I'm listening to KPFK (we're listening by phone to take up only one stream in case others are trying to listen as well). Cindy Sheehan laid it out perfectly as to why she's running against Nancy Pelosi. Ann Wright was equally amazing and, unless I'm mistaken, I believe two community members called in to the show. (I'm not familiar with the show, first time listening, I'll include the title of it when they repeat it.) (I am familiar with community members' voices who've taken part in the roundtables for the gina & krista round-robin.)
Michael is the host's first name. I'm hoping the names given again.
So Cindy Sheehan is running and why shouldn't she? Democrats made one promise after another during their 2006 Vote For Us campaign. Sorry, but I don't see the point in voting for someone who keeps telling me that they'll do something but never does. To me, this is like sticking with a cheating husband who keeps promising that's over but you keep catching him.
Michael Slate. I think that's the host's name. I'll check with C.I. when the show's over. This was an interesting program and the host was as important to that as were the guests. Radio Active is the name of the program.
So Cindy Sheehan got banned awhile back at an alleged left site that was never left. It was always about building a business -- a Republican who decided he could make bucks as a Democrat and felt fine tossing around racism and sexism -- objecting to sexually objectifying women resulted in the little runt cracking "women's studies major" in that high squeek that's become a popular staple for impersonators at various DC parties -- as C.I. long ago noted, that crowd isn't "crashing any gates," they're just scrubbing the toilets. That's really all they are: toilet scrubbers.
I never make the mistake of thinking if I didn't have huge money to give and hadn't given it in the past, the Democrats would give a damn about me.
The toilet scrubbers don't have a lot of money, so they need to bundle the hard earned cash of the people and claim credit for that. They enter through the back door, they are the "help," and they scrub the toilets while wishing they were insiders.
They aren't and they never will be. It's the same mistake they make when they think reporters are "stars" or "independent agents." You own the paper (or network) or you're just working for them. Mike (Mikey Likes It!) wrote in Polly's Brew about a number of things this weekend including a friend of C.I.'s who is a publisher and tied his wagon to Jimmy Carter, throwing all of his weight behind Carter, believing all the lies he was told and then, when Carter took office, he found out that he too was disposable.
Politicians use to get elected, they work through people like tissues. I'm not going to pretend I'm so jaded that John Conyers sicking the cops on activists practicing civil disobedience didn't shock me. But there's really no difference he should be any different. You might hope he would be, you might wish he'd remember the struggle, but the reality is that he's been in power too long to remember much of anything. I remember Adam Clayton Powell discussing all of this after he was run out of Congress. I was much younger then. I asked C.I. after if Powell wasn't being too negative and C.I. (who has had family in Congress) assured me Powell was biting his tongue.
In college, tight circle that this insulated life is, C.I.'s parents had known mine and I can remember their attitudes that we couldn't move Congress. They knew from the inside but we did move Congress, we did force change, we did end an illegal war. It can happen again.
It won't happen from the likes of Patricia J. Williams raving over Barack Obama who is craven and disgusting. It won't happen from others acting as cheerleaders worshipping from the outside. As Adam Clayton Powell said all those years ago, Congress has to be made to work. True then and true now.
Cindy Sheehan's attempting to make them work. But watch and see how the knives get drawn for her. I saw this insipid whine (by a former New Republic[an]er) at The Huffington Post today slamming Ralph Nader for taking the election from Al Gore. As someone who donated a great deal to the Gore 2000 campaign, I've never felt the need to whine Nader stole anything. I will gladly charge the Bully Boy and his James Baker led crew with theft and disenfranchisement.
I don't claim to understand sports. But I'm not aware of anyone whining, "We would have the championship if that other team . . ." I'm aware of blaming the ref for calls.
I agree with C.I. that it's very disappointing Arianna Huffington allows that nonsense to be posted at her site. I remember her running a strong campaign for governor and I remember the push to get her out of it. I remember websites slamming her at the time. It's really sad to realize she'll condone these kind of attacks on others.
But prepare for the attacks on Cindy Sheehan to only increase. She's challenging the system and a lot of little Don't-Rock-the-Boaters are going to get upset. Ironically, some of them will later write about how unfair gerry mandered districts are. They will say every race should be up for grabs. But when there's a reality that Cindy can upset an incumbent, they'll attack. Cindy Sheehan has name recognition and these days, in the safe-safe-beyond-safe districts, that's really one of the few ways you can get a serious challenge.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Tuesday, July 24, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, a US service member announces he is not going to Iraq, the DNC makes a mockery of a 'debate' without any need of YouTube 'gadgets,' the US military announces more deaths (late Monday -- and deaths that could have been announced no later than Sunday), the New York Times tries to sell the illegal war again, Cindy Sheehan declares a Congressional run, and more.
Starting with war resistance. Memphis Vets Against the War (Chapter 149 of Iraq Veternas Against the War) note (at Memphis Flyer) "soldiers of conscience, who dared to speak openly about the immorality and illegality of the war, [who] have been court-martialed and imprsioned. Their cases, dating back to 2004, raise serious doubts about the capacity of our soldiers to receive justice in our military courts. Five months prior to Abu Ghraib scandal, a soft-spoken Army soldier named Camilo Mejia was visibly upset by the atrocities he observed during his tour of duty in Iraq. Repelled by the slaughter of civilians and the needless deaths of American GIs (all reported in Mejia's riveting combat memoir, The Road to Ar Ramadi, 2007), Camilo gathered up his courage and made formal complaints to his superiors. Commanders refused to listen and questioned his patriotism. Eventually Mejia was sentenced to a year in prison for speaking out, for telling the truth. His trial, like subsequent trials of war resisters, was a travesty of justice. Judge Col. Gary Smith ruled that evidence of the illegality of the war was inadmissible in court, that international law is irrelevant, that a soldier's only duty to follow orders, regardless of their legality. It is a sad day in military jurisprudence when a soldier of conscience is court-martialed, not for lying, but for telling the truth . . . Our military system is passing through a profound moral and legal crisis." IVAW's Adam Kokesh posts an e-mail from Robert Weiss who has filed for conscientious objector status and "informed my chain of command that the only way I will go to Iraq is if they tranquilize me, cuff me, and throw me on a plane. That being the case I won't perform any duties or wear a uniform anyways. I don't plan on letting the situation progress that far. I am hopeful that I will be placed on rear detachment until the decision on my application comes in. When it becomes apparent that they won't do this I will simply refuse to follow any orders given to me or wear a uniform. This will surely result in some jail time but that doesn't deter me one bit. It makes more sense to me to resist the military now rather than in Iraq where the situation would be much more difficult."
