogspot.com/2008/12/sweet-caroline-for-senator-4.html
http://dbellel.blogspot.com/2008/12/sweet-caroline-for-senator-5.html
http://dbellel.blogspot.com/2008/12/sweet-caroline-for-senator-6.html
http://dbellel.blogspot.com/2008/12/sweet-caroline-for-senator-7.html
http://dbellel.blogspot.com/2008/12/sweet-caroline-for-senator-8.html
http://dbellel.blogspot.com/2008/12/sweet-caroline-for-senator-9.html
http://dbellel.blogspot.com/2008/12/sweet-caroline-for-senator-10.html
http://dbellel.blogspot.com/2008/12/sweet-caroline-for-senator-11.html
http://dbellel.blogspot.com/2008/12/sweet-caroline-for-senator-12.html
http://dbellel.blogspot.com/2008/12/sweet-ring-ding-ding-caroline.html
http://dbellel.blogspot.com/2008/12/sweet-caroline.html
http://dbellel.blogspot.com/2008/12/nyc-royal-family.html

Sol very kindly linked to me and even more kindly took the time to e-mail. I don't read the e-mails. I've gotten so used to Sunny reading them that I don't generally read any of them unless she prints one up at work. I hear about them during lunch. But I'm just a lousy blogger -- meaning lousy at it. My apologies. As soon as C.I. shuts down The Common Ills, I'm done online. It takes more time than I have and you really need to blog regularly, on a schedule, so people know you're there. That is the one thing I'm good at. I blog the same four days a week. I'm awful at everything else except for that.

But that was very nice and I wanted to note Sol in return. Thank you also to Ty (see "Ty's Corner" at Third) who recommended that I check my e-mails Saturday because he had an e-mail from Sol.

"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Monday, January 5, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the US Embassy in Baghdad has its grand opening (the banner reads "IMPERIALISM: OVER 1 BILLION SERVED!"), Dick Cheney carries his fantasy world around with him, Allawi slams al-Maliki, and more.

Today the US Embassy in Baghdad held their grand opening ceremony. Missy Ryan, Peter Graff, Tim Cocks (Reuters) report that John Negroponte (Deputy US Sec of State, former US ambassador to Iraq) and Jalal Talabani (President of Iraq) were on the guest list for the highly exclusive get-together -- well the Embassy is in the highly fortified Green Zone and Al Jazeera notes the "tight security". The three rocked rocked the house with nearly one-thousand additional guests. The Embassy's press releases brags, "The largest American Embassy structure to date, its scale reflects the importance of the U.S.-Iraq bilateral relationship. Construction began in 2005 and was completed in 2008 at a total cost of $592 million." $592 million would prevent a huge number of home foreclosures here in the US, but, hey, at least they didn't try to hide the cost today, right? Oops, they did try to hide the price tag. CNN plays party pooper informing that the $592 million was "the original price tag" but "the cost could end up $144 million higher" according to a 2007 Congressional report.

The Embassy notes that the guests gather to watch the US flag being raised by six Marines with music provided by the Army's 4th Infantry Division Band. That seven-person band is made up of "Commander, Iraq and Texas, Steadfast and Loyal Chief Warrant Officer Robert Nixon," "Commander, Fort Carson Colorado, Fit For Any Test Chief Warrant Officer Marvin Cardo," "First/Sergeant/Enlisted Band Leader, Fit For Any Test First Sergeant Jeremy Smelser," "Chief; Plans, Operations & Training Division/Rock Band Vocalist/Drum Major Sergeant First Class Dewayne Butcher," "Fit For Any Test, 'Nuf Said Sergeant First Class Troy Hascall," "Bringer of Rock, Burner of Things, Thrower of Towels, Fit For Any Test Sergeant First Class Sean Kerley" and "Trumpet Player, Chief, Logistic & Resource Management Division Sergeant First Clas Henry Reyna"

US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker went with a dark suit for the occassion and used the standard GOP red tie for a splash of color while Jalal Talabani demonstrated, that fatty arteries or not, he's still going to eat what he wants and be damn proud of it. Which is how he turned a dark coat into a mumu. Well done, Jalal! Jalal knows the staff of the Mayo Clinic will suck the fat out of those arteries as often as necessary. Party like it's January 2007, Jalal! John Negroponte decided to indulge his Indiana Jones fantasy by wearing a hat (which he did remove for the US national anthem and the flag raising). And that was just outside!!! Tom A. Peter (Christian Science Monitor) drops the 411 on all the wack goings on including who played "the diplomatic equivalent of a Wal-Mart greeter": "A US Army lieutenant colonel". Peter explains that the embassy has a schoolhouse; however, no need to worry that cramped the party mood today: "Although it's currently occupied by coalition forces representatives, embassy officials hope that one day, when the situation here normalizes, Iraq will be a family-friendly posting for diplomats. Just how far off that day is, embassy spokespeople are not willing to speculate". Alaa Majeed (UPI) points out, "But the transfer does not suggest the Iraqi government is competent beyond the walls of the Green Zone, which houses most of the state ministries. The Green Zone, since 2003, has split the capital, Baghdad, in two and emerged as a symbol of the inability of the government to bring dignity to the Iraqi people."

Deborah Haynes (Times of London) describes the backdrop to Crocker's speech, "As he spoke, the sound of helicopters buzzed overhead, a reminder of the ongoing US military presence in Iraq despite the shift in power. All US forces in the country came under the authority of the Iraqi Government on January 1 after a UN Security Council resolution authorising their presence expired." Talabani may have hit the party punch a little too hard because RTT quotes him declaring the US Embassy "will searve as a model for other peoples of the eastern world." Declared . . . or warned? Apparently Negroponte was hitting the party punch as well which is why Reuters quotes him stating, "It is from here men and women, civilian and military, will help build the new Iraq."

And maybe Dick Cheney, president of vice, started celebrating the opening of the embassy early because "drunk" would probably be an improvement over "liar" which is how he came off yesterday on CBS' Face The Nation (link has text and video) as he insisted of Iraq, "I think we are close to achieving most of our objectives. We've seen a significant reduction in the overall level of violence; it's lower now than virtually anytime since we've been there in the spring of '03. We've seen the elimination of one of the world's worst regimes. We've seen the Iraqis write a constitution and hold three national elections. We've now entered into a strategic framework agreement with the Iraqis that calls for ultimately the U.S. completion of the assignment and withdrawal of our forces from Iraq. All of those things I think by anybody's standard would be evidence of significant success. And I think we're very close to achieving what it is we set out to do five years ago when we first went into Iraq." The never met the benchmarks, Cheney, the ones defined by the White House. Two years later and they still can't claim to have met the benchmarks for progress -- as defined by the White House. These weren't longterm benchmarks. These were benchmarks they were actually supposed to have completed at the end of 2007. Two years later and they never managed to meet them. You can fudge it and say "partial" (as the White House did) but, for example, a de-de-Baathification law that not only provides no oversight but is never implemented. And if you're not grasping the reality of those benchmarks -- which the White House has treated as open-ended and the press has gone along with that lie . . . May 16, 2007, Democratic Policy Committee, "In September, the Iraqi government publicly committed to meet a series of political benchmarks by the end of 2006 or early 2007, for advancing the national reconciliation process, including measures for amending the constitution; holding provinical elections; reforming de-Baathification laws; regulating the oil industry; and disbanding sectarian militas." Dick Cheney wants to talk 'improvement,' refer to the benchmarks set by the White House and honestly tell the American people what was achieved.

