Tuesday, January 20, 2015

It can't sink lower

 Kat's "Kat's Korner: Put a DNR order on Madonna's Rebel Heart " went up as did Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "The Conversation."






 What world does Walter C. Uhler live in?

He's written "The New York Times Sinks to a New Journalistic Low in its Reporting on Ukraine" and my only response is, "Were you born yeserday?"

Hello, Iraq?

Their Iraq War coverage?

Those awful lies?

The paper might have returned to the gutter but it's impossible for it to ever sink lower.



"TV: As The Millers sank, The McCarthys rose" (Ava and C.I., The Third Estate Sunday Review):


Tyler Ritter's done a great job bringing Ronnie to life.  (Yes, Tyler is the son of the late John Ritter.)  And Tyler deserves a great deal of credit for his timing as well as his acting chops.  But anytime you've got a character who is real and relatable, you're not having to play catch up or create a grand backstory to try to make sense of the character.

It's an amazing cast which also includes strong work by Kelen Coleman and Jack McGee and, especially, Joey McIntyre.  (Yes, he is the Joey McIntyre of New Kids On The Block.)  Gerard is a real ass.  Sometimes, he's a smart ass.  Sometimes he's just an ass.  McIntyre has brought the character to life in such a way that even as you groan over Gerard's latest remark or stunt (or bringing his frightmare of a girlfriend -- Jessica St. Clair's Katrina -- for a family visit), you don't hate him, you don't dislike him, you don't turn him into Newman.  McIntyre's made Gerard a real person.

You care about all the members of the family because you know them or you are them.  


  
The Millers was built around who can say the most outrageously cruel thing to one another while The McCarthys is built around something more than bitchy.  And, most importantly, The McCarthys is laugh out loud funny.



I haven't seen the show yet.  But one of my readers, Linda, e-mailed last week about Joey McIntyre and the show so, for her, I'm excerpting the part of the review that notes him.



"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Monday, January 19, 2015.  Chaos and violence continue, Canada hikes down Mission Creep, Haider al-Abadi meets with scholars, Barack's 'plan' continues to underwhelm, and much more.


The US-led occupation of Iraq continues with Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) reporting 175 violent deaths today.  While the Canadian government acknowledges that  combat took place for Canada and the Islamic State.  Al Jazeera reports:


Canadian special forces have clashed with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant group by exchanging gunfire in Iraq in recent days, in the first confirmed ground battle between Western troops and ISIL, a senior officer has said.
The Canadians came under mortar and machine gun fire while training Iraqi troops near front lines and shot back in what Canadian special forces commander Brigadier General Michael Rouleau described as self-defence, killing the ISIL fighters. 

Rouleau said the melee had taken place in the previous seven days and was "the first time we've taken fire and returned fire" in Iraq, where the armed group has overrun large areas.


When did the exchange take place?  Laura Payton (CBC News) offers it was "sometime in the last week when they went to the front lines following a planning session with senior Iraqi leaders, their commanding officer told reporters in Ottawa on Monday."  BBC News quotes Brigadier General Michael Rouleau that the incident was "the first time we've taken fire and returned fire."

This wasn't supposed to happen.  They were supposed to be advisors and trainers.

Sound familiar?

Steven Chase (Globe and Mail) points out:

The release by the Canadian military on Monday has triggered a debate about whether mission creep is afflicting what was supposed to be a relatively limited assignment for nearly 70 elite soldiers to offer military advice to Kurdish fighters in northern Iraq.
The military and the Harper government insist these activities are not the kind of direct-combat ground operations that Canadians were assured troops would avoid in their role as instructors and trainers to peshmerga forces battling the Islamic State.


Mission creep is always a possibility.  A point the American people should remember.

And as the news of combat for Canadian troops gets traction,  There are calls for more foreign troops to be sent into Iraq.  AFP reports, "US Senator John McCain on Monday urged the deployment of international ground forces to combat jihadists in Syria and Iraq, as he toured the Middle East with a Senate delegation."



While McCain called for more troops, Iraq's Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi met with some US scholars.  al-Abadi's office issued the following today:


PM Al-Abadi Discusses Developments in Iraq and the Region with American Think Tank Specialists


 

 
 
 
January 19 2015

Prime Minister Dr. Haider Al-Abadi met today with researchers and specialists in Iraqi affairs and counter-terrorism from US-based think tanks.


During the meeting with Dr. Kenneth Pollack, Dr. Kimberly Kagan and Dr. Fred Kagan, they discussed security challenges facing Iraq and the region as part of the war against Daesh terrorists.


Prime Minister Al-Abadi stressed the need for greater awareness in the international community about the global threat of terrorist organizations. He called for greater efforts to dry up their funding streams, challenge extremist ideologies and develop more comprehensive intelligence mechanisms to monitor their movements and ultimately eliminate the threat posed to the entire world.


The American delegation in turn recognized the positive developments taking place in Iraq under Prime Minister Al-Abadi's leadership and welcomed the recent military successes achieved by the Iraqi Security Forces as part of the war against Daesh.



Kenneth Pollack is with the centrist Brooking Institute and right-wing Kim Kagan heads the Institute for the Study of War and her arm candy Fred Kagan is right-wing as well.


US President Barack Obama has no real plan for Iraq.  He began bombing Iraq in August but bombing was never a plan.

It stopped being effective long ago.

And all these months later, Barack has nothing to show for the billion-dollars-plus he's wasted bombing Iraq.

The press is starting to notice.

Martin Chulov (Guardian) reports:

Iraq’s vice-president for reconciliation, Iyad Allawi, said a lack of a political process between the Shias who dominate the country’s power base, and disenfranchised Sunnis was a “grave mistake” that could mean the air attacks end up achieving little.
“The whole strategy needs to be revisited and readdressed and the international allies should be part of this,” Allawi told the Guardian. “People are asking me what will come after Isis. What would be the destiny of [local] people? Are they going to be accused of supporting or defeating Isis? Would they be accused of being Ba’athists? It is going to be really difficult for them to engage without reconciliation.”