Agustin Aguayo was in Germany (as Weiss is now) when he was told he would be handcuffed/chained and put on a plane to Iraq. That prompted his self-checkout. Aguayo is telling his story publicly and The Acorn reports that Aguayo will speak this Thursday from 7:00 pm to 8:30 pm at Grant Brimhall, Thousand Oaks Library, 1401 E. James Rd., that the event is "free and open to the public" and more information is available by calling (805) 375-9939. War resister Pablo Paredes will also be at the event.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Jared Hood and James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Joshua Key, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Jeremy Hinzman, Stephen Funk, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Care, Kyle Huwer, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty-one US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters.
Turning to news of activism, bravery and disappointment. Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) reported today that DC was the location, specifically John Conyers' office, for a rather surprising development, "45 protesters calling for the impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney were arrested Monday at the U.S. Capitol. The arrests occurred after the demonstrators refused to leave the office and hallway of Congressman John Conyers of Michigan. The arrested included Cindy Sheehan and former CIA analyst Ray McGovern. They were urging Conyers -- the chair of the House Judiciary -- to introduce articles of impeachment." In addition, they were delivering a petition, with over one million signatures, calling for impeachment. As Rebecca (Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude) noted last night, "That's really sad. John Conyers, who knows all about civil disobedience, sicks the cops on civil disobedience. Oh how the mighty have fallen." Dave Lindorff (CounterPunch) shares that sentiment noting, "The arrest of impeachment activists and their forcible eviction from his office was a betrayal of people who were doing the very thing that had allowed Conyers to make his way into Congress in the first place: sitting in to insist on action on their demands for justice. It was, after all, sit-ins that helped lead to the Voting Rights Act which allowed African American candidates like Conyers to finally win seats in the US Congress. It's ironic that Rep. Conyers, speaking in 2005 on Democracy Now! following Rosa Parks' death at the age of 92, said her passing 'is probably the end of an era.' Certainly, with his request to have Capitol Police officers enter his office (the very office where Parks once had worked as a staff member!) to cuff and arrest peaceful protesters who were trying to defend the Constitution, he has made that point far more clearly than he could have expressed it in mere words."
David Swanson (AfterDowningStreet) was among those arrested and he notes that John Conyers' office is under a lot of pressure or feels that way: "The staffer was annoyed and complained to his colleague 'It's bad enough they shut the office down with phone calls'." Oh, those pesky citizens, foolishy thinking they have a voice in democracy! Don't they know the John Conyers staff doesn't need their input! Democracy in the Conyers office translates as "We give you what we want, be happy!" Now here's John Conyers singing with backing assitance from his staffers (and a down dirty rap by Nancy Pelosi): "Don't protest . . . be happy. Ain't got no guts . . . ain't got no spine. Ain't gonna help you . . . just get mine. But don't protest . . . be happy."
As Lindorff notes, Swanson has detailed the Two Faces of John Conyers -- says one thing when before crowds, says another when back on the hill. Swanson reveals today that Conyers "said, if he were to do that [move forward with impeachment] Fox News would go after him and accuse him of being partisan. I kid you not. The Democratic Chairman of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee is basing his decisions on whether a Republican cable TV station would approve. As Cindy Sheehan told me outside the jail last night: 'If I based my decisions on Fox, I would never do anything'." (As noted Sunday, "Politicians crave their good publicity and when the media tilts to the right, they grasp which way to lean to get valentines. . . . Politicians aren't naturally brave -- it's difficult to win a popularity contest/election on bravery".) Lindorff notes that Iraq Veterans Against the War's Rev. Lennox Yearwood was arrested (really, shame on Conyers -- he's now having the clergy arrested) while Nadir (Distorted Soul via AfterDowningStreet) noted that -- in the worst tradition of The Nation magazine -- John Conyers' staff played dumb, "They asked why this action was directed at him, and not at other congress members. It was explained that protests were also being held in DC and at district offices all over the country. Conyers was being targeted because as Judiciary Chair, he has the power to put H. Res. 333 on the Judiciary Committee agenda." Cindy Sheehan (AfterDowningStreet) reminds, of Conyers, "A year ago he introduced HR635 to impeach George Bush while he was Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee and not even chairman. He wrote the book on impeachment called: The Constitution in Crisis and he readily admits that BushCo have committed impeachable offenses. It's about partisan politics, pure and simple. The Congressman claims that there is absolutley no way that impeachment can go forward and when I was nearing the end of my hope I cried out: 'So, if the people's house won't help us then we the people have no recourse against the executive branch.' To which he replied: 'Yes you do, vote the enablers out in '08.' Firstly, Congressman Conyers told us to put Democrats back in [power in] Congress to end the war and impeach BushCo. We did that and instead of ending the war, they gave George Bush more money to wage it and to conduct his deadly and tragic surge." CODEPINK's Medea Benjamin (Common Dreams) observes, "The arrest of impeachment activists and their forcible eviction from Conyers' office today is proof of the bankruptcy of the two-party system. It is shameful that Conyers and Pelosi are putting their perceived interest of their party above the Constitution, which clearly makes impeachment the remedy for dealing with presidential 'high crimes and misdemeanors'. With the Democratic leadership refusing to rein in an administration run amok, it is crystal clear that we, the people, must uphold the Constitution. People's power, like the kind in evidence today in the normally solemn halls of Congress, is our only hope."