And on the issue of getting honest about Iraq, Condi Rice, get honest. December 18, 2008 the US House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform issued [PDF format warning] "MEMORANDUM Re: The President's Claim that Iraq Sought Uranium from Niger". Background, there was no attempt by Iraq to obtain yellow-cake uranium from Niger. Former US Ambassador Joe Wilson went to great lengths to explain that fact and was 'thanked' by having his wife Valerie Plame outed as an undercover CIA agent. Bully Boy LIED in his 2003 State of the Union speech and also in a September 12, 2002 speech and a September 26, 2002 speech. The September speeches July 8, 2003, Bill Hemmer (CNN) spoke with Joe Wilson:


HEMMER: We'll take that answer as a bit of a foundation for this interview. Listen to what Condoleezza Rice said about a month ago, early June on "Meet the Press." I'm quoting right now. She says, "We did not know at the time -- no one knew at the time in our circles -- maybe someone knew down in the bowels in the agency, but no one in our circles knew that there were doubts and suspicions that this might be a forgery" -- Condoleezza Rice back on June 8. You say that is not possible. Why not?


WILSON: Well, when I was at the National Security Council, and before I wrote my piece for "The New York Times," I actually checked with very senior officials of the National Security Council from the time I was there, as well as very senior officials in the vice president's office just to refresh my memory.

September 28, 2003, Condi sat back down on Meet The Press and this exchange took place between her and Tim Russert:

MR. RUSSERT: That was in January. And in June -- June 8 -- you were on MEET THE PRESS; I asked you about that, and this was your response.
(Videotape, June 8, 2003):
DR. RICE: The president quoted a British paper. We did not know at the time, no one knew at the time in our circles -- maybe someone knew down in the bowels of the agency, but no one in our circles knew -- that there were doubts and suspicions that this might be a forgery. Of course, it was information that was mistaken.
(End videotape)
MR. RUSSERT: "No one in our circles." That has proven to be wrong.
DR. RICE: No, Tim, that has not proven to be wrong. No one did know that they were forgeries. The notion of the forgeries came in February or in March when this was--when this came to the CIA. It is true that we learned, subsequent to my comments to you, that Director Tenet did not want to stand by that statement. And I would never want to see anything in a presidential statement -- speech -- that the director of Central Intelligence did not want to have there.
And I'm the national security adviser. When something like this happens, I feel personally responsible for it happening because it obscured the fact that the president of the United States did not go to war over whether Saddam Hussein tried to acquire yellow cake in Africa. He went to war over a threat from a bloody tyrant in the most volatile region of the world who had used weapons of mass destruction before, and was continuing to try to acquire them. And so, of course, this should not have happened.

That's all American has because as the Committee On Oversight and Government Reform note, Condi refused to provide them with testimony -- repeatedly. At one point Alberto Gonzales (then US Attorney General) showed up allegedly offering remarks on her behalf and, in that capacity, Gonzales insisted Condi stated the CIA cleared the inclusion of the uranium claim in both September 2002 speeches. Not true. The Committee explaines John Gibson ("Director of Speechwriting for Foreign Policy at the National Security Council) testified that "Michael Gerson, chief White House speechwriter, and Robert Joseph, the Senior Director for Proliferation Strategy, Counterproliferation, and Homeland Defense at the NSC" were pushing to include it in the September 12, 2002 speech and the CIA objected. More importantly for Condi, this section of the memo:

On September 26, 2002, President Bush delivered remarks in the White House Rose Garden urging Congress to authorize the use of force in Iraq. During an interview with the Committee, Jami Miscik, the Deputy Director of Intelligence at the CIA, stated that NSC officials "woulnd't take [the uranium claim] out of the speech." As a result, she was asked to explain directly to Dr. Rice "the reasons why we didn't think this was credible." Ms. Miscik stated that "[i]t was clear that we had problems or we at the most fundamental level wouldn't have been haveing the phone call at all." According to Ms. Miscik, the CIA's reasons for rejecting the uranium claim "had been conveyed to the NSC counterparts" before the call, and Dr. Rice was "getting on the phone call with that information." Ms. Miscik told Dr. Rice personally that the CIA was "recommending that it be taken out." She also said "[i]t turned out to be a relatively short phone call" because "we both knew what the issues were and therefore were able to get to a very easy resolution of it."

So would Condi like to amend her public statement: "We did not know at the time, no one knew at the time in our circles -- maybe someone knew down in the bowels of the agency, but no one in our circles knew -- that . . ."? She clearly did know. The Deputy Director of Intelligence told her. Is Condi going to be pressed on that before she leaves the State Dept?

Dropping back to the weekend. Saturday Nouri al-Maliki, puppet of the occupation, was in Iran and Press TV was airing an interview they taped with him ahead of his visit. In the interview he suddenly began referring to the treaty masquerading as a Status Of Forces Agreement as a "withdrawal agreement" once again. He hasn't used that since November and he is the one who insisted, prior to the vote in Parliament that it be called that. The US called it a Status Of Forces Agreement -- grasping that to call it a withdrawal agreement would put the White House in clear violation of the US Constitution. When talking to the Vatican, Nouri pretends the fate of Iraqi Christians are the most important thing to him so, no surprise, when visiting Iran, he completely ignored the issue and spun life on the ground in Iraq as happy-happy. Sunday Xinhua reported he met with Ayatollah Ali Khammenei today and Khamenei told him that there will be no peace in Iraq as long as the US present: "The U.S. is treacherous and reneger and is not a good friend even for its close allies in the region, therefore, its promises cannot be trusted."

While al-Malilki was trying to look big, Iraq's first prime minister after Saddam, Iyad Allawi, was cutting him down. Khalid al-Ansary (Reuters) reported that "Former U.S.-installed Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi" is offering a savage critique of the White House occupant and Nouri al-Maliki. "Utter failure," is how he characterizes the Bully Boy's policies. al-Ansary notes:Maliki's government was characterised by "weak performance, erected upon political quotas, major government corruption and infiltrated state agencies," he said. "Four years passed ... and they can't build the police, army, national institutions.""Ending Saddam's regime was essential, but replacing the Saddam regime with extreme chaos was not right," he said. "I did not imagine the political process would eat itself from inside or that it would abandon the rule of law and establish political sectarianism."That was Saturday. Today Missy Ryan and Khalid al-Ansary (Reuters) interview Allawi: "But Allawi blamed Maliki, from the religious Shi'ite Dawa party, for perpetuating divisions among Iraqis -- for example failing to enact measures passed by parliament that aim to bring ousted Baath party members back into government. 'Sectarianism still is the order of the day. You can't get a position in the government, even a junior position,' without meeting sectarian criteria, he said." They note Allawi is hoping the provincial elections scheduled for January 31st find his secular party making gains. Jafar Jani (Baghdad Life, Wall St. Journal) observes "a battle of paper and glue" as political posters go up and then get ripped down in Baghdad.

Saturday Waleed Ibrahim, Missy Ryan and Tony Austin (Reuters) reported that US forces shot Hadil Imad, an Iraqi news "producer for Biladi television stations," wounding her and her condition remains critical. When? Iraq and the US only wanted to get honest about it today but it took place January 1st -- remember that? The day of the big 'transfer,' the big 'transformation.' Hadil remains in the hospital and, not only is she a journalist, she'd gotten married the week prior. Campbell Robertson (New York Times) reported she was 24-years-old and Sunday Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) reported that the channel she works for released a statement online that "said Imad was shot 'in cold blood' and noted that the incdent coincided with the implementation of the security agreement that Iraqi and U.S. officials have exalted as an affirmation of Iraq's sovereignty."

Yesterday's biggest violence was a bombing in Baghdad. Hussein Kadhim and Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) report the bomber killed herself and "as many as 40 people" not far from "the holy Iman Musa al Kdhim shrine." Anthony Shadid (Washington Post) notes that the bombing was "20 yeards from a door to the . . . shrine" and adds, "Residents described scenes of carnage after the woman detonated the explosives at 11:15 a.m. on a cool, sunny morning. Dismembered bodies were strewn across a muddy road and near a covered market, the blast's force hurling some parts onto the roofs of nearby two-story buildings. Volunteers gathered bloodied pieces of flesh in black plastic bags. In the ensuing, chaotic minutes, witnesses said, some peopled vomited at the sight and smell of blood." Kimi Yoshino (Los Angeles Times) reports 72 wounded and observes, "It is the second major bombing in the predominantly Shiite neighborhood of Khadimiya since Dec. 27, when a minibus exploded, killing 24." "The attack was the second major bombing since US forces came under Iraqi Government authority on January 1. It also occurred as Iraqi leaders expressed confidence in their ability to defend Iraq at a ceremony to mark Army Day," points out Deborah Haynes (Times of London). Sam Dahger and Mudhafer al-Husaini (New York Times) zoom in on the reactions of survivors such as Mahdi Khrosorabadi who wonders, "Why do they tell us to come, why? Security is still very bad." An unnamed woman is quoted insisting, "An Iraqi is blowing up Iraqis! Money has blinded everyone."

Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Laith Hammoudi and Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) report 7 Baghdad roadside bombings that left thirty-one people wounded and 2 dead, a Mosul car bombing that wounded five people and a Mosul roadside bombing that wounded seven college students.

Shootings?

Laith Hammoudi and Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) report 1 "final year medicine college student" shot dead Mosul. Reuters notes "a student pharmacist" shot dead in Mosul (this is not the medical student -- they note that student as well)

Corpses?

Laith Hammoudi and Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) report 1 corpse discovered in Baghdad.


Baghdad's Kassakhoon looks back on 2008 and observes:

Did we see electricity 24 hours a day? NO. Did we see clean water coming out from the tap? NO. Did we see new hospitals? NO.Did we see new bridges and streets? NO.Did we see good food ration suitable for human beings and not only fit to chicken? NO.Did we see new residential compounds? NO and NO and NO and NO....
Did we see government officials in elegant western suits traveling in motorcades of modern armored vehicles? YES. Did we see new military vehicles and weapons? YES. Did we see more concrete walls? YES. Did we see sidewalks being built by Baghdad's Municipality workers and the next day the same workers demolish them to be built again the next day? YES and YES and YES and YES and YES...

Not quite the 'progress' report others keep spinning. Let's zoom in on one question and answer: "Did we see good food ration suitable for human beings and not only fit to chicken? NO." Friday the latest spin included how to 'help' Iraqi widows. Tony Perry (Los Angeles Times) reported that the US Marines purchased 50 cows for 50 widows in some sort of non-musical update to Seven Brides for Seven Brothers. Perry states it's a two-for, helping the "once-thriving dairy industry" and "women and children hurt by the frequent failure of the Iraqi government to provide the pensions". Helping women and children hurt by what? The pensions are an issue but the greater threat remains the rations. The White House is the one who repeatedly attacked the rations and tried to end them immediately. Too much objection to that so, instead, each puppet in Baghdad has whittled them down and whittled them down. And we're never supposed to notice the connection to this and the soaring malnutrition rates among Iraqi children. The fact that, during Saddam Hussein's reign, Iraqis got more staples each month isn't supposed to have a thing to do with the soaring malnutrition rates? This is the first year, in fact, that didn't draw to a close with news that the rations program was again being cut. Doesn't mean it wasn't, just means they haven't announced it yet if is being cut. IRIN reported yesterday that a survey by Iraq's government on whether or not to continue the rations program resulted in 95% of respondents stating that they would prefer it to some form of "financial aid." (Or, presumably, prefer it to a dairy cow.) IRIN explains:

Iraq's food rationing system, known as the Public Distribution System (PDS), was set up in 1995 as part of the UN's oil-for-food programme following Iraq's invasion of Kuwait 17 years ago. However, it has been crumbling since the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 due to insecurity, poor management and corruption. In late 2007, the Iraqi Trade Ministry, which runs the programme, was contemplating reducing the 10-item PDS parcels by half in 2008 due to lack of financial support and soaring world food prices. However, the idea was later dropped when the government allocated US$7.3 billion to keep the programme running in 2008. Each PDS parcel costs the government 500 Iraq dinars (less than 50 US cents) per person. In mid-2008, the trade ministry said it was drawing up a plan to be implemented in 2009 that would restrict the food aid programme to the poor and that it would cooperate with the planning ministry in this regard. Mohammed Hanoon, spokesman of the Iraqi Trade Ministry, said the government was under a lot of pressure to cut its 2009 budget due to low world oil prices and was therefore planning to allocate US$5 billion or less this year to the PDS. The Iraqi government depends on oil revenues for about 95 percent of its income."The cabinet has not yet responded to the ministry's plan to reduce the number of beneficiaries and we cannot predict the fate of the food ration [system] this year or 2010," Hanoon told IRIN.

Finally, the losses have been many for Iraqis throughout the illegal war. The losses of those making up the so-called coalition of the willing have been numerous as well. Today the White House noted their sorrow over a loss:

The President, Mrs. Bush, Barbara, and Jenna are deeply saddened by the passing of their cat India ("Willie"). The 18 year-old female black American Shorthair died Sunday, January 4, 2009 at home at the White House. When Barbara was nine years old, she named India after the former Texas Ranger baseball player, Ruben Sierra, who was called "El Indio." When Barbara and Jenna moved away to college, India, affectionately called "Kitty" by the family, stayed at the White House with the President and Mrs. Bush. India was a beloved member of the Bush family for almost two decades. She will be greatly missed.

Finally, a death that grieves the White House.


iraq
peter graffmissy ryandominic evanstim cocks
mcclatchy newspaperslaith hammoudi
mohammed al dulaimy
leila fadel
cbs newsface the nation
the washington postanthony shadidthe los angeles timesernesto londonodeborah hayneskimi yoshino
the new york timessam dagher
campbell robertsonmudhafer al-husaini
jafar janithe wall st. journal

Quick thoughts

Alexander Cockburn is one sick f**k and makes a point to remind everyone at his cesspool today. No link to his garbage and may he seek the help so desperately and obviously needs.

His bad piece has several parts and the first section is how hope is the last thing America suffers from a lack of. Sound familiar? Yeah, C.I. tackled that. Which really underscores the difference between the likes of Cockburn and the really-reals like C.I. Cockburn decides to illustate how that was the case by turning to . . . Oprah. Yeah, that's standing big and proud, Alex. That's really hitting hard. Alexander Cockburn couldn't be more pathetic if he tried. I cannot believe I ever wasted time reading him.

"2008: The Year of Living Hormonally (Year in Review)." (C.I., The Common Ills):
Corn-nuts.
One of the saddest things about 2008 was seeing how their love for Barack destroyed so many. David Corn was a little too tight with some sources prior to 2008 (to put it mildly). But, overall, he was a basic reporter and one who could actually work in the MSM if he chose to do so. A claim the bulk of his peers can never make.
So it was sad to see David Corn make a complete fool out of himself (supposedly he's now on the mend, let's hope so) repeatedly. When not insisting only the most naive would be shocked by Samantha Power's words to the BBC and that 'everyone' already knew that, Corn could be found heckling during teleconfrences with the Hillary campaign. It was so bad (very early on) that a friend with the campaign called to ask if David was "for real?" Sadly, he was.
Worst of all was when he'd go back to Mother Jones (no link to trash and that's all Mother Jones now is -- may it recover quickly if it's able to) and blog about his 'manly' little moments. He was a regular George H.W. Bush in those instances. There was Corn-nuts, for instance, bragging about how he really tore into Howard for bringing up Barack's relationship with Weather Underground's Bill Ayers. He typed away (and loved his moment so much, he actually continued writing about it over and over as late as four days after) of how he confronted Howie and said no way, no how, not while Corn-nuts is around! How dare Howard bring Bill Ayers up when Bill Clinton pardoned two members of Weather Underground.
Bill Clinton pardoned no one in the Weather Underground.
Barack tossed that out in the last debate His Royal Highness deigned to do (the one he flopped in). Out of his ass into the mouths of his Cult.
The next day, Ava and I made it very clear ("There was no pardon, Barack") first thing in the morning and assumed that, during the day's news cycle, it would straighten itself out. Wrong before and I'll be wrong again. That night, we had to do the slow-walk through for those who couldn't do the basic work themselves. To their credit, ABC News corrected the error in less than six hours. David Corn?
Mother Jones got repeated phone calls about the error. The receptionist got snippy and refused to switch people over to editors. (She snarled at one community member that "they were all busy writing!") In three places at the Mother Jones website, the LIE was posted (by David Corn) that Bill Clinton pardoned two members of the Weather Underground. It took many, many phone calls before any action was finally taken. One of the three posts finally carried a note by David Corn where he did not admit to his error. He blamed it on others and then turned around and tried to minimize that by getting in a Marc Rich dig.