If the Islamic State was defeated tomorrow and run out of Iraq it wouldn't make a damn bit of difference.


Tim Arango and Omar al-Jawoshy (New York Times) report:


On any given day, Sunni women gather here in search of answers about their men, some of whom have been jailed for years.
“The Iraqi Army took my son in March of 2014,” said Tawfika Abbas. “Until now, I don’t know where he is. Zero information.”
Another woman, Entisar Gannos, cried for her four sons: one jailed since 2006, another since 2010, and the other two since 2011, all without court hearings.
Their grief, and the pain of not knowing what is happening to their loved ones, highlight a vital task for Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi: reforming Iraq’s criminal justice system. Well-documented abuses of the system, including long detentions without trial and confessions obtained by torture, are the primary grievance of the country’s Sunni minority.


The US government has failed to lead on diplomacy.


There are no accomplishments to point to.


And, more and more, Iraqis are making that clear, making clear that there has been no change.






  • The world must hear the voice of sunni civilians not supporting Shiite militias to kill civilians this not solves the problems









  • Lastly, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America issued the following last Friday:



    New York, N.Y. (January 16, 2015) – According to a new report released today by the Pentagon, the number of active duty suicides decreased in 2013 compared to 2012. However, the study revealed that a staggering 479 suicides were still recorded among active duty servicemembers, Reservists and National Guard members, compared to 522 in 2012. The annual Department of Defense Suicide Event Report (DoDSER), which includes suicide attempts and deaths, is available here.
    The release of the DoD survey coincides with a study to be released by the Annals of Epidemiology, which confirms that the annual suicide rate for veterans is roughly double that of civilians with similar demographics. Both studies underscore the need for mental health care reform legislation promoted by Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA). Their bill, the Clay Hunt Suicide Prevention for American Veterans (SAV) Act, would increase veteran access to mental health care services and boost accountability within VA’s suicide prevention programs. The bill, which unanimously passed the House on Monday, will be heard by the Senate Veterans Affairs’ Committee on Wed., Jan. 21, before being sent to the floor.
    “The Pentagon’s report is only the tip of the iceberg of our nation’s warrior mental health care crisis,” said IAVA CEO and Founder Paul Rieckhoff. “Suicides from active-duty servicemembers and veterans are categorized separately in reports from the DoD and VA, clouding the big picture and making the crisis seem smaller than it is. In reality, these men and women represent the same population with the same risk factors, but are just at different points in their careers. And as the Annals of Epidemiology study underscores, the suicide rate among veterans may be higher than we have ever understood. Both of these reports confirm what IAVA and our members have known for years: that our country is failing to adequately meet the mental health care needs of our veterans. Veteran and military suicide is not just a veteran or military issue — it is a complex, national public health issue. We call on the President talk about this national crisis in Tuesday’s State of the Union address, and support IAVA’s Clay Hunt SAV Act and other policy efforts to combat veteran suicide. We also call on Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) – the first female combat veteran elected to serve in the U.S. Senate – to endorse veteran mental health care reforms during the Republican response to the State of the Union address.”
    “Although the news is difficult, we thank Secretary Hagel and his team for their commitment in combating suicides among our troops and vets. As a combat veteran himself, the Secretary is acutely aware of the challenges our soldiers face when they return home from war. In the past year the Secretary and his team have engaged with our staff and members on ways to increase quality mental health care access for active-duty military,” Rieckhoff concluded.
    In IAVA’s 2014 Member Survey, 47 percent of respondents know at least one Iraq or Afghanistan veteran who has attempted suicide, while 40 percent of respondents know someone who has died by suicide, up three points from 2013. A staggering 31 percent of respondents have thought about taking their own life since joining the military.
    To support its legislative efforts, IAVA launched a petition in December after Sen. Coburn blocked the Clay Hunt SAV Act. To date, the grassroots petition currently includes more than 139,500 signatures of IAVA members and supporters. Click here to learn more.
    In 2014, IAVA provided 2,147 veterans with comprehensive and personalized transition support from Masters level social workers through its Rapid Response Referral Program (RRRP). IAVA also connects veterans to mental health services through its partnership with the VA’s Veterans Crisis Line. The services works to ensure that every servicemember, veteran, family member and provider knows that there is free and confidential help available 24 hours a day through phone, text and online. Veterans, or those concerned about veterans, can call 800-273-8255 and press 1 to be directly connected to qualified responders.

    Note to media: Email press@iava.org or call 212-982-9699 to speak with IAVA CEO and Founder Paul Rieckhoff or IAVA leadership.
    Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (www.IAVA.org) is the nation's first and largest nonpartisan, nonprofit organization representing veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan and has nearly 300,000 Member Veterans and civilian supporters nationwide. Celebrating its 10th year anniversary, IAVA recently received the highest rating - four-stars - from Charity Navigator, America's largest charity evaluator.









    Sunday, January 18, 2015

    Phoebe Snow's live album

    "This week's playlist" (The Third Estate Sunday Review):

    Never Been Gone



    1) Carly Simon's Never Been Gone.

    2) Prince's Controversy.

    3) The Jimi Hendrix Experience's BBC Sessions.


    4) Stevie Nicks' In Your Dreams.

    5) The Mamas and the Papas' Deliver.

    6) Phoebe Snow's Phoebe Snow Live.

    7) The Doors' The Doors.

    8) Bonnie Raitt's Slipstream.

    9) Etta James' All The Way.

    10)  Wilco's A Ghost Is Born.



    Phoebe Snow was a highly gifted singer and guitarist.

    She started her run of classics with the album Poetry Man which included the hit title track (which she wrote).

    Her personal life included a daughter with special needs.  Parenting meant she more often turned to recording jingles.

    I can remember being in Musicland (it was a music store) in 1989 and being so excited to see a new album by her, Something Real.