Impeachment is widely supported in the few national polls that survey on it and muncipalities across the nation have passed resolutions in support of it. Robert Parry (Consortium News) observed, "If some historic challenge is not made to the extraordinary assertions of power by President Bush and Vice President Cheney, the United States might lose its status as a democratic Republic based on a Constitution that adheres to the twin principles that no one is above the law and everyone is endowed with 'inalienable rights.' . . . Even if impeachment didn't reach the ultimate goal of removing Bush and Cheney, it would put down a marker of congressional resistance to executive abuses. The public would get the point, too. The current Democratic strategy of fighting and losing legislative battles over symbolic resolutions of disapproval or meaningless votes of no confidence only invites the consolidation of the Bush-Cheney vision of an all-powerful presidency." [Parry's latest book, Neck Deep: The Disastrous Presidency of George W. Bush has just been released. Also Rev. Yearwood is the chair of the Hip Hop Caucus in addition to being a member of IVAW.] >
Ray McGovern (writing at Consortium News) reveals that during the meeting with Conyers yesterday, he, Sheehan and Yearwood were informed by the Rep that what was needed was a "Town Hall meeting in Detroit so we can talk about impeachment" but, as McGovern points out, that already happened: "On May 29, 2007, Col. Ann Wright and I were among those who flew to Detroit for a highly advertised Town Hall meeting on impeachment, because we were assured that John Conyers would be there. The Town Hall/panel discussion was arranged by the Michigan chapter of the National Lawyers Guild less than two weeks after the Detroit City Council passed a resolution, cosponsored by Conyers' wife Monica Conyers -- calling for the impeachment of Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. We had hoped that Monica's clear vision and courage must be contagious. I had to remind the congressman that he did not show up for the Town Hall." And while Conyers can't remember which events took place and which did not, Matthew Rothschild (The Progressive) sounds the alarms about Bully Boy's latest power grabs including the July 17th Executive Order that allows "the Secretary of the Treasury . . . to freeze the assets of any person opposing Bush's Iraq policy" which can be seen to include actions such as a rally calling for the end of the illegal war, throwing "a pie in the face of legislator," arranging for "an Iraqi oil worker" to speak, etc. Rothschild concludes of the Bully Boy, "He's got our democracy by the throat, and he keeps squeezing it. And still the Democratic leadership in the House won't wave their hands for impeachment? We have a renegade in the Oval Office. He is suberting our Constitution. And the only remedy is impeachment. We must apply that remedy before it's too late." [Rothschild's new book is You Have No Rights: Stories of America In An Age of Repression (The New Press, $16.99). Rothschild has concluded one leg of his book tour and will begin a second leg next month: August 14th 7:00 pm, San Luis Obispo Public Library, 995 Palm St, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401; August 15th 7:00 pm, Borders Books, 900 State Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93101 and August 16th 7:00 pm, Book Soup, 8818 W Sunset Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90069.]
Returning to Peace Mom Cindy Sheehan, she has now declared her run in the 2008 elections: "It is also with a heavy heart that I announce my candidacy against Nancy Pelosi in California's 8th. If anybody would dare think that I am not serious, I would hope that they would look back at the last three years of my life and everything that I have sacrificed to restore our nation to one that obeys the rule of law and can be looked up to with respect once again in the international community and not as the hated laughingstock on the block. I am committed to challenging a two party system that has kept us in a state of constant warfare for the last 60 years and has become more and more beholden to special interests and has forgotten the faces of the people whom it represents." Today, at 4:00 pm PST, 6:00 Central and 7:00 EST, Cindy Sheehan will be on KPFK discussing her meeting with Conyers and her decision to run. (Those who see the heads up too late should remember they can utilize the KPFK archives.)
Larry Pinkney (The Black Commentator) may make the case best of the current self-created swamp the US finds itself in (domestically) listing various lies and concluding, "Thus is should come as no surprise that even as America sinks deeper into the self-created bloody quagmire of Iraq, its President, Vice President, the entire US Senate, and a sizeable portion of the US House of Representatives are selectively ignoring the lies which led to the American invasion and occupation of Iraq in the first place. Now these same elements are clamoring for war with Iran while blaming that nation for the deaths of US troops who were themselves taken into Iraq under the patent 'weapons of mass destruction' lie. This insanity will stop only when the people of the United States bring it to an end. The politicians, be they Democrats or Republicans will never end this insanity as they and their corporate bosses are irretrievably intertwined in this symbiotic cycle of insanity."
The insanity largely continued in yesterday's 'debate' (the hyped YouTube debate -- so hyped, so trendy, that even Pat Robertson had to file a YouTube story yesterday on The 700 Club before his sit-down chat with Prince of Darkness Robert Novack). The DNC planned 'debate' brought together candidates for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination . . . at the Citadel in yet another cowardly attempt to hide behind the military. As bad as it is that Democrats sought to represent the people by appearing at a military venue, there's also the fact that the college was originally created, as their own press release notes, "to educate young men whose duty was to protect the city of Charleston from the threat of a slave rebellion." In all the rah-rah, that's not being noted and it should be noted loudly before the next 'debate' includes the donning of white sheets. In a non-ironic moment, the issue of reparations for slavery was raised and, as Jens Manuel Krogstad (Waterloo Ceder Falls Courier) notes, Barack Obama felt it was more important to fund "struggling schools" -- as if that has anything to do with reparations or as if it's an either/or issue -- either we fund schools or we address reparations.
A lot of hot air (possibly no more than usual) filled the auditorium. Two speaking to realities were Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel. US House Rep Kucinich declared, "I introduced a plan four years ago, Anderson [Cooper], that was a full plan to remove our troops. I'm the only one on this stage -- excuse me -- who not only voted against this war, but voted against funding the war. It is not credible to say you oppose the war from the start when you voted to fund it 100 percent of the time, 70 percent, 5 percent of the time. Let's get real about this war. Let's get those troops home and let's take a stand and do it now. Send a message to Congress now. We cannot wait until the next president takes office." It's cute the way commentators see that line in relation to US Senator Hillary and former US Senator John Edwards while ignoring the very obvious point that it applies firmly and completely to US Senator Barack Obama. Former US Senator Gravel stated, "Our soldiers died in Vietnam in vain. You can now, John, go to Hanoi and get a Baskin-robbins ice cream cone. That's what you can do. And now we have most favored nation trade. What did all these people die for? What are they dying for right now in Iraq every single day? Let me tell you: There's only one thing worse than a soldier dying in vain; it's more soldiers dying in vain."
As Democracy Now! noted, Senator Joe Biden declared (in what should be front page news everywhere) that he's been "inside the Green Zone, where I've been seven times and shot at." Biden was shot at inside the Green Zone? That should be front page news. And reporters should be attempting to verify the veracity of that astounding claim. Obama played the weasel he's so good at. Just as he was telling would-be donors in 2004 that he wasn't for withdrawal, his comments in the 'debate' should have also been shocking: "The time for us to ask how we were going to get out of Iraq was before we went in, and that is something that too many of us failed to do. We failed to do it. And I do think that that is something that both Republicans and Democrats have to take responsiblity for." But Obama was taking on responsibilty. He went on to talk about future wars (no surprise to anyone paying attention the war imagery he incorporated into speeches in 2004) and avoided the real issue of withdrawal. In fact, his statements noted above can be seen as a refusal to call for complete withdrawal. He's fond of harping on the fact that he was against the war before it began, he's less prone to point out that he publicly came out against withdrawal repeatedly in 2004.
Former Governor Bill Richardson's website notes Richardon's statement in the 'debate', "This is what I stand for: I believe we should bring all of the troops home in six months with no residual forces" and proclaims, "The Governor was frustrated by the lack of time devoted to exploring the candidate's positions on the Iraq War, and other critical topics. 'If we had more time we could have had a real discussion so people could see my plan is clearly different than the other candidates'."