We are all selecting our favorite section of C.I.'s year-in-review and highlighting it. That's among my favorites. I could actually pick several, but that's among my favorites. I do enjoy the writing of the passage but I also enjoy what went into it. You see people play favorites all the time. They won't call out ___ but they'll go after someone they don't like. C.I. likes David Corn. Calling out Corn wasn't easy or anything C.I. ever planned to do. But when it was needed, C.I. stepped up. It's something the easy-bake critics like Alex Cockburn don't understand. It also includes the realities and, regarding the correction, if that was Alex, I'm sure it would read, "So I called my friengs in ABC News' legal department and . . ." C.I. leaves that section out. C.I. leaves out the section about calling a news exec at ABC and getting no help so then calling legal to get them to explain to the news dept how there was and is a difference.

I love that passage because I know it really killed C.I. to call out Corn in 2008 and it would have been so easy, having done that throughout 2008, to leave it out of the year-in-review. But C.I. doesn't pull punches or play favorites.


"Letter to Bush on Gaza Crisis" (Ralph Nader, Information Clearing House):
Dear George W. Bush,
January 02, 2009 --
Cong. Barney Frank said recently that Barack Obama's declaration that "there is only one president at a time" over-estimated the number. He was referring to the economic crisis. But where are you on the Gaza crisis where the civilian population of Gaza, its civil servants and public facilities are being massacred and destroyed respectively by U.S built F-16s and U.S. built helicopter gunships.
The deliberate suspension of your power to stop this terrorizing of 1.5 million people, mostly refugees, blockaded for months by air, sea and land in their tiny slice of land, is in cowardly contrast to the position taken by President Dwight Eisenhower in 1956. That year he single handedly stopped the British, French and Israeli aircraft attack against Egypt during the Suez Canal dispute.
Fatalities in Gaza are already over 400 and injuries close to 2000 so far as is known. Total Palestinian civilian casualties are 400 times greater then the casualties incurred by Israelis. But why should anyone be surprised at your blanket support for Israel's attack given what you have done to a far greater number of civilians in Iraq and now in Afghanistan?
Confirmed visual reports show that Israeli warplanes and warships have destroyed or severely damaged police stations, homes, hospitals, pharmacies, mosques, fishing boats, and a range of public facilities providing electricity and other necessities.

The assault on Gaza continues. Ralph Nader has spoken out and Cynthia McKinney has done that and a great deal more; however, the world continues to await Barack Obama's response. I do so hope they aren't holding their breath as they wait. If they are, at least they'll only pass out. They won't die from holding their breath. Medically, they would pass out and then begin breathing again. So don't worry about them and their foolish ways. They certainly didn't make time to worry about the people in Gaza when they rushed to vote for Barack.


"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Friday, January 2, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, slapping up against the latest wave of Operation Happy Talk, some US veterans of war have difficulties re-adjusting to civilian life, and more.

It's the new year so the press would traditionally contribute their 'looking back' pieces. But why do that and be bound by the facts when it's so much more 'creative' to look to the future and pen fantasies? In today's Washington Post, Anthony Shadid decided to inform that, "The war in Iraq is indeed over"; however, events on the ground begged to differ. Even ten years ago, a reporter trying to do what Shadid has done (war over by press fiat!) would have been the laughingstock of the press corps. Such are the times that Shadid is actually 'outshined' by the actions at another outlet. Leila Fadel. Yeah, she's back in Iraq. And offering all the 'value' and 'pertinence' as Yvette Mimieux did when she decided to team up with Ali Akbar Khan because what the world needed then (1968) was more bad music with poetry (Baudelaire) read over it badly. Flowers of Evil was what those 'geniuses' ended up with and it might as well be the title of Fadel's latest which contains this hidden 'gem': "It's difficult, however, for hope to return so quickly after so much bloodshed." Fadel is, no doubt, very proud of that line just as Yvette knew Flowers of Evil would set the world on fire. But, for the record, bad poetry doesn't have a damn thing to do with journalism. Fadel might try to squeeze that sentence into some sort of crack-pot, Chicken Sop for the whatever but it doesn't belong in reporting.


But we're not getting reporting, we're hearing the sounds of the Up With People singers warming up as they prepare for the ultimate wave of Operation Happy Talk. "There's no doubt," insists Fadel straining to hit notes beyond her range -- but, in fact, reporting is all about doubts. Reporting is all about questioning. Save this garbage for your EST seminar (Erhard Seminars Training) because it's quackery, it's not reporting.


Doubt it? Here's Fadel seeing 'change,' "U.S. officials already have moved out of Saddam Hussein's Republican Palace, which they'd used as their headquarters since U.S. troops took control of Baghdad, and are occupying a brand new, sprawling 104-acre U.S. embassy complex that's America's largest in the world." And this tells us what, Fadel?


It appears to tell us that the largest Embassy in the world is preferred to Hussein's musty, old castle. It appears to tell us that, as was stated long before construction on the Embassy began, the US would move into the Embassy as soon as it was possible. Delays came about because shoddy work was done. And, no, not all of it has been fixed. But those are details that escape Fadel who writes as if she's willing McClatchy's Baghdad operation to shut down. Leila, thinking "happy thoughts" might have allowed Peter Pan to fly, but there's no evidence to suggest it will do the same for a news outlet.

Once upon a time, reporters were expected to deal in facts. Today, it's all word games. Could someone give 'em all Scrabble for their down time and instruct that they practice their trade at all other times? Chief among the foreign outlets needing to unwrap a Scrabble board: AFP. The agency's Benjamin Morgan offers a lede about how Iraq's airspace ("a swathe" of it) is being handed back to it by the US. A swathe? Over 29,000 feet and higher was already controlled by Iraq. Thereby explaining that amazing space program al-Maliki launched. What? He didn't launch one? No, of course not. And it doesn't mean a damn thing that 29,000 to 24,000 feet were returned to Iraq as the new year began. Why is that? AFP quotes Amer Abduljabbar Ismail (Minster of Transportation) stating that "the complete control of our airspeace will not be finished until 2011, when the US military leaves." Poor, deluded, sick liar. The US isn't leaving in 2011 and, if they did, Iraq having control of it's air space wouldn't mean a damn thing because, as was repeatedly revealed in Baghdad press conference after conference this fall, Iraq air force will not be ready in 2011. They freely admitted -- American and Iraqi spokespeople -- that Iraq would require the US well past 2012.

So many novelists, so damn few reporters. It's as though the 90s trend which found the 80s literary set -- Jay McInerney, Tama Janawitz, Bret Easton Ellis, Jill Eisenstadt, et al -- invading the feature profile resulted in a serious case of creative envy among the press corps. (I know and like Jay and will note that he had showed true talent in non-fiction writing. I know others who attempted that feat and will pointedly not bother to make a similar regarding the 'merits' of their contributions.)


The Green Zone and Basra airport 'handovers' are worth one sentence outside the real estate listings. If that. Timothy Williams (New York Times) wisely does not attempt to make it the thrust of his report and includes some details on the area that is thought to be the one to watch (including thought to be the one to watch by Barack's transition team):


Mosul, located about 250 miles north of Baghdad, is in a region contested by Sunni arabs and Kurds, and where Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, a homegrown Sunni extremist group that American intelligence agencies say is led by foreigners, has been active.
The city's Christian minority was the focus of repeated attacks last year, forcing thousands to flee, although many have returned.
Nineveh Province is also the buffer zone between the central government in Baghdad and the semiautonomous Kurdistan region in Iraq's far north. About 5,000 American soldiers are stationed there.