    I got it (on cassette) and it contained one classic after another -- the title and "If I Can Just Get Through The Night" especially stood out.

    Both tracks showed up on her live album in 2008.  I really think that was her finest album.  I loved what she did with "Natural Wonder" and "You're My Girl."  "The Other Girlfriend was haunting."

    If you're new to Phoebe, Phoebe Snow Live is the album to begin with.  You will marvel over the singing, there was no one else like her.







    "Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
    Saturday, January 17, 2014.  Today we look at Iraq in terms of the US zooming in on Cindy Sheehan and how she is us and we are her in all the ways that are beautiful and that are ugly and, mainly, what it likely means for the 2016 elections.


    Anyone can comment about movies -- they're a democratic art form.  That doesn't mean they can comment intelligently.

    I have no interest in seeing Clint Eastwood's latest film.  I'm not a friend of Clint's, I'm not a fan of his films (as an actor or a director) and I don't care for the war combat genre (whose only real classics for me come from Brian De Palma: Redacted and Casualties of War).  Clint's new film is American Sniper.

    I've not insulted it and have no plans to.

    It's not a film I'd make or choose to see but it's not shocking that Clint was interested in the topic and I'm sure he told it cinematic manner.  We noted the film in the December 30th snapshot.  And yesterday's snapshot included IAVA's congratulations to Clint and company for their Academy Award nominations.

    Good luck to Clint and company and, for those who've missed it over the ten long years Ava and I've covered TV at Third, I prefer comedies.  After comedies, I like a good thriller (Alan J. Pakula was one of the masters and no one does suspense like Brian De Palma). I'm also not interested in sitting through films where women do nothing and are discarded on the sidelines. (In fairness to Clint, the source material for his film meant it would focus on a man's journey and the setting didn't lead to much more for women than what Natalie Wood did in Rebel Without A Cause.)

    I say that to explain what has been a 'controversial' position.  (Sadly for the e-mailers, I don't avoid controversy, I court it.)  I have defended the film and Clint's right to make it and that's upset a few e-mailers (who haven't seen the movie but no when their 'leaders' stir up s**t, it's their job to eat it).

    My stance is an artistic stance and if that's too much for you maybe you can bury your head in the sand.

    Here's a reality you might try grasping: If you didn't view the art, you don't have an opinion on what it says.

    Friday, Cindy Sheehan wrote a deeply stupid post not limited to this:


    Along with another glorification of the War State (Zero Dark Thirty) winning best film title at the Oscars last year and Hollywood’s long history of working with the Pentagon (or War Department) to make decades of Warnography, I was reminded about an episode in my own history.


    First, the Academy has no award for Best Film Title.  Possibly, Cindy means Best Picture?

    Best Picture went to Ben Affleck's Argo.

    But again, when faux outrage is stirred, the sheep know to eat s**t and swallow.  Kathyrn Bigelow was made fair game by a cabal that's worked publicly and repeatedly since their attempt to destroy the Academy Award chances for Ron Howard's A Beautiful Mind.  It's cute the way this group operates and how, when they destroy, they get away with it -- or think they do.  But that's a tale for another a day -- and when we had time to trace the group's roots which go back decades.



    Instead, we'll focus on Cindy's explanations and fantasies of why a film wasn't made of her life.

    I don't have the time -- or interest -- in going into copyrights and authorship and the need for people to sign consent agreements to be portrayed in films -- these are legal issues that clearly escape Cindy and I'm not in the mood to spoonfeed today.

    We would get lost in the weeds attempting to explain all that.

    We're going to focus on film.

    Cindy believes there was a possible plot to prevent her story from being told.  That two different groups of producers were attempting to keep her tied up at two different times so that her story would not be told on the big screen.

    She feels this might be possible because no film was made.

    It might be possible.

    Anything is.


    But the basics of film and the industry argue against any conspiracy.

    As a woman of a certain age, Cindy's story was always going to be hard for the big screen.

    She notes Susan Sarandon was attached -- or at least mentioned --  to the film proposal in 2006 and 2007.

    And that's about 10 years after Susan could deliver any real audience at the box office.

    That's why Susan's doing films like Tammy (where she's not the lead) and the Lifetime film playing Marilyn Monroe's mother.

    I don't mean that as an insult to Susan.  We're talking realities here -- the things Cindy avoided in her post.


    Susan was all wrong for the role as well.


    Cindy's not stupid by any means but she doesn't project intelligence the way Susan does.

    Or the way Jane Fonda does which was Mike Nichols wasn't interested in Jane for the part of Karen Silkwood (Jane had tried to get the film rights for the story on Karen Silkwood) and Meryl Streep played the role instead.


    Meryl could have played Cindy.   Again, Cindy's not stupid, she's smart.  But there are types and Susan Sarandon would have been the wrong fit for Cindy.

    Back when studios still thought Susan could carry a film -- she couldn't, some actors can't, some very good actors can't,  she starred in Safe Passage.  That's more or less how she would have played Cindy and it wouldn't have worked nor would it have sold tickets.


    Susan has tremendous talent and cast her as the woman who unravels the secrets in a thriller or as the seductive vamp or any number of roles and she'll deliver.  But when she plays someone newly awakened it doesn't really work because, like Jane Fonda, her characters are a little bit faster than everyone else on the uptake so you don't buy them as 'awakening' to politics -- though you do buy them 'awakening' to love.


    The part could have been played by Meryl (a given) or by Jessica Lange or Sally Field -- and Sally probably would have been the most effective in the role.  The role could have been played by Michelle Pfeiffer, Jodie Foster, Debra Winger, Joan Cusack, Rosanna Arquette, Melanie Griffith, Charlize Theron, etc.  Of the women listed after Field, the only one whose name only would have interested studios enough to consider the film would have been Jodie Foster.

    Jodie could deliver an audience large enough to make back the costs of filming and, if she and the film delivered, she could have brought in a much larger audience.