Meanwhile a citizen named Pat weighs in at Hillary Clinton's website, "During last nights debate it came out that the Iraqi Parlement is going to take a '3 week' vacation 'now', while the country is in the middle of a war. Not to mention the U.S. troops dieing on 'their' streets daily. Now tell me does this make any sence? I suggest we 'all' immediately call/write/or e-mail the President protesting such action. This is outrageous! Also I would like to hear Hillary's response to this situation. Thank you. Pat." Pat seems unaware that while US service members have been dying and while the US has been "in the middle of a war" for over four years now, the US Congress has regularly gone on vacation (declared vacations) -- they took a recess for the 4th, will do so for Labor Day, did so for Memorial Day, etc. Did it make sense? In Baghdad today the high was predicted to be 117 degrees farenheit (that's why so many Iraqis in the summer sleep on the roofs when possible). The temperature is the reason for the planned, announced break. Possibly Pat is comfortable debating in 117 degrees temperatures but that's not really Pat's call to make for others. The White House has made noises of complaint as have some Republicans. The first willing to forgo their own scheduled vacation will probably be taken somewhat serious but, as it is, the Iraqi Parliament already gave up the month of July (part of the two-month vacation). Pat may not be aware of it but the US Congress is scheduled to begin it's own vacation next month -- August 3rd to September 4th. The US Congress really isn't in any position to finger point at the Iraqi Parliament over the issue of vacations.
The biggest whiners in the US about the Iraqi Parliament going on vacation are those who fret over the fact that US imposed benchmarks aren't being met, such as passage of US drafted legislation which would permit the theft of Iraqi oil. The Green Party of the US has "declared their support for the tens of thousands of Iraqis, including labor unions, who are protesting the Iraqi oil law 'benchmark' that the Bush Administration and supporters are seeking to impose as a condition for reconstruction aid. On July 16, Iraqis took to the streets of Basra in a demonstration organized by the Iraqi Federation of Oil Unions against the proposed law, which would place 2/3 of Iraqi oil under foreign control, granting 30-year contracts to US and UK energy corporations for 'development' of Iraq's oil resources."
At The Notion, Ari Berman takes on the New York Times for their . . . headline. Yesterday, Wally addressed the realities here, Cedric here and we did so this morning here. Berman's late to the party and only semi-dressed. The headline in question is to Megan Thee's "Support for Initial Invasion Has Risen, Poll Shows" and the headline is the least of the problems. Thee repeatedly compares the latest CBS-New York Times poll to the previous one. Anyone paying attention would immediately grasp the earlier poll had 1554 respondents while this one has 889. They would also grasp why this was -- when you poll on the weekend, you get a lower number of respondents and you also tend to get a more sedentary grouping. Seizing a statistical anomaly, Thee sells the myth that there is a rise in support for the illegal invasion. A poll is useless on its own. Where it is reliable is when it finds trends over times. Running with an anomaly as news is not only ignorant, it's unprofessional. When CBS News noted the joint poll yesterday, they didn't run with the anomaly (the difference between professionals and idiots?). They noted the trends and what the Times runs with is billed (near the end of CBS' report) as "slightly" not trumpeted as "Support for Initial Invasion Has Risen, Polls Shows!" Megan Thee and the New York Times are pushing nonsense and calling out the headline hardly cuts it (as "real time" criticism or otherwise). The trends? Bully Boy's at 25% approval for Iraq, Congress is at 26% approval overall, 63% say that there should be no funding without a timetable for withdrawal, etc.
Staying with polling news Jon Cohen and Dan Balz (Washington Post) report on the Washington Post-ABC News poll (1,125 respondents) which finds low marks for the Bully Boy and for Congress but the public citing a preference for "the Democratic-controlled Congress [to] make decisions about a possible withdrawal of U.S. forces" (6/10s state Congress has final say).
Today on KPFK's Uprising, Rahul Mahajan delivered a commentary on the United States lousy practice of accepting refugees from Iraq and the historical practice of 'rewarding': "But the US record of dealing decently with its allies and collaborators is a remarkabley poor one. In Iraq, the United States three times abandoned the Kurds to their fate -- in 1974, 1991, and 1996. The first time around, Henry Kissinger, explaining the abandonment to Congress, explained superciliously that 'covert action should not be confused with missionary work.' The second time was part of one of the worst crimes of the United States in the post-Vietnam era -- when the sainted George Bush Sr. called on the Iraqi people to rise upagainst Saddam, then panicked when they did and helped Saddam in brutally suppressing them. The third time, in what some have called the 'Bay of Camels,' a sudden invasion of northern Iraq (nominally part of the same country, but under autonomous administration since the Gulf War) caught the CIA completely unprepared and resulted in the slaughter of thousands of locals with whom they had been working, most of whom they made no effort to remove from harm's way." In addition to audio being available at the KPFA archives, Rahul Mahajan's commentary can also be read at his website Empire Notes. (Sonali Kohatkar also interviewed journalist David Enders about a number of topics including his decision to become an embedded reporter on his recent trip to Iraq.)
On Sunday, Spence S. Hsu (Washington Post) reported Ryan Crocker was requesting that the US government "take the unusual step of granting immigrant visas to all Iraqis employed by the U.S. government in Iraq because of growing concern that they will quit and flee the country if they cannot be assured eventual safe passage to the United States" and reveals that despite public promises/goals of admitting 7,000 by September, since last October, only 133 have been admitted. Today, Helene Cooper (New York Times) reported that the administration is "trying to help." One would hope so, Crocker is the US ambassador to Iraq.
In Baghdad today, Iran and the US met. As Mohammed al Dulaimy and Hannah Allam (McClatchy Newspapers) reportedyesterday, Iraqis weren't immediately included in the talks taking place in their own capital and directly impacting their country: "some Iraqi officials had complained that they were being sidelined; another example of overlapping forces at play in Iraq. It was later agreed that Iraqi officials would observe the talks, though U.S.-Iranian interests would take center stage." CBS and AP report that the meeting led to an agreement "to set up a security subcommittee to carry foward talks on restoring stability in Iraq" according to Ryan Crocker. CBS News' Pamela Falk states that "the point of the talks is broader, and that is to open channels of communication". Alexandra Zavis (Los Angeles Times) reports that accusations were exchanged while puppet of the occupation, Nouri al-Maliki, pleaded for both sides to be sincere and keep Iraq's best interests in mind. This as War Pornographer Michael Gordon (New York Times) salivates over the US military's Joint Campaign Plan which plans for the next two years of illegal war in Iraq. Robert Burns and Pauline Jelinek (AP) report that the plan sees 2009 as when "local authorities" will be "enforcing security" and yet "leaves open the question of how many US troops will still be needed". Alexandra Zavis (Los Angeles Times) reported on the Green Zone "embassy" the US is building ("nearly $600-million cost") which truly serves notice that the US isn't planning on leaving. (And demonstrates the centrist and creepy Council for Foreign Relations can also be offensive as Stephen Biddle spits out a little about Native Americans and no one's supposed to notice.)