Reuters reported this morning that tribal Sheikh Mohammed Abdullah Salih was entertaining a group of "Sunni Arab tribal leaders" for lunch when a bomber arrived and detonated his or her bomb -- killing his/herself and wounding somewhere between 42 and 100 people (depending on the source). And the death toll? BBC reports at least 30 dead. Anthony Shadid and Saad Sarhan (Washington Post) report, "Iraqi officials said the assailant, a relative of the sheik, was a familiar presence around the house, making it easier for him to pass unsearched through an entrance usually reserved for women in the conservative town of Yusufiya, about 12 miles south of Baghdad." And, yes, it does have to do with upcoming elections (scheduled for January 31st). Sami al-Jumaily (Reuters) explains the get-togehter was "a feast for Sunni Arab electoral candidates and tribal leaders". When you read the garbage about war over and the latest waves of Operation Happy Talk get up to the neck, remember what the 'reporters' forget: The UN has warned repeatedly that violence will increase as the provincial elections approach. Even the US State Dept has echoed those warnings.

In other reported violence . . .


Bombings?

Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that left four people wounded, a Mosul roadside bombing that left two people wounded. Reuters notes a Mosul bombing the injured a police officers.

Shootings?

Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 person shot dead in Mosul. Reuters notes an armed attack on Mussayab checkpoint where 3 guards were killed and six more were left wounded.

Richard Sisk (New York Daily News) reported Wednesday night, "Two U.S. troops died of combat wounds in Iraq Wednesday and a British Royal Marine was killed in Afghanistan to end a year that put the two wars on different trajectories. The latest casualties brought the U.S. death toll in Iraq for 2008 to 314, the lowest total since the 2003 invasion, when 486 were killed. A total of 4,221 U.S. troops have been killed in Iraq. " The Iraq deaths were noted in Wednesday's snapshot. We're noting Sisk here because he's the only one who treated the deaths as worthy of a report -- as opposed to an aside in the midst of a report on something else.

The transition to Iraqi control is . . . stuck in the mud. Ned Parker and Ali Hameed (Los Angles Times) report that January 1st came and went with little change, "On the first day of the new era, the Iraqi soldiers were still following U.S. soldiers' instructions on what route to take and whom to talk to. The Americans motioned when to ask residents for information about recent Sunni militant attacks or to tell residents that Iraqi forces, not the Americans, were now in charge here.The early-morning patrol underscored the delicate nature of what everyone calls a transition, where the American officers refer to their job as partnering with Iraqi combat units, now that a U.S.-Iraq security pact has gone into effect." The 'transition' is not unlike the November 'handover' of the "Awakening" Council from US to Baghdad control. All this time later, over a 1/3 are still under US control and the word is it will be "months" before that 'transition' is complete.


In the US, Lizette Alvarez (New York Times) teams with Dan Frosch for the beat she's long covered. The latest installment is "A Focus on Violence by G.I.'s Back From War." From the article, and focusing on Colorado:


Nine current or former members of Fort Carson's Fourth Brigade Combat Team have killed someone or were charged with killings in the last three years after returning from Iraq. Five of the slayings took place last year alone. In addition, charges of domestic violence, rape and sexual assault have risen sharply.Prodded by Senator Ken Salazar, Democrat of Colorado, the base commander began an investigation of the soldiers accused of homicide. An Army task force is reviewing their recruitment, medical and service records, as well as their personal histories, to determine if the military could have done something to prevent the violence. The inquiry was recently expanded to include other serious violent crimes.
Now the secretary of the Army, Pete Geren, says he is considering conducting an Army-wide review of all soldiers "involved in violent crimes since returning" from Iraq and Afghanistan, according to a letter sent to Mr. Salazar in December. Mr. Geren wrote that the Fort Carson task force had yet to find a specific factor underlying the killings, but that the inquiry was continuing.
Focusing attention on soldiers charged with killings is a shift for the military, which since the start of the war in Iraq has largely deflected any suggestion that combat could be a factor in violent behavior among some returning service members.

Past work by Alvarez on this issue includes the February piece she and Deborah Sontag did entitled "When Strains on Military Families Turn Deadly," her July piece "After the Battle, Fighting the Bottle at Home," her January article with Sontag "Combat Trauma Takes the Witness Stand" and her August "War Veterans’ Concussions Are Often Overlooked."


While the assault on Gaza continues and US president-elect Barack Obama continues to remain silent, 2008 Green Party presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney writes (at Dissident Voice) of the assault on the vessel Dignity -- which carried her, medical personnel and medical supplies -- by the Israeli navy:


It's official now. We've been told that the sturdy, wood construction of our boat, Dignity, is the reason we are still alive. Fiberglass would probably not have withstood the impact of the Israeli attack and under different circumstances, we might not be here to tell the story. Even at that, the report that came to us yesterday after the Captain and First Mate went back to Sour (Tyre) to inspect the boat was that it was sinking, the damage is extensive, and the boat will take, in their estimation, at least one month to repair. Tomorrow, we will bring the Dignity from Sour to Beirut. And now, we must decide what to do and from where we will do it and how we are to get back to wherever that might be.
My personal, and I know the group's, thanks must go to Al Jazeera, that allowed three of their reporters to be onboard with us on our voyage. As a result, Al Jazeera carried the story of the Dignity live, from castoff in Cyprus when our spirits were high, right up through the menacing maneuvers of the huge, super fast Israeli ships before they rammed us, the Israeli calls on the ship phone after the ramming calling us terrorists and subversives and telling us to return to Cyprus (even though the Israelis later claimed that they didn't know who we were, they knew enough about us to tell us where we had come from), and the fact that we didn't have enough fuel to follow their instructions, right up to their threat to fire at us if we didn't turn around, ending with our beaten-up boat limping into Sour harbor in Lebanon. Al Jazeera carried our story as "breaking news" and performed a real service to its audience and to us. Al Jazeera called the Israelis to inquire about the incident right as it was happening and I am sure the Israelis were prepared to leave none to tell the story. Al Jazeera told the story and documented it as it was happening.
One of those Al Jazeera reporters with us was Sami El-Haj, who was detained in Guantanamo by the United States for six incredibly long years. What an honor to even exchange glances with such a humble man who had endured so much pain at the hands of the U.S. government. I apologized to him that my tax dollars were being used in such a despicable way. And Sami's crime according to the U.S.? Born in Sudan, and reporting for Al Jazeera in Afghanistan, Sami was the wrong color, the wrong nationality, the wrong religion, reporting for the wrong news outfit, telling us the truth about a wrong war. And for that he survived incarceration for six long years. Sami El-Haj, Guantanamo prisoner number 345.Another incredibly committed journalist who was with us was CNN's Karl Penhaul. Karl reported the truth even when his own station was repeating Israeli disinformation. The fact that we were traveling with these alert journalists added to the flat-footedness and obvious crudeness of the Israeli response. Sadly, Israel has changed its story too many times to count, and that's because they are not telling the truth.
We lived to tell the story. Karl's incredible reporting, just a portion of our story, can be seen on CNN where there's also video and a photo of our damaged boat. A little more of the story and film of the extensive damage can be seen.

Those 'left' voices claiming to give a damn about the Palestinians -- you can find them at any outlet, this is the only story they can cover these days -- how many of them voted for Cynthia McKinney? Or Ralph Nader? Not too damn many. Most deluded themselves that Corporatist War Hawk Barack Obama would bring 'change' and he did! While George HW Bush golfed in Kennebunkport as a MidEast slaughter was ongoing, Barack took his game to Hawaii. 'Change' you can choke on. While Barack plays mute, Iraq's Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued this statement Wednesday:

Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari "We Support any Effort Agreed by Arab States Concerning the Israeli Bombing" Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari stated that Iraq supports any effort by Arab states on the Israeli shelling of areas in the Gaza Strip controlled by Hamas in a statement to Al-Jazeera on Saturday and that the Iraqi stance is with Arab solidarity and what the Arab countries agreed upon. Minister Zebari added that Iraq would be in favor of any decision in this regard. Israel launched air raids on positions in the Gaza Strip controlled by Hamas and killed two hundred people.