    But even with Jodie, working against the film was that the role had already been played by Jane Fonda -- Sally Hyde in Coming Home, Jane won her second Best Actress Academy Award for playing a woman who awakens to the realities of war.

    Sally was only one part of the story.  Jon Voight (who won a Best Actor Academy Award for his performance) played Ron Kovic with a fictional name.  Bruce Dern and Jane's marriage ends due to the war, Jon Voight's character finds his voice when he loses so many other things, there's the subplot with Vi and her brother and so much more -- including graphic sex scenes (Jane had a body double).  Don't forget the graphic sex scenes.

    All of that and a beautiful, muted look via Haskell Wexler and innovations via director Hal Ashby -- he used sound like no on else before him.

    It made for a film.

    But The Cindy Sheehan Story, as portrayed in Peace Mom, is a TV movie, if you're trying to pull off the arc of awakening.  Probably starring Meredith Baxter.  It could also be a powerful play if you zoomed in on just the day Casey Sheehan dies and the aftermath on the family -- we're talking the immediate effects.  And that could also make for a powerful premium cable channel movie.

    You have to know what the story is and where the story fits because a Lifetime TV movie is not going to sell tickets in theaters.  You're wasting everyone's time delivering a pitch for a TV movie to a film studio exec.

    Cindy thinks there might have been some conspiracy.

    There was most likely none at all.

    Her film never had studio backing -- nor even serious interest from a studio.

    Even if it had, there are projects studios get behind which get gutted all the time.  Jodie Foster and Robert Redford were supposed to star in Crisis In The Hot Zone but Redford was a dick and a vain one and Jodie walked.  The film had been in competition with Dustin Hoffman, Rene Russo and Morgan Freeman's Outbreak to see which could start shooting first.  That ended when no other name actress wanted to put up with Redford's nonsense.

    Films go under all the time, they go from talk to nothing.

    They can even be announced -- and advertised -- and then not get made.


    faye



    That's Faye Dunaway.  Height of her beauty.  Height of her box office.

    And she's going to make the film Duet For One.  It's about to begin filming.

    Nope.


    When it was made a few years later, it would star Julie Andrews.

    There was no plot to keep Faye busy, to tie her up, so no one else could use her in movies.

    Joan Crawford would leave MGM for, among other reasons, the refusal to allow her to star in The Spiral Staircase despite the fact that she'd optioned the source material.  (A few years later, RKO would make the film and it would be a hit.)  Miriam Hopkins thought she'd play the lead in the film of Jezebel.  She'd played the role on Broadway, she held the rights, Jack Warner led her to believe that handing the rights over to his studio meant she'd star in the film.  Instead, Bette Davis played the role and won her second Best Actress Academy Award.  Bette Davis was led to believe she'd star as Mary Todd Lincoln but when the project moved from development towards filming, Jack Warner refused to greenlight claiming a film that told the truth would be an insult to Abraham Lincoln's memory.

    Yentl is a film classic and one that director Barbra Streisand should forever feel proud of.  But as much as the film on the screen is something to be proud of, Barbra's dedication to the project is also something to be proud of. She started working on the project in 1968 and never lost faith in it, never took a "no" as the final answer and, in 1983, the film was reality.

    Or look at The Dollmaker.  In 1971, Jane Fonda falls in love with Harriette Arnow's book. In 1974, she meets with the author about making the book.  She's in her grey-listed period -- where politics keep US studios from hiring her for many projects (though she still has a few offers coming in -- she turned down Chinatown and The Exorcist, among others, during this period).  When Tricky Dick resigns and realities have to be reconsidered, studios are interested again and her first leading role is in the box office hit Fun With Dick and Jane (1977).  One hit after another followed and Jane still couldn't get studio interest for the film.  So, as she herself tells it, she met with ABC in 1979, the day after she won her second Academy Award, and she (and Bruce Gilbert) proposed The Dollmaker as a movie of the week for the TV network.  ABC was all for it but there was still the issue of the script.  It would be 1983 before the TV movie was filmed and 1984 when it aired.   (Jane won an Emmy for her performance.)

    To get a film made -- for the big screen or for TV or (today) the internet) -- you have to be a long distance runner.

    The film frustrations Cindy Sheehan went through don't even qualify as a 1 K fun run.


    Let's deal with another aspect and then we'll circle around.

    Casey Sheehan died.

    That was a huge loss for his family.

    As someone who felt her loss was great enough to warrant a meeting with a world leader, I'm not really sure where Cindy gets off insulting Chris Kyle.

    Guess what, it's not all about you, Cindy Sheehan.

    I've defended Cindy here repeatedly over the years.  She's said nothing to help another mother, has she? She can't identify with Pat Smith's loss?

    I've wondered about that.

    And now here is she is trashing a dead man because she thinks he's racist -- or says she thinks it.


    If only we were all so pure and wonderful like Cindy Sheehan?


    The fact of the matter is she needs to lose the judgmental.


    There's no reason for her to insult Chris Kyle.

    Her view of her son is in conflict with those who served with him.

    That's not surprising.

    He was put through the same socialization process everyone in the military is.

    So I'm not understanding why Cindy's being so awful to Chris Kyle who has a family that misses him dearly.

    You're not happy that he shot Iraqis?

    I'm not happy that any Iraqis were shot.

    But the blame for that, for Americans, goes to the White House (then and now) and the Congress.


    Casey Sheehan didn't declare war on Iraq.  Neither did Chris Kyle.

    If you're offended by what Chris Kyle did, then you need to take that argument up the chain.

    Stop blaming the people and start blaming those in charge.

    Chris Kyle broke no law.

    He said some mean spirited things about Arabs?

    I don't doubt it.

    And I'm not stupid enough to assume he came up with those remarks himself.  I'm fully aware that this was part of training, part of the socialization, part of the attempt to create the belief in 'the other' which allows the dehumanization necessary to kill.