In Iraq today . . .
Bombings?
The bombing causing the most fatalities took place in Hilla today. The Telegraph of London reports that the bombing took place "opposite a children's hospital . . . setting cars ablaze in a street packed with shoppers and people on their way to work." CBS and AP note that "Eassam Rashid, 32, was selling vegetables at his stall when the blast sent shrapnel over his head." AFX notes that at least 24 people were killed in the blast while approximately 66 are listed as wounded and Lt. Eid al-Shammari declaring, "Most of the wounded were women and children, and the blast destroyed 15 vehicles and about 20 nearby shops." Al Jazeera reports the death toll rose to 26.
Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that there are 27 dead and 68 wounded and also notes a Baghdad roadside bombing that left 2 Iraqi soldiers wounded, a mortar attack on the Green Zone, a Baghdad roadside bombing that killed one police officer (three more wounded), a Basra mortar attack (on a hospital) claimed 3 lives (fourteen wounded), a mortar attack in Diyala that claimed 1 life and injured the man's wife.
Shootings?
Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports: "Gunmen killed Brigadier General Kamal Tahir in Al Kadhmiya. Tahir is an officer of the Iraqi minister of defense and a member of Kadhemiya city council, Iraq police said." Reuters reports, "Gunmen seriously wounded a police colonel and his son and blew up three houses in Dhuluiya" and that "a civil servant" was shot dead in Kirkuk.
Corpses?
Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that 18 corpses were discovered in Baghdad. The total number of US service members killed in the illegal war has now reached 3637 since the start of the illegal war (ICCC). Since yesterday's snapshot, the US military announced: "A 13th SC(E) Soldier was killed July 21 as a result of injuries sustained when an improvised explosive device detonated near his Humvee while conducting a combat logistics patrol south of Samarra, Iraq." And they announced: "A Task Force Marne Soldier died of wounds sustained after an improvised explosive device attack July 22."
Finally, last week in Iraq Peter McFerran was killed. The BBC reports that his father, professor Robert McFeran who served in the Royal Air Force for 10 years, is now calling "on Prime Minister Gordon Brown to start withdrawing British troops."
iraq
agustin aguayo
los angeles times
democracy now
amy goodman
mcclatchy newspapers
matthew rothschild
alexandra zavis
los angeles times
the new york times
michael gordon
the washington post
the daily jot
cedrics big mix
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
Monday, July 23, 2007
Short post
"Five Pro-U.S. Sunni Leaders Assassinated" (Democracy Now!):
In the Iraqi city of Taji, at least five pro-U.S. Sunni leaders were assassinated on Saturday in a suicide bomb during a meeting.
I thought I'd open with that because we're supposed to have (yet again) "turned a corner" when no corner has been turned (ever). But the US military is really proud that they've got some promises (with hand shakes to back them up!) that things are going to change. You can read "Iraq reporting MSM style" for more on that. You can also realize that you are yet again being lied to by the administration and pretty much every candidate who wants to be president.
"The Democrats' Iraqi Dilemma: Questions Unasked, Answers Never Volunteered" (Ira Chernus, Truthout):
Pity the poor Democratic candidates for president, caught between Iraq and a hard place. Every day, more and more voters decide that we must end the war and set a date to start withdrawing our troops from Iraq. Most who will vote in the Democratic primaries concluded long ago that we must leave Iraq, and they are unlikely to let anyone who disagrees with them have the party's nomination in 2008.
But what does it mean to "leave Iraq"? Here's where most of the Democratic candidates come smack up against that hard place. There is a longstanding bipartisan consensus in the foreign-policy establishment that the U.S. must control every strategically valuable region of the world - and none more so than the oil heartlands of the planet. That's been a hard-and-fast rule of the elite for some six decades now. No matter how hard the task may be, they demand that presidents be rock-hard enough to get the job done.
So whatever "leave Iraq" might mean, no candidate of either party likely to enter the White House on January 20, 2009 can think it means letting Iraqis determine their own national policies or fate. The powers that be just wouldn't stand for that. They see themselves as the guardians of world "order." They feel a sacred obligation to maintain "stability" throughout the imperial domains, which now means most of planet Earth - regardless of what voters may think. The Democratic front-runners know that "order" and "stability" are code words for American hegemony. They also know that voters, especially Democratic ones, see the price of hegemony in Iraq and just don't want to pay it anymore.
So the Democratic front-runners must promise voters that they will end the war - with not too many ideologically laden ifs, ands, or buts - while they assure the foreign-policy establishment that they will never abandon the drive for hegemony in the Middle East (or anywhere else). In other words, the candidates have to be able to talk out of both sides of their mouths at the same time.
No worries, it turns out. Fluency in doublespeak is a prime qualification for high political office. On Iraq, candidates Dennis Kucinich and Bill Richardson don't meet that test. They tell anyone and everyone that they want "all" U.S. troops out of Iraq, but they register only 1-4% in the polls and are generally ignored in the media. The Democrats currently topping the polls, on the other hand, are proving themselves eminently qualified in doublespeak.
So that's reality. That's also why you see Democratic leadership in Congress refusing to call for a genuine withdrawal. In the House, Nancy Pelosi obviously wants bases in Iraq which is why she tries to go existential when questioned on "permanent bases" by responding nothing is "permanent." Cowardice may be. I guess we'll all have to watch Congress to determine that.
Speaking of cowards (and fools), "Sweet Nepotism" is about Koo Koo Katrina vanden Heuvel. In "A Note to Our Readers," Jim notes that C.I. asked for edits. That is true but, in answer to two e-mails today, that wasn't a problem. On one section, I was actually in agreement. This was written for fun and for the print edition -- not the online edition -- and when it was suggested we pull it over for online use, it was Rebecca who said it will need to be edited. C.I. offered "take my name off" and it could run as is. But there was one section I was uncomfortable with (it was deleted in the online version) and another section that got pulled. So, answering the question, it wasn't a problem that it was edited. While I'm noting things, please be sure to read Ava and C.I.'s commentary on ABC's Brothers & Sisters entitled "TV: Losers & Fools." A lot of criticism is rightly made of news outlets pitting conservatives against centrists for a 'debate' and billing the centrists as "from the left." It's not just a "news" thing and Brothers & Sisters is a disgusting show.