Public TV notes. Washington Week begins airing on many PBS stations tonight (check local listings) and sitting down with Gwen will be Doyle McManus (Los Angeles Times), Dan Balz (Washington Post), David Wessel (Wall St. Journal) and Alexi Simendinger (National Journal). Topics will include Barack, Blagojevich and, possibly, who Gwen will cook home meals for if Condi returns to the West Coast? To Condi on the West Coast waiting . . .

Meanwhile NOW on PBS (check local listings, begins airing tonight in most markets) offers:

With the economy in a downward spiral, more and more people are taking advantage of credit card offers to make ends meet, but are the credit card companies actually taking advantage of their customers?
In the week in which federal regulators adopted sweeping new rules for the credit card industry, NOW meets families struggling to pay off their credit card debt. Such debt has become significantly larger thanks to questionable industry practices like doubling and tripling interest rates, increasing fees and penalties, and shrinking credit limits.
We meet people like Andrew Spurlock and his wife Michelle, who are raising three children while watching the interest rates and fees on their credit cards skyrocket. Michelle was horrified when her interest rate jumped from seven percent to 30 percent from one day to the next, despite claiming she always paid her monthly minimum. Michelle and her husband are fighting off financial ruin as they struggle to pay off their debt.
Harvard Professor Elizabeth Warren, an expert on debt and the middle class, says credit card companies are deceiving customers in order to maximize profits. "You would think that if you upheld your end of the contract that the contract would be binding. But in the case of credit cards, you would be wrong," Warren, tells NOW.This week, NOW takes a hard look at the small print in credit card offers, and at Congressional legislation aimed at regulating the industry.


Meanwhile on broadcast TV (CBS) Sunday, 60 Minutes:

Is It Murder? With drunken driving fatalities staying constant despite all the campaigns against the crime, some prosecutors are pursuing harsher penalties against perpetrators, including long prison terms for those who caused deaths. Bob Simon reports. Watch Video Mind Reading Neuroscience has learned so much about how we think and the brain activity linked to certain thoughts that it is now possible – on a very basic scale - to read a person’s mind. Lesley Stahl reports. Watch Video The Mad Scientist Of Football Texas Tech coach Mike Leach made up for a lack of money and top talent by creating an innovative offense that’s changing the game of college football and beating bigger schools which regularly attract the best talent in the nation. Scott Pelley reports. Watch Video 60 Minutes, this Sunday, Jan. 4, 2009, at 7 p.m. ET/PT. Kennedy Center Honors: Streisand and Freeman
Barbra Streisand and Morgan Freeman are among this year’s honorees by the Kennedy Center. Mike Wallace interviewed Barbra Streisand in 1991 and Morgan Freeman in 2005. Streisand Video Freeman Watch

Public radio notes. The following programs will air on WBAI, the first on Monday:

Monday, 2-3pm
Cat Radio Cafe
Author Edmund White on his play "Terre Haute," based on imagined conversations between literary lion Gore Vidal and Oklahoma City bomber Timothy Mc Veigh; playwright Andrea James and actors from "Yanagai! Yanagai!" a protest play from aboriginal Australia; and actor/director Roger Hendricks Simon on his award-winning independent film "The Sublet." Hosted by Janet Coleman and David Dozer
Broadcasting at WBAI/NY 99.5 FM
Streaming live at WBAI
Archived at Cat Radio Cafe


And:

A CELEBRATION OF JAMES JOYCE Monday June 16th 7 PM-4 AM • Listen to part 1 • Our yearly commemoration of Leopold Bloom's walk through Dublin includes readings from "Ulysses" and other works in the Joyce canon, as well as excerpts from Beckett and Irish song. With Alec Baldwin, Anne Meara, Alvin Epstein, Bob Dishy, Kate Valk, Jim Fletcher, Aaron Beall, Brian O'Doherty, Emily Mitchell, John O'Callahan, David Pincus, Zeroboy, Judy Graubart, Janet Coleman, David Dozer, Kate O'Brien, playwright Richard Maxwell and director Caraid O'Brien as Molly Bloom. Produced by Peabody Award winner Larry Josephson for WBAI.

2008 is over. Today the Los Angeles Times offers "2008 year in review." In this community, 2008 has been covered by the following: Betty's "Thinning out the herd (2008)" went up Thursday as did Kat's "2008 in music" and the "2008: The Year of Living Hormonally (Year in Review)." "2008 in books (Martha & Shirley)" -- Martha and Shirley's book commentary which went up Tuesday and Ruth's "Ruth's 2008 Public Radio Report" went up Wednesday. And Sunday, Third offered the following "Editorial: Democracy or fan club?," "TV: 2008, the lows and really lows," "The 2008 Bronze Boobies," "Best and worst in hardcover music journalism," "Music 2009" and "2009 in DVDs."



iraq the washington post anthony shadidthe los angeles timesned parkerali hameedtimothy williamsthe new york timeslizette alvarezdeborah sontagdan froschhoward mustoefiona macdonaldmcclatchy newspapersleila fadel60 minutescbs newsnow on pbspbswbaicat radio cafejanet colemandavid dozerwashington weekrichard siskthe third estate sunday reviewruths reportkats kornerthomas friedman is a great man

Roland Burris is the Senator

Like C.I., I know Bobby Rush and have for many years. Rebecca called me right at the end of lunch today. It's been hectic all week. Sunny's on vacation (good for her) so I'm rushing to return calls between appointments. I did not even have time to go to The Common Ills this morning.

Rebecca called me to ask why I had not cross posted? I asked, "Cross post what?"

I'm not going to be silent while Bobby's under attack or disrespected. I also had no time today to cross post. I asked Rebecca to beg (I used the word beg) C.I. to include whatever she wrote in full in today's snapshot which she did. (Thank you, Rebecca. Thank you, C.I.)

If you're late to what's going on, Roland Burris has been named by the governor to fill Barack Obama's Senate seat. Burris is a man with a lifetime of public service, elected to many offices, experienced, Howard University alumni, an incredible resume. Bobby Rush stood up for Burris yesterday when the announcement was made and has continued to do so.

There is an effort to keep Burris out of the Senate. Why? Because people are mad at the governor. As C.I. wrote, if you didn't like it, you should have impeached Rod Blagojevich. He wasn't impeached. He has the power to appoint the Senator. He has done that. It has Roland Burris.

Harry Reid, who the hell do you think you are? I know who you are. You're trash who is anti-choice. You're King Whitey living in White Land.

Harry thinks he can deny seating Burris. That's not going to happen. As Bobby has pointed out, that is racism, that is wrong and it's not happening.

I'm going to try to keep this as basic as possible.

1) Blagojevich remains the governor.

2) Blagojevich made his appointment.

3) Burris, a distinguished person was appointed.

4) Burris is the Senator.

C.I. goes over it so much better (of course). I am rushing because we're headed out. I wasn't even planning on blogging tonight (as I wrote last night). But I did want to weigh in on this issue. Now I have to jump in the shower and get dressed.


"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Wednesday, December 31, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces deaths, hype passes for hope and neither are realistic, and more.

Today the US military announced: "A U.S. Soldier died, Dec. 31, in Balad, Iraq from injuries sustained during combat operations, Dec. 30." And they announced: "A Multi-National Division -- Baghdad Soldier died from wounds sustained during a mortar attack in Baghdad Dec. 31." The announcements bring the total number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4221. The toll for the month thus far is 14. You could say, "The death toll so far is the same as the media reported for October" but . . . 14 was the October death toll; however, the media rushed to insist it was 13. So it'll be cute to see if anyone references the October death toll in their reporting and, if so, how they do it. If your outlet reported 13 and never corrected it, you're really pushing it to just say, "The same number as in October." 13 was the death toll for July -- the lowest monthly death toll for 2008.