    Now maybe moon beams shot out of Casey Sheehan's ass like Cindy seems to think.  Maybe they didn't.  But I'm not going to insult Casey Sheehan because I'm opposed to the ongoing war.  And I'm not going to insult Chris Kyle for it either.

    I don't expect Cindy to be a saint.  I do expect her to have common sense.

    Her post is beneath her and goes to the reality that she has a myth about Casey with regards to Iraq and it's a myth she wills herself to believe.


    Chris Kyle.could have been her son but she attacks him and berates him in a post.

    She has no humanity to share and can't relate to the family of Chris Kyle on any level.

    Nursing a myth takes a lot out of you.

     And let's point out the obvious about her supposed offense regarding what Kyle wrote in his book.

    Cindy does a radio show.  If she really cares about the Iraqi people why doesn't she cover Iraq?

    If she really cares why, in the year long bombing of Falluja's residential neighborhoods, has she never devoted an episode to this topic?

    These are War Crimes, legally defined War Crimes.

    And Cindy's not calling them out, she's not using her forum to draw attention to the thousands of civilians who have been killed and wounded for the 'crime' of being in their neighborhood, for the 'crime' of being in their homes.

    This is not the Islamic State.

    Grasp that.

    This is the Iraqi military bombing Falluja daily.

    It started under Nouri al-Maliki.  September 13th, new Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi noted how wrong it was -- but stopped short of calling it a War Crime -- it is one, it's the legal definition of "collective punishment" -- and promised the bombings had stopped.  The next day they continued.

    So when Cindy's going to talk about that?

    I'm so tired of people who pretend they care about this or that but when they've got the chance to talk about something that matters, they don't.

    Ongoing War Crimes and no one wants to call them out.  It's pretty much Human Rights Watch, Felicity Arbuthonot and this community willing to call out the War Crimes. (If you call it out or know someone who does, send a link to common_ills@yahoo.com and it will gladly be noted here.)

    How damn difficult is for a citizen in, for example, the United States to call out the Iraqi government attacking civilians daily in Falluja?

    I don't think it's difficult at all.

    But the silence from Cindy Sheehan and others never ends.

    Pick any day at random, let's go with June 18th: The bombing of Falluja's residential neighborhoods claimed the lives of 6 civilians -- two of whom were children -- with sixteen more civilians injured.


    So don't come whimpering to me about some 'naughty words' that were used in a book when you don't have the guts, the spine, the compassion, the humanity to call out the year long suffering of Sunnis in Falluja as the military has repeatedly targeted the residential neighborhoods wounding and killing thousands in 2014 alone.


    The United Nations refuses to release an 'official' count on deaths in Falluja and that's because they don't want to speak up about the ongoing War Crimes.

    The only time they've acknowledged it seriously was when new Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi announced these bombings had ended -- then the UN had praise to offer publicly.  But the bombings didn't end, the UN didn't retract their praise or even acknowledge that the bombings continued.


    Iraqi Spring MC notes 3 civilians dead and four injured on Friday from the Iraqi military's non-stop bombing of civilian areas in Falluja.

    And these bombings have other impacts as well.


    النازحون من منازلهم جراء القصف العشوائي المتعمد من قبل القوات الحكومية على منازل المدنيين. .




    As Iraqi Spring MC notes, they add to the ever-growing refugee population in Iraq.


    The silence also means others can get away with it.

    Today, civilian areas in and around Baghdad were bombed by the war planes in the US-led coalition.

    But let's all get upset over what Chris Kyle wrote in a sentence or two in his book.

    That is the real crime -- right, Cindy Sheehan?

    Not the ongoing bombings of civilians, not the never-ending war.

    Yeah, you play strong and proud over your attacks on a dead man who can't defend himself and who might be a little too close to what you fear your son was like in Iraq.

    Can your crazy -- can it, market it, sell it, maybe it'll make you rich.

    It just won't help end any wars.  But the woman who occupied a ditch in Crawford can't be bothered with Iraq today unless it's to trash a dead soldier.


    I don't have time for the crazy.

    There are two ways to make The Cindy Sheehan Story -- I said we'd work back to it -- a big screen film.

    The first is to deal with the tragedy of those quiet moments when Cindy's alone with her memories and has to realize if the construct she's created about Casey is accurate or not?

    That sort of haunting is what got Music Box a greenlight (and when the studio paid Jane Fonda a small fortune not to act in the film and replaced her with Jessica Lange, that was about sexism and age-ism and not a conspiracy).


    The other story, the one I urged to the second group of film makers Cindy whines about -- yeah, I'm going to call it whining.  I've been kind when she's misconstrued Rob Reiner who is a friend of mine.  But I'm not going to be kind here.  She's whining and doing so stupidly.  She had two different groups approach her about making a film and she never took the lead and she never fought for it but instead sat back and expected to happen when the reality is over 99% of proposed films never get made and any that do require people to champion the projects and fight.

    The other story is about a woman who allowed herself to be used.

    This is the reality, not the story Cindy wants to tell.  She likes to, for example, claim she was against Barack from the start.  That's a lie.  It's a known lie.  She was for Barack up until the Democratic Party primaries ended.  Common Dreams is among the websites she left comments on.  She can claim she was trying to destroy Hillary Clinton (his opponent in the 2008 primaries, for those who've forgotten).  Doesn't really matter.  Oh, wait, it does.  Had Hillary been elected president in 2008, the so-called peace movement wouldn't have folded up the tent and gone home.

    But the film that would work as cinema is about a woman who really wasn't sure where she stood on the war while her son was alive.  She waivered.  And that's understandable and even something most can feel empathy towards her for.  Then she became outspoken.  This is months before her Crawford, Texas stand.

    And then she's in the DFW area at a Veterans for Peace meeting and decides, since Bully Boy Bush is at his Crawford, Texas ranchette, to go down there.

    It's decided to start Camp Casey.

    And tons of people show up.

    Most are grass-roots people who want to end the war.