"Facing the Truth" (Monica Benderman, CounterPunch):
It's about time Americans faced the truth. Today a Marine not only convicted of conspiring to commit kidnapping, larceny, and making false statements; but the murder--MURDER--of an innocent Iraqi man, was given his sentence. He is to receive a reduction in rank and a bad conduct discharge.
THIS is what America has become.
It is now considered "bad conduct" to murder an unarmed man, knowingly return to the scene to fabricate the appearance of self-defense and hide the facts after the fact.
Murdering an innocent Iraqi is now considered "Bad Conduct." In 2004 my husband, a ten-year US Army veteran, made a conscious decision to no longer participate in war--he spoke openly of the bad conduct of his commanders in giving orders to soldiers in his unit which not only jeopardized the lives of innocent Iraqis, and children, but also those of the soldiers he served with.
For his decision to no longer be part of the destruction, wanton killing, and unjust, immoral action this war has shown itself to be, my husband was accused of being a deserter, faced trumped up, fabricated charges of intentionally missing his unit's movement, and when the first court-martial attempt failed, was handed additional trumped up charges of larceny for combat pay his command erroneously placed in his paycheck. During a second court-martial attempt he was found guilty of missing movement or not getting on a plane and was sentenced to 15 months in prison, loss of all pay, reduction in rank and a dishonorable discharge.
A veteran with ten years of honorable service, who took a stand to no longer participate in an action in which murdering innocents is acceptable is now considered "Dishonorable."
How low do you intend to go, America?
When a sentence like that is handed out it's an insult to justice, an insult to Iraqis (saying their lives are unimportant) and an insult to the US military (saying that this behavior is expected and common place). It says a great deal that a murder results in no prison time. It says a great deal about all three categories. It also, as Monica Benderman points out, says a great deal about the American public. I'd argue it's an indictment of us, that we're perfectly willing to ignore a murder.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Monday, July 23, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces the death of another US service member, on Sunday the US bombed civilians (today the British follow suit), Iran and the US plan to meet tomorrow in Baghdad, and more.
Starting with war resistance. Agustin Aguayo served in Iraq as a medic and attempted to be granted CO status. The US military refused to grant it and claimed that there had to be a religious awkening (which CO status does not require) while ignoring Aguayo's religious awakening. After his first tour, Aguayo was stationed in Germany when he was informed he would be returning to Iraq. Aguayo self-checked out and returned in less than 30 days which DID NOT prevent the US military from charging him with desertion (despite the fact that the accepted measure for a desertion charge is a minimum of 30 days). Aguayo's court-martial was held in the spring and he was sentenced to prison but the time since the end of September was recognized as time served. Aguayo is now back in the US and speaking out. Sunday he spoke in Los Angeles and Stuart Silverstein (Los Angeles Times) reports
he "received a hero's welcome" and declared that while serving in Iraq, "I realized I wasn't just a medic, someone that helps and patches up and heals the wounded. I was much more. I was an enabler of these missions." Silverstein reports that Aguayo self-describes as a "conscientious objector/war resister." The Acorn reports that Aguayo will speak this Thursday from 7:00 pm to 8:30 pm at Grant Brimhall, Thousand Oaks Library, 1401 E. James Rd., that the event is "free and open to the public" and more information is available by calling (805) 375-9939.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Jared Hood and James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Joshua Key, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Jeremy Hinzman, Stephen Funk, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Care, Kyle Huwer, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty-one US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters.
In a press briefing (via videolink) with reporters at the US Pentagon, General Walter E. Gaskin, declared Friday, that "we have turned the corner. . . .we truly turned the corner". Reality? As noted by Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) today, "New Pentagon statistics show that the number of attacks in Iraq last month reached their highest daily average since May 2003. The data, which was obtained by Reuters, shows an upward trend in daily attacks in the four months since President Bush decided to escalate the war. During the month of June there was a daily average of 178 attacks against coalition troops, Iraqi security forces, civilians and infrastructure."
Over the weekend, the US military conducted an air strike in the heavily populated area north of the capital. Richard A. Oppel Jr. and Qais Mizher (New York Times) reported that the US military asserted they had killed 'insurgents' only. Molly Hennessy-Fiske (Los Angeles Times) reported that the Saturday air attack was disputed by eye witnesses in Husseiniya "said U.S. helicopters attacked three houses in a four-hour period, killing at least 18 people, including women and children. They said about 21 people were wounded in the attacks, which leveled the buildings" and quoted Hazim Hussein stating, "It was a war and not a response to an attack targeting them. It was a war against civilians inside their houses."
Hannah Allam and Jenan Hussein (McClatchy Newspapers) quoted Salam al Rubaiye who disputed the US military's account and declared, "Lies, lies, lies.The Americans always try to change the truth, especially when it concerns the Sadrists," and Bassem Musawi who stated, "I took out with my own hands the bodies of two young children, two men, two adult women and four little girls. I don't know why the Americans bombed these homes. I know one was the house of Abu Mustafa. He's a very poor man with only one boy and the rest of his family are girls. And he didn't even have a rifle." Democracy Now! today quoted one unidentified resident declaring, "This is what the occupation does. The occupation. Look at the fork-lift trucks, they've turned the world upside down, our relatives have been ripped to pieces. Does God accept this? Does Mohammed accept it? Why, are we heathens? Even Israel hasn't done anything like this. Israel did not do what America has done to us." And Amy Goodman (DN!) informed that "Sunday nearly 1,000 Iraqis rallied in Husseiniya to protest the killings."
In some of today's violence . . .
Bombings?
Sinan Salaheddin (AP) noted three car bombings in Baghdad today "within thirty minutes" Mohammed al Dulaimy and Hannah Allam (McClatchy Newspapers) report that three car bombs were followed later in the day by a fourth with an estimated 18 people being killed while at least 40 were wounded, that "Madhi Army militiamen barred a journlist from photographing the scene," that the Badr militia "set up their own checkpoing" within a 100 feet of the US forces (with apparently no US objection), and quote locals including Haider who declared, "We don't have a government! It's worthless. Bring me one honest man from the Sunnis or the Shiites!" and an elderly woman who asked, "Why are they killing us? We have no one left! They aren't saving anyone, they're killing civilians. And who's behind this?"
before pointing "to the American soldiers."