Speaking of bad reporting . . . The Philadelphia Inquirer's Trudy Rubin wrote a laughable column (another one) that was published in the US on Christmas Eve and was published Monday in Taiwan. Trudy sees "signs of change on the streets of Baghdad" but, silly fool, she also believes that the US treaty with the puppet government in Baghdad will be followed. There are puppets in Baghdad smarter than Trudes. Where to start?

The "US Troops Withdrawal Agreement" is what the treaty was called by al-Maliki and what foolish idiots believed it was. It was no such thing. The treaty was needed to grant another one-year extension. The United Nations' Security Council could have extended the mandate for a year but the White House didn't want that. (Nor did al-Maliki who had -- two years in a row -- already gone around Parliament to get the mandate extended twice.) The treaty needed to cover a year. When the US began addressing it (in 2007), they frequently spoke of that reality. Trudy (and Patrick Cockburn) must have been sleeping. 2009 is the only year that both sides have to follow. 2010 can find the contract altered or cancelled. The same with 2011. In 2010, both parties may choose to replace it with a new treaty. It is a one-year contract with two options for renewal.

In mid-November, al-Maliki took to Iraq TV (state TV) to declare, "The pact stipulates that U.S. troops are to withdraw from cities and towns by June 30, 2009. And it is a deadline that will not be extended. It also says that [the US] should withdraw from Iraqi land, water and air space by January 1, 2011 -- which is a deadline that will not be extended." That was back when he was calling it the "US Withdrawal Agreement."

Nouri and Bully Boy were shoulder-to-shoulder recently. Remember that? At al-Maliki's palace? Maybe people forget because the one-shoe, two-shoe incident attracted so much attention? But check the transcript at the White House and see what al-Maliki's calling it? Is he calling it the "US Withdrawal Agreement"? No. He's using the same term the White House did "SOFA" -- Status Of Forces Agreement. It's not a withdrawal agreement. And at the December 20th Green Zone press conference, Iraqi Maj Gen Qassim Atta called the treaty the "US Withdrawal Agreement"? No. He referred to the June 2009 'withdrawal' as being "according to what's been said during -- the agreements, an agreement, the security agreement".

The US Withdrawal Agreement was just a brand al-Maliki slapped on it in November when he was attempting to pressure Parliament to vote for it. Since then, that 'term' is no longer used, not even by al-Maliki. Now let's deal with the June claim Trudy's pimping. From the December 22nd snapshot:

Today Elisabeth Bumiller (New York Times) examines the realities of the so-called US withdrawal from Iraq and it's not a pretty sight. Bumiller and Thom Shanker reported last week on how the 'plan' presented to president-elect Barack Obama -- the Petraeus-Odierno plan -- wouldn't allow for that campaign 'promise' of a US withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq. Friday Julian E. Barnes (Los Angeles Times) reported that word games could allow for the impression that promises were being kept -- including what the treaty masquerading as a Status Of Forces Agreement allegedly promised. For context, Sudarsan Raghavan and Qais Mizher (Washington Post) explained last week, "American combat troops will remain inside Iraqi cities to train and mentor Iraqi forces after next summer, despite a security agreement that calls for their withdrawal from urban areas by June 30, the top U.S. military commander said Saturday." With all that as the backdrop, Bumiller explains today that "a semantic dance" has begun at the Pentagon over what qualifies as a combat soldier and, with regards to the treaty, "Even though the agreement with the Iraqi government calls for all American combat troops to be out of the cities by the end of June, military planners are now quietly acknowledging that many will stay behind as renamed "trainers" and "advisers" in what are effectively combat roles. In other words, they will still be engaged in combat, just called something else." Bumiller notes that "trainers" and "advisers" will be the renaming terms for "combat troops" in order to keep them in Iraq: "In other words, they will still be engaged in combat, just called something else." Of Barack, she notes, "it has become clear that his definition of ending the war means leaving behind many thousands of American troops."

So that means we've taken care of The Trudys and their "withdraw from major cities in June!" nonsense. (And it's already been learned that even the private contractors/mercenaries clause may not stand.) With the well known history of US treaties, you really had to be naive to think it would work out any differently. Naive or a liar.

So let's back up to this 'safer' claim. The same December 20th Green Zone press conference found Maj Gen Atta expounding on what's in store for the coming year: "The year of 2009 is going to witness a lot more coordination between Baghdad Amanat and the BOC and also the traffic police to reopen all the closed roads and streets and to also lift or remove all the concrete barries or security barriers, and [. . . .]" Really? And the security's going to hold? Hmmm. It's very likely that some of the news outlets pulling reporters from Iraq and sending them to Afghanistan may have to alter those plans at some point in the new year.

Meanwhile Campbell Robertson (New York Times) reports on some things that actually are planned to happen. On January 1st, warrants will be needed. Arrest warrants and detention warrants. The former must be received before arrests, the latter can be granted as late as 24 hours after a detention. So, Robertson explains, the US military is doing the house-to-house searches and other activities they can still do before the January 1st date when they will (may)be required to consult the Iraqi judiciary.Robertson notes that Company C of the "First Battalion [,35th Armor Regiment] has been trying to complete missions, like general house-to-house searches, that will soon become far more complicated, if not impossible" but, this month, as they were attempting to gather the backing that they hoped would result in a warrant being issued in January on one suspect, they came across him and "did what they had been doing freely for nearly six years: they detained him on the spot."
"(may)be"? As Capt Lloyd B. Osafo points out in the article, "Who knows if the Iraqis are going to follow all of this to a T? That's my personal opinion about all of this: who knows?" And the doubt is only increased by Iraqi Maj Hasson S. Hussein al-Zoubadi whining about how the Iraqi military will now have to follow these new rules. Robertson points out, "Actually, the agreement changes almost nothing for the Iraqi security forces: they are supposed to have been operating under the warrant-based system since 2007." When they haven't been it backs up Osafo's opinion.

Also expected in the new year is the holding of provincial elections. They are scheduled for January 31st and Maj Gen Atta was talking them up in the December 20th press conference as well. Missy Ryan and Andrew Dobbie (Reuters) report Mowaffaq al-Hamdani was shot dead in a Mosul cafe today and that al-Hamdani was "a candidate for the Sunni Arab party Iraq for Us". Following the shooting, police pursued the killers and 1 police officer was shot dead while another was injured. The reporters note, "The results of the vote, which will choose provincial council leaders in 14 of Iraq's 18 provinces, will set the tone for parliamentary elections due at the end of 2009. The government of Nineveh province, where Mosul is located, has been in the hands of minority Kurds since many of the Sunni Arab majority boycotted the last provincial elections in 2005."

Turning to some of today's other reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Mosul bombing that followed another bombing (apparently the first was to draw people in for the second bombing) that left 4 dead and seven people wounded while a Sinjar car bombing claimed 5 lives and left forty-five wounded.

Corpses?

Reuters drops back to Tuesday to note 1 corpse discovered in Mosul and another just outside of Mosul.


CBS and AP note that New Year's Eve is being celebrated around the world. But not in the allegedly 90% democracy Iraq, Sam Dagher (New York Times) reports that Baghdad residents will not be allowed to celebrate the New Year tonight. It's been outlawed.Dagher explains that hotels and clubs have been ordered to close down (and cancel reservations). Why? Shi'ites have a holiday. Remember the back-patting al-Maliki just received last week? "Christmas is a legal holiday in Iraq for the first time ever!" was what the headlines screamed at many outlets. Murharram is going on! All must be placed on hold for this Shi'ite religious period (Shi'ite but not Sunni).