    But there are those who see it as political hay.

    And then some anti-Semitic statements Cindy made emerge.

    And let's not pretend that they were anti-Israeli government.  They weren't.  They were anti-Semitic.  Doesn't make Cindy a bad person (we won't rush to attack her the way she rushed to attack Chris Kyle), just means she needs to be a little more informed.

    And that's really when they have Cindy -- and a detail not often told.

    The behind the scenes players -- only some of which she's named -- rush to spin it as (a) she didn't make those comments and (b) even if she did, she's a dumb little home maker so no one should get too upset about it.

    August is a dead month for the media and they were happy to let the spin settle and continue to cover the woman in the ditch outside a world leader's home, demanding to speak with him to know why her son died in Iraq.

    Partisan bloggers for the Democratic Party took part in the lie that Cindy wasn't opposed to the war, she just wanted an answer.  A blogger named Jude, for example, is someone we broke with over this lie.  Jude was pimping it online -- she was always a Democratic Party house organ and not an individual blogger -- and she wasn't the only one.

    And Cindy allowed it.

    She walked in the narrow confines she was instructed to.

    She wouldn't sell party politics but she would -- and did -- take part in the media creation of "Peace Mom."

    And after the 2006 mid-terms, the Democratic Party and their various outlets and organs had no use for her.

    She had helped them deliver both houses of Congress to the Democrats.

    The political party had used the illegal war to drum up votes.

    So if you though they were ending the Iraq War in 2007, you were a damn fool.

    They weren't going to end it, not when they had a presidential election two years out that they could win by harnessing the outrage over the Iraq War and turning it into votes.

    Cindy betrayed herself in various little ways.

    But none of that prepared her for the betrayal she would face from others.

    You can make that film as a comedy or as a thriller.  You can use Frank Capra's Meet John Doe as your backdrop -- they share many of the same plot points.

    And it's a movie that could put people in the seats because it's not just the story of Cindy, it's the story of American in the last fifteen or so years.

    In one way or another, like Cindy, we all did small steps of self-betrayal.  We kidded ourselves that it was for 'the greater good.'  We kidded ourselves that, when we were silent, it was helping the movement.

    Whether you think Occupy was a movement or not, the lack of criticism -- serious criticism -- allowed whatever it was to peter out quickly and Occupy is no more despite the hopes and dreams of a bunch of elderly radicals in NYC.

    But we did that in the peace movement or the anti-war movement.  We pretended it was okay that those with divided loyalties -- at best (you can't serve the peace movement and a corporatist, War Hawk political party at the same time) -- were in the forefront.

    We created our own free speech pens and sat out so much time in them.


    It set the stage for the next presidential election, "2008: The Year of Living Hormonally (Year in Review)."

    A time when all good Democrats must not call out Barack for putting homophobes on stage at campaign events, a time where all good Democrats must not note that after the Iraq War started in 2003, Barack was a public supporter of it -- yes, 'anti-war' Barack got on board.


    We 'built' that.  And we created the stage for the events Joan Didion so aptly described (link goes to New York Review of Books podcast):


    What troubled had nothing to do with the candidate himself.
    It had to do instead with the reaction he evoked.
    Close to the heart of it was the way in which only the very young were decreed of capable of truly appreciating the candidate. Again and again, perfectly sentient adults cited the clinching of arguments made on the candidate's behalf by their children -- by quite small children. Again and again, we were told that this was a generational thing, we couldn't understand. In a flash we were sent back to high school, and we couldn't sit with the popular kids, we didn't get it. The "Style" section of The New York Times yesterday morning mentioned the Obama t-shirts that "makes irony look old."
    Irony was now out.
    Naivete translated into "hope" was now in.
    Innocence, even when it looked like ignorance, was now prized.


    By then, some had begun speaking out.  Cindy was among those.  But she and I and many, many others helped set the stage for what came after by biting our tongues when we should have been speaking out.  By thinking silence on an issue meant helping the larger issues.

    I've known all my life Naomi Klein was the child of a war resister.  I know Naomi's father and knew him before she was born.

    But as Naomi refused -- refused -- to speak out on war resisters, I stayed silent for years.

    She had no right to.  She owed it to the community to speak out, to pay it forward.

    And yet she'd plug her books and plug her articles and act ditzy on Al Franken's radio show ('Oh, you can't say s**t on the radio in America? Giggle, giggle, I'm practically a bra-less starlet!').

    At one point when I said I was going public, it was conveyed to me that Naomi feared going public would mean she would lose entry to the United States, be put on some sort of list.

    That was nutty but okay, I bit my tongue.

    And I did it far too long.  When there was serious media attention on war resisters in the early days, I should've outed Naomi as a child of a Vietnam war resister, an American who went to Canada.  That would have forced her to address the issues in all the interviews she was giving, it would have raised the profile of war resisters, it would have put a human face on it and it would have argued: 'Canada, you have a figure of global prominence in Naomi Klein and you have her as a citizen because you welcomed war resisters in the past.  Do so again.'

    We all lied and that's how we arrived at the point we're at now.

    And we're still lying because people don't want to tell you how Hillary probably wins if she runs for president.

    She wins because we're so f**king ugly on the left now.

    We're an eye sore.

    Large segments of the country are repulsed by it and this allows the neoliberals to argue that we need to drop the 'purity tests' and we need to be 'rationale' and Hillary's the candidate for us and blah blah blah.

    The pendulum swings back and forth not because the country is bi-polar but because the middle and the apathetic (which does comprise the bulk of the United States population) grow outraged over the excesses of the right when they're in power and over the excesses of the left when they're in power.

    Both segments seem to think they have a right to dictate to the American people how they should live their lives and the voters reject that repeatedly over and over.

    We could have stood for something beyond partisan politics in the last six years but we didn't.

    And now it's likely Hillary Clinton in the White House or a Republican and, honestly, aren't the two really just the same damn thing?