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad bus bombing claimed 1 life and left seven more wounded, a Baghdad mortar attack left four people injured, a bombing on Kafri - Tooz St. targeting Soleman Beck (who survived), a Mosul mortar attack that claimed the lives of 3 members of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, a child was wounded in a rocket attack in Basra, and one person was killed in Basra bombing by British forces which left eight more injured and damaged homes. BBC reports, "At least two policemen were killed and 10 wounded when a woman hiding an explosives belt under her Islamic gown blew herself up in the western Anbar province."
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports the inury of 4 Iraqi soldiers from gunfire in Baghdad, 2 people shot dead in Baghdad, 2 people shot dead in Mosul, "2 electricity directorate workers" shot dead in Baquba (a third wounded), 2 shot dead at a fake check point in Khalis (five kidnapped, one wounded), and 2 shot dead at a fake check point in Khanaqeen (one wounded and at least two kidnapped). BBC reports, "Two people were shot dead in the town of Iskandariya, south of the Iraqi capital " CBS and AP report that the two were husband and wife and that a police officer was also killed.
Corpses?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 24 corpses discovered in Baghdad, 3 in Tooz, 1 in Bani Saad, and 8 in Mosul. CBS and AP report 3 corpses discovered "at a construction site in Iskandariyah".
Today the US military announced: "One MNC-I Soldier was killed when an improvised explosive device detonated next to his vehicle during combat operations in Baghdad Saturday." The announcement brings the ICCC total to 3633 US service members killed in the illegal war with 54 of those for the month of July thus far.
Turning to political news. On Sunday, Turkey held elections. Today's Zaman reports that the results of the election meant no big changes with the AK Party retaining their hold on power in "a landslide victory" leaving it "projected to win 340 seats in the 550-member Parliament." AP is calling it "a mandate" while noting "the new government faces a series of challenges, including a presidential election, Kurdish rebel violence and lingering tension over the role of Islam in society." Al Jazeera quotes Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan declaring, "This is the first time in 52 years that a party in power has increased its votes for a second term. We will continue to work with determination to achieve our European Union goal" but notes EU membership remains elusive with France objecting and other countries wanting to see more reforms. Today's Zaman notes there was a record and peaceful turnout with an estimated 42,533,041 people casting ballots. The Kurdish also won more seats in the election and this applies to Iraq in that the PKK, defined as a "terrorist group" by many Western nations including the United States, has favored a separatist movement in Turkey and is said to receive support in northern Iraq which has led to cross-border excursions by the Turkish military in recent months as well an exchange of mortars. As The Turkish Daily News noted Friday, Turkey is asking Iraq to extradite Ali Riza Altun (head of the PKK) after Austria waived him through. The Turkish Daily News also reports that Kurdish leader Leyla Zana is under investigation for remarks at a Friday get-out-the-vote rally where she allegedly called for the partitioning of Turkey supposedly stating, "It is time to divide Turkey into states. Ankara: Divide the country into states and establish the state of Kurdistan."
In United States political news, John V. Walsh (CounterPunch) reports that the tired and boring Toad is back in the news penning an op-ed whining about Ralph Nader who may or may not run in the 2008 presidential election. Walsh notes that chants of "Run, Ralph, Run!" sprang up while Nader was speaking at this month's Green Party convention. Walsh reports that Toad gives a sloppy wet kiss to WalkOn.org and hails it for its close relationship with DC (a relationship some might characterize as fondeling) despite the reality that "Gallup shows . . . the public is fed up with the crowd in Congress" referencing the fact that Congress' current approval rating is lower than when the Republicans were in charge in 2006.
On the Green Party convention, Kimberly Wilder reported on it at her site and you can click here for video of Nadar addressing ballot access. No known video exists of Toad fueling rumors that he is the Dark Lord; however, several Manhattan adult video outlets may be of assistance.
In diplomatic news, CBS and AP report that Iran and the US will meet in Baghdad tomorrow as a follow up to their May Baghdad meeting and that the US continues its whisper campaign accusing the Iranian government of arming Iraqis opposed to the US illegal war and occupation in their own country. In a Thursday press briefing (via videolink) with reporters, Lt. General Ray Odierno attempted to up the whisper campaign by claiming that
there was "a link between Iranian support to extremists" meaning al Qaeda but, when questioned further, admitted, "We don't see any evidence -- significant evidence".
Mohammed al Dulaimy and Hannah Allam (McClatchy Newspapers) report that "some Iraqi officials had complained that they were being sidelined; another example of overlapping forces at play in Iraq. It was later agreed that Iraqi officials would observe the talks, though U.S.-Iranian interests would take center stage."
This as Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) informs that 'benchmarks' are stalled in Iraq for a number of reasons including the planned vacation by the Iraqi Parliament next month (due to the increase heat) which makes it unlikely that anything will be passed before the US Congress receives the September 'progress' report that the White House had set as its own 'benchmark' but now tries to back peddle away from furiously with US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker declaring that the 'benchmarks' really don't matter. This follows the down playing of the September report by Lt. General Ray Odierno, Commander Multinational Corps-Iraq, in the Thursday press briefing where he stated that November was the time the escalation could really, really be measured. When questioned about the push-back in the briefing, Odierno responded, "What I was saying is -- again, my remarks were, in 45 days I will have a better idea if the trends are continuing, and that's September. Obviously, we have an assessment we will conduct in September that will provide -- that General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker will provide. I was not looking at extending that time frame when they have to report back. What I imagine we'll have to do is do assessments that follow that initial assessment in September, and that's -- I'm assuming we'll continue to do assessments while we're here." Odierno never stated the September report would not take place -- nor could he, Congress accepted Bully Boy's talk of 'benchmarks,' wrote them into legislation and they are now Congressionally mandated.
Despite those facts (Congressionally mandated and Odierno being clear that he wasn't saying the report was off), Thom Shanker and David E. Sanger (New York Times) spun Saturday trying to make 'good news' out of the fact that the September report was still 'on' -- it was never off. This was grasped on Thursday (by those paying attention) and on Friday when Tony Snow, White House flack, gave a press briefing and tried to Happy Talk the way Sanger and Shanker would the following day. When Snow attempted that, a reporter at the press briefing responded, "We know that he [Odierno] didn't ask to change the September reporting date. That isn't the point." But the New York Times tried to play dumb and make it the point on Saturday. The actual point is that the White House is attempting a push-back wherein they begin selling, "Ignore the September report we've repeatedly cited. It doesn't matter. What really matters is the November report." The push-back is to lower expectations, clampdown on public outrage and attempt to buy more time for the illegal war.
iraq
agustin aguayolos angeles timesdemocracy now
amy goodmanmcclatchy newspapersthe new york timesthom shankerdavid e. sanger
alissa j. rubin
In the Iraqi city of Taji, at least five pro-U.S. Sunni leaders were assassinated on Saturday in a suicide bomb during a meeting.