Turning to US politics. Roland Burris has been appointed to the US Senate by Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich. Blagojevich is governor and the state constitution gives him the right to appoint the replacement for Barack Obama who has left the Senate for the White House.The Illinois legislature has already taken the issue of Blagojevich to the state court and the court took a pass. The legislature had it in their power to impeach Rod Blagojevich and still might. However, they have yet to impeach him.He has appointed Burris. That appointment can't legally be overturned. And though the Illinois Secretary of State insists he will not confirm Burris, that's not really allowed in the state constitution. The Secretary is not allowed to override a governor's choice. Those egging the SoS on should be ashamed because they're applauding the subversion of the law. On the front page of today's New York Times, Monica Davey offers up "Defiant Illinois Governor Names Pick for Obama Seat" which includes an offensive statement:The choice of Mr. Burris immediately injected the issue of race into the appointment process, which may very well have been party of the governor's calculation. Representative Bobby L. Rush, Democrat of Illinois, who was called to the lectern at the news conference by Mr. Burris said he did not believe any senator "wants to go on record to deny one African-American from being seated in the U.S. Senate." The offensive statement is Davey's first one and we'll be using "Black" and not African-American in this entry, just FYI.Barack Obama is a person of color, he is bi-racial. He was the person holding the seat. Of course a person of color should have been considered to replace Barack. More importantly, appointments have often been a traditional road to address disenfranchisement. What's especially offensive about Davey's sentence is that she writes for the New York Times. New York which has their first Black governor, David Paterson. And they may have Hillary's Senate seat up for grabs but no one at Davey's paper has advocated for the governor to appoint a person of color to the Senate seat should Hillary become the next Secretary of State. Not only has the paper refused to advocate for it, they haven't even suggested it. (Marcia has raised the issue here and she's noted a qualified woman of color here.)Blagojevich may or may not be innocent. The courts will decide that. But the state legislature could have removed him if they had the votes and the will to do so. They did not. His powers include naming a replacement senator. If they didn't want him to do so, they should have impeached him (or at least tried).Blagojevich has exercised his powers and named the new US Senator from Illinois: Roland Burris. It is too late now and no loophole should give the legislature a second chance. They have had weeks and weeks to take action and they haven't done so. Too bad if they don't like the results.Shouldn't have dragged their feet.Talk of not seating Burris is offensive. The Times offers Carl Hulse's "Democrats Seek to Black Appointee to Obama's Seat, but Authority Is in Question" which addresses the disgraceful efforts now with Burris and in 1969 with Adam Clayton Powell. It really doesn't matter what Harry Reid thinks he wants, he is not the governor of the Illinois. Rod Blagojevich is and he acted within his (state) constitutional duties in appointing Burris who is qualified. The US Senate is being offensive with their threats and their claims now that they'd do this with anyone appointed by Blagojevich. No they wouldn't. And they probably won't be able to do it with Burris. The only thing that could have stopped the appointment was for the governor to be impeached. The legislature didn't do that.Roland Burris is Black. And if they're going to try to deny him his Senate seat -- which he was legally appointed to -- they are going to look very offensive and very racist. Barack Obama -- bi-racial -- has already issued a statement saying Burris shouldn't be seated. A bi-racial man with all the breaks, spoiled from youth and barely out of his youth, wants to deny a Black man who took part in the Civil Rights struggle of the sixties? He wants to deny a Howard University graduate? He better check himself real quick because this will not play well and someone better remind Barack that racism allows him to be considered "Black" but that's a day pass, a temporary one, and it can be pulled at any point. Attempting to deny Roland Burris a seat in the US Senate could result in some of the most pointed criticism Barack's yet to receive.Roland Burris will be only the fifth Black person to become a US Senator. Hiram Revels was the first (1870, from Mississippi), Blanche K. Bruce (1874, Mississippi),Edward Brooke (1967 - 1979, Massachusetts) and Carol Moseley Braun, the first Black woman elected to the US Senate (1993-1999).Barack is bi-racial, he is not Black. (That's why we're using "Black" and not "African-American" for this entry.) Burris would be the fifth Black US Senator. And someone thinks he can be denied just because they're all huffy over Rod Blagojevich?What Blagojevich did was legal and within his rights. Efforts to deny Roland W. Burris his Senate seat will be seen as racism due to the historical pattern.Trivia note, like Burris, Edward Brooke was a Howard University alumni.Andrew Malcom's blog post "Inside Blagojevich's bold, brash &*%$^# pick to replace Obama" (Los Angeles Times' Top of the Ticket) does a better job than Davey's overly long article in addressing some of the realities involved. As Mike wrote last night, "I hope he does well by his state and its citizens and I say, 'Congratulations, Senator Burris'."Disclosure: I've known Bobby Rush for years (and years). The only participant in this (that I'm aware of) whom I know. (I don't know Burris, I don't know Blagojevich.)
Barack remains in the news despite his tropical vacation. While he vacations, Gaza is under assault. Rebecca has been following that and noted last night Cynthia McKinney joined doctors and human rights activits on the Dignity to take medical supplies and help to the Palestinians however the ship was attacked by the Israeli navy. Black Agenda Report points out:

President-Elect Obama has been silent on the Israeli attacks, while President George Bush has supported Israel's actions.
"I would like to ask my former colleagues in the United States Congress to stop sending weapons of mass destruction around the world," said McKinney, who was the Green Party's presidential candidate in November. "As we are about to celebrate Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's birthday, let us remember what he said. He said that the United States is the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet. And guess what: we experienced a little bit of that violence, because the weapons that are being used by Israel are weapons that were supplied by the United States government."

Vacationing Barack also remains dogged by the controversy he created when he invited homophobe Rick Warren to preside as some sort of anti-gay activist at the inauguration. Margaret Kimberly (Black Agenda Report) observes:


Obama has been courting Warren and other conservative evangelicals for some time. In June of 2006 Obama gave a speech that purported to show Democrats how to reach out to religious voters. At that time he had not yet officially declared himself a presidential candidate, but he very clearly showed his strategic hand and his political plans. He smeared religious progressives by saying that they didn't even exist and he smeared all progressives by claiming that they were hostile to religion. The much talked about speech consisted of one right wing talking point after another.
The Warren invitation is vintage Obama. Like Bush, Obama believes that he is the decider and that opinions differing from his own are to be ignored. Unlike Bush, he is savvy enough to pretend otherwise, and his smooth talking feel goodism fools many into maintaining a vow of silence about anything he does. The Warren invitation is yet another instance of the patronizing Obama telling the left that they shouldn't worry their pretty little

And Dr. Violet Socks (Reclusive Leftist) observes:



I wrote about the Warren thing when it broke, and noted at the time that -- ahem -- there's a hell of a lot more wrong with the guy than just the gay marriage thing. But who am I kidding? Women's rights don't matter. My Google news feed is full of articles and editorials on how Warren's presence at the Inauguration is an insult to right-thinking liberals everywhere -- but only because of his homophobia. There is no mention of the sexism. Thinking that women are born-to-obey is fine, apparently, but the anti-gay thing is just beyond the pale. Golly, Richard Cohen's sister even canceled her Inauguration party.
And you know what? Homophobia is awful. It's ugly primitive bigotry. Kind of like racism, which is also awful. Ridiculous to think that skin color or sexual orientation makes some humans inferior to other humans.
But sexism? Thinking women are inferior? Even preaching that women were put on earth to serve men? Eh. Whatever. Different strokes.
Forty years after the Second Wave started, and we're still at the back of the bus.

Socks' point is valid but it also needs to be noted that homophobia effects women. It effects women who are lesbians, it effects women targeted for being or suspected of being lesbians. It effects women with LGBT friends and family members and Richard Cohen's sister is a lesbian which is why he emphasized the homophobia when writing of his sister's decision to cancel a planned party to celebrate president-elect Barack's inauguration.

"2008 in books (Martha & Shirley)" -- Martha and Shirley's book commentary -- went up yesterday and Ruth's "Ruth's 2008 Public Radio Report" went up today.


iraq
the new york timeselisabeth bumiller
thom shanker
the washington postsudarsan raghavan
the los angeles timesjulian e. barnes
missy ryan
campbell robertsonsam dagher
andrew malcolmthe los angeles times
laith hammoudimcclatchy newspapers
margaret kimberley
sex and politics and screeds and attitudemikey likes itruths reportsickofitradlz