     




    Thursday, January 15, 2015

    Don't ever take advice from Edwin Lyngar

    What will we do with the fanatics?

    Edwin Lyngar has a piece of filth up at Salon where he argues that the left needs to lie and pull dirty tricks.

    That's exactly what's destroyed the left.

    Big surprise, Lyngar is recent left.

    He's another one of those fixated conservatives -- like David Brock -- who claim to have seen the light but if they really had they wouldn't be preaching that the left needs to do dirty tricks.

    These people are welcome to come over to the left but we should never put them in charge of anything or take advice from them.

    They failed on the right for a reason.



    "Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
    Wednesday, January 14, 2015.  Chaos and violence continue, support for the US bombings of Iraq begin to fade within the Iraqi government, both the Iraqi government and the US government attempt to harvest the corpses of children for their own propaganda purposes, and much more.



    Monday in Berkeley, there was a protest which included a chant, "Yemini lives matter, Afghan lives matter, Iraqi lives matter, Pakistan lives matter!"

    We're noting the protest mainly because Tuesday's Flashpoints (KPFA) featured a report on the protest that Dennis Bernstein and others with Flashpoint did.  The protest was at UC Berkeley School of Law.


    Stephanie Tang: The Bush regime opened this torture chamber at Guantanamo not just to imprison captives after 9/11 as it expanded it's military adventures into the Middle East.  The Bush regime opened Guantanamo  to send a message to the world that the US could operate with impunity, outside the norms of international law.  Obama made his first promise upon taking office that he would close this immoral hellhole of a prison. He's had 6 years to close it.  He has had 6 years to punish those who ordered the torture and forever repudiate indefinite detention and secret renditions as American policy.  But Obama has done none of this.  We are here from the World Cant Wait, the National Lawyers Guild, CodePink and other people who care about justice, who stand up for justice and we demand the closure of Guantanamo immediately We demand the accountability that can only mean prosecuting the war criminals from George Bush and Dick Cheney on down.  This is the only way that torture will not become a permanent part of the arsenal of the US power spreading around the world.  Torture is a war crime it is never acceptable or legal under any circumstances. This is clear in international law and US law.  The third reason we're here today is particular to the University of California and it's law school  at Boalt Hall.  There is a War Criminal on the faculty here. John Yoo is a tenured professor. He wrote the memos that enabled the Bush-Cheney regime to establish their formal official torture program. John Yoo continues to publicly promote that program, defined it and, therefore, he is still doing harm.


    The report also featured an alumni informing the dean's office, "I came here in 1959 because there was a wonderful man on the faculty named Frank Newman, a great supporter of human rights became dean and became a justice and he would never permit someone like John Yoo to speak in front of his class -- let alone become a professor.  And I think that it's important  to understand that the reputation of this law school is based on people like Frank Newman and that the reputation, if it's going to be based on people like John Yoo people aren't going to come here."


    Moving to Iraq,  Ben Ariel (Israel National News) reports that Iraq has donated $28 million to the Arab League for the Palestinians.  In response, the following Tweet was posted:






  • And this Tweet as well:









  • What are they Tweeting about?

    16 children have died in Iraq from exposure to the cold.  Al-Shorfa reports that they died in central and northern Iraq according to Iraq's human rights commission member Masroor Aswad who couldn't wait to harness a tragedy by claiming all the dead children were homeless as a result of the Islamic State.  A claim, of course, that he can't back up nor can the press truly investigate.

    Of course, that reality didn't stop the US State Dept from presenting a claim as fact and spreading it.

    Meanwhile, USAID wants to trumpet, "USG agencies have supported the Iraq humanitarian response with nearly $218.4 million in FY 2014 and FY 2015 funding. This includes nearly $10.2 million in FY 2015 assistance from USAID/OFDA for programs providing life-saving assistance to vulnerable Iraqis."


    16 children are dead and for the governments of Iraq and the United States, this is 'wonderful' because they can use it to attack the Islamic State.

    So eager are they to use these deaths, they fail to factor in how it looks to the rest of the world.

    As the Tweets note, Iraq's got plenty of millions to give . . . to those outside of Iraq.  While Iraqi children freeze to death, Haider al-Abadi cuts a charity check for $28 million.

    And the US?

    $218.4 million in humanitarian aid . . . spread out over the last fiscal year and the current one.  So that's roughly $109 million a year.

    But Pierre Bienaime (Business Insider) notes, "According to Defense News, the US donated $300 million in military equipment to Iraq in 2014, and will deliver 6 M1 Abrams tanks and 50 humvees to the Baghdad government at no cost."  And that's just one aspect of the millions and millions of military aid the US government provided Iraq with.  But only $109 million to help the refugees.
     
    The US government funds violence full out but when it comes to humanitarian causes they play cheap and the world sees it.

    Despite this, they have the gall to attempt to use the deaths of 16 children -- deaths that could have been prevented had the US government or the Iraqi government not been so cheap and shown so little value?

    They don't only fail to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people, they spark a global outrage as they make clear how little value they place on human lives.


    Meanwhile, the two greedy factions turn on each other as the 'plan' of US President Barack Obama -- bomb from the air and bomb some more -- produces little-to-no results.

    Ahmed Rasheed and Ned Parker (Reuters) report that Barack's envoy John Allen, retired US general, heard complaints yesterday and today from figures including Iraq's Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi and Speaker of Parliament Salim al-Jubouri.   The latter is a Sunni and his comments that the US government is not doing enough militarily can be seen as going to the refusal to arm Sunni tribes in the fight against the Islamic State.

    Alsumaria reports that US Gen John Allen declared today that the US government would not be arming Sunni tribe leaders.  It is up to the Ministry of Defense, Allen insisted, to arm the Sunnis.