I thought I'd open with that because we're supposed to have (yet again) "turned a corner" when no corner has been turned (ever). But the US military is really proud that they've got some promises (with hand shakes to back them up!) that things are going to change. You can read "Iraq reporting MSM style" for more on that. You can also realize that you are yet again being lied to by the administration and pretty much every candidate who wants to be president.
"The Democrats' Iraqi Dilemma: Questions Unasked, Answers Never Volunteered" (Ira Chernus, Truthout):
Pity the poor Democratic candidates for president, caught between Iraq and a hard place. Every day, more and more voters decide that we must end the war and set a date to start withdrawing our troops from Iraq. Most who will vote in the Democratic primaries concluded long ago that we must leave Iraq, and they are unlikely to let anyone who disagrees with them have the party's nomination in 2008.
But what does it mean to "leave Iraq"? Here's where most of the Democratic candidates come smack up against that hard place. There is a longstanding bipartisan consensus in the foreign-policy establishment that the U.S. must control every strategically valuable region of the world - and none more so than the oil heartlands of the planet. That's been a hard-and-fast rule of the elite for some six decades now. No matter how hard the task may be, they demand that presidents be rock-hard enough to get the job done.
So whatever "leave Iraq" might mean, no candidate of either party likely to enter the White House on January 20, 2009 can think it means letting Iraqis determine their own national policies or fate. The powers that be just wouldn't stand for that. They see themselves as the guardians of world "order." They feel a sacred obligation to maintain "stability" throughout the imperial domains, which now means most of planet Earth - regardless of what voters may think. The Democratic front-runners know that "order" and "stability" are code words for American hegemony. They also know that voters, especially Democratic ones, see the price of hegemony in Iraq and just don't want to pay it anymore.
So the Democratic front-runners must promise voters that they will end the war - with not too many ideologically laden ifs, ands, or buts - while they assure the foreign-policy establishment that they will never abandon the drive for hegemony in the Middle East (or anywhere else). In other words, the candidates have to be able to talk out of both sides of their mouths at the same time.
No worries, it turns out. Fluency in doublespeak is a prime qualification for high political office. On Iraq, candidates Dennis Kucinich and Bill Richardson don't meet that test. They tell anyone and everyone that they want "all" U.S. troops out of Iraq, but they register only 1-4% in the polls and are generally ignored in the media. The Democrats currently topping the polls, on the other hand, are proving themselves eminently qualified in doublespeak.
So that's reality. That's also why you see Democratic leadership in Congress refusing to call for a genuine withdrawal. In the House, Nancy Pelosi obviously wants bases in Iraq which is why she tries to go existential when questioned on "permanent bases" by responding nothing is "permanent." Cowardice may be. I guess we'll all have to watch Congress to determine that.
Speaking of cowards (and fools), "Sweet Nepotism" is about Koo Koo Katrina vanden Heuvel. In "A Note to Our Readers," Jim notes that C.I. asked for edits. That is true but, in answer to two e-mails today, that wasn't a problem. On one section, I was actually in agreement. This was written for fun and for the print edition -- not the online edition -- and when it was suggested we pull it over for online use, it was Rebecca who said it will need to be edited. C.I. offered "take my name off" and it could run as is. But there was one section I was uncomfortable with (it was deleted in the online version) and another section that got pulled. So, answering the question, it wasn't a problem that it was edited. While I'm noting things, please be sure to read Ava and C.I.'s commentary on ABC's Brothers & Sisters entitled "TV: Losers & Fools." A lot of criticism is rightly made of news outlets pitting conservatives against centrists for a 'debate' and billing the centrists as "from the left." It's not just a "news" thing and Brothers & Sisters is a disgusting show.
"Facing the Truth" (Monica Benderman, CounterPunch):
It's about time Americans faced the truth. Today a Marine not only convicted of conspiring to commit kidnapping, larceny, and making false statements; but the murder--MURDER--of an innocent Iraqi man, was given his sentence. He is to receive a reduction in rank and a bad conduct discharge.
THIS is what America has become.
It is now considered "bad conduct" to murder an unarmed man, knowingly return to the scene to fabricate the appearance of self-defense and hide the facts after the fact.
Murdering an innocent Iraqi is now considered "Bad Conduct." In 2004 my husband, a ten-year US Army veteran, made a conscious decision to no longer participate in war--he spoke openly of the bad conduct of his commanders in giving orders to soldiers in his unit which not only jeopardized the lives of innocent Iraqis, and children, but also those of the soldiers he served with.
For his decision to no longer be part of the destruction, wanton killing, and unjust, immoral action this war has shown itself to be, my husband was accused of being a deserter, faced trumped up, fabricated charges of intentionally missing his unit's movement, and when the first court-martial attempt failed, was handed additional trumped up charges of larceny for combat pay his command erroneously placed in his paycheck. During a second court-martial attempt he was found guilty of missing movement or not getting on a plane and was sentenced to 15 months in prison, loss of all pay, reduction in rank and a dishonorable discharge.
A veteran with ten years of honorable service, who took a stand to no longer participate in an action in which murdering innocents is acceptable is now considered "Dishonorable."
How low do you intend to go, America?
When a sentence like that is handed out it's an insult to justice, an insult to Iraqis (saying their lives are unimportant) and an insult to the US military (saying that this behavior is expected and common place). It says a great deal that a murder results in no prison time. It says a great deal about all three categories. It also, as Monica Benderman points out, says a great deal about the American public. I'd argue it's an indictment of us, that we're perfectly willing to ignore a murder.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Monday, July 23, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces the death of another US service member, on Sunday the US bombed civilians (today the British follow suit), Iran and the US plan to meet tomorrow in Baghdad, and more.
Starting with war resistance. Agustin Aguayo served in Iraq as a medic and attempted to be granted CO status. The US military refused to grant it and claimed that there had to be a religious awkening (which CO status does not require) while ignoring Aguayo's religious awakening. After his first tour, Aguayo was stationed in Germany when he was informed he would be returning to Iraq. Aguayo self-checked out and returned in less than 30 days which DID NOT prevent the US military from charging him with desertion (despite the fact that the accepted measure for a desertion charge is a minimum of 30 days). Aguayo's court-martial was held in the spring and he was sentenced to prison but the time since the end of September was recognized as time served. Aguayo is now back in the US and speaking out. Sunday he spoke in Los Angeles and Stuart Silverstein (Los Angeles Times) reports
he "received a hero's welcome" and declared that while serving in Iraq, "I realized I wasn't