    Again, this is not a minor issue for al-Jabouri.  He raised it last month with US Senator John McCain.  From the December 27th snapshot:


    As we noted Friday morning, US Senator John McCain was in Iraq and scheduled to meet with Speaker of Parliament Salim al-Jubouri.  Anadolu Agency reports they did meet and that Jubouri asked for the US to arm :100,000 Sunni tribesmen living in four regions that are controlled by the ISIL."

    From McCain's Twitter feed:







    Again, though the request the Speaker made to McCain is not being factored into the coverage today of the criticism, the reality is this request is the spine of the criticism being made by al-Jabouri.

    As for Iraq's Prime Minister?

    He's been making complaints publicly prior to meeting with Allen on Tuesday.  As AFP reported at the start of the week, the Prime Minister slammed the coalition the US government has put together declaring it was taking too long to provide "military support" to the Iraq military.

    Rasheed and Parker note today, "A statement from Abadi's office after the talks said US-led alliance should 'increase the tempo of the effective air strikes on Islamic State positions', and also called for the training program for Iraqi security forces to be expanded."


    After the meeting, Haider tried to put a smiley face on it with the following Tweet:





    Productive meeting w/ Gen Allen and . Agreed to expand Coalition airstrikes and training & arming of ISF 





    Adding to these problems, the White House has lost a powerful ally in Iraq.  Press TV reports:

    The head of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq has dismissed the US-led coalition’s sincerity in its fight against the ISIL terrorists, saying Iraqis can defend their country on their own.
    “People of Iraq have the ability to liberate their homeland from the terrorists of ISIL and there is no need of foreign interference and international or American forces,” said Ammar al-Hakim.


    Ammar al-Hakim is someone factions in the US government have long supported to be Prime Minister.  He has charmed many US officials visiting Iraq as well as many foreign correspondents. He's managed, within the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, to fill the shoes of his late father.  He's emerged as a very powerful Shi'ite leader. And now he's saying the US military is no use to Iraq.


    This rejection comes on the heels of Moqtada al-Sadr making similar remarks.  While movement leader and cleric Moqtada was never an ally of the White House, Haider al-Abadi is or was.  And Moqtada has called for the US military to butt out of Iraq.
    So one faction of Shi'ites, represented by Haider, complain that the US government isn't doing enough, another faction, represented by Ammar, claim that the US military is not needed and still another faction, represented by Moqtada, call for the US military to get out of Iraq.
    Meanwhile a Sunni segment, represented by Salim, complain about the US government's failure to arm Sunni tribal leaders.  
    And the Kurds?  
    Always taken for granted by the US government which has spent decades manipulating them.  Now the Kurds, tired of waiting for White House support, looks to Germany for arms (the way Sunnis are looking to Jordan).  
    It would appear all the time Barack has wasted 'building' a 'coalition' to drop bombs on Iraq should have been spent on diplomacy because the support he thought he had within the Iraqi government?  The support he needs to continue bombing Iraq?  It appears to be fading.

    And, again, Alsumaria reports that US Gen John Allen declared today that the US government would not be arming Sunni tribe leaders.  It is up to the Ministry of Defense, Allen insisted, to arm the Sunnis.

    That decision not to arm is a decision to choose sides in a battle while supposedly insisting that Iraq's government focus on being inclusive.


    The White House continues to choose sides -- as it did throughout Nouri's second term.

    The decisions they made then allowed Nouri to brutalize the Iraqi people and created the current problem.
     
    Saudi Prince Turki al-Faisal (Asharq Al-Awsat) reminds everyone of the roots of the Islamic State in Iraq:

     The group started recruiting disgruntled former soldiers from Saddam Hussein’s disbanded army and played on the grievances of the Iraqi Sunni population, which was angered by Maliki’s sectarian policies and his giving free rein to armed Shi’ite militias to persecute Sunnis. This eventually led to popular uprisings in some of the country’s Sunni-dominated areas, where the people called for Maliki’s resignation and their full civil rights as Iraqi citizens. Maliki duly responded by violently quashing the uprisings, which led to thousands of Iraqis from Sunni tribes either being killed or driven from their homes, especially in the western Anbar province, which forms the main entry point into Syria. And here comes the next twist in the story: due to the lack of any international pressure on Maliki, this new group, now calling itself the Islamic State of Iraq, gained a safe haven in Anbar province, whose residents had fought its precursor, Al-Qaeda in Iraq, so fiercely. The organization then began to form sleeper cells in Sunni-dominated areas, especially in Mosul, and to recruit former members of Saddam Hussein’s army and fighters from the Naqshbandi Army, whose senior members include former Saddam aide Izzat Al-Douri. 


    There was no international pressure on Nouri -- certainly not from the White House.

    And today the White House pursues the same strategy of blindly backing Haider despite the fact that Shi'ite militias, under Haider, target, hunt and kill Sunnis.  No pressure from the White House over that, no concerns.  Nothing.

    It's hard to see how doing the exact same thing -- but with a new puppet named Haider al-Abadi -- will help Iraq or stop the violence.

    Yesterday, Hamza Mustafa (Asharq Al-Awsat) reported:


    Iraqi President Fuad Masoum and Parliament Speaker Salim Al-Jabouri met on Tuesday in Baghdad to discuss a comprehensive national unity and reconciliation plan to bring together Iraq’s disparate ethnic and confessional communities.
    Presidential spokesman Khaled Shuwani told Asharq Al-Awsat both men had agreed during their meeting that “it was time to transform the issue of national unity from being one of slogans to a full-fledged national project taking into account social, political, economic, and security factors, in order to promote peaceful coexistence between Iraq’s various factions.” 

    Mustafa noted that Iraqi Vice President Ayad Allawi was also working on a unity plan.  Masoum is a Kurd, Salim, we've already noted is Sunni.  Allawi is a Shi'ite but he represented a hope for an inclusive Iraq as head of the non-sectarian political slate Iraqiya.


    But Allawi appears to be the only Shi'ite working on this.  And the conspicuous absence of Haider al-Abadi in this conversation is rather telling.


    Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) notes 129 deaths from violence across Iraq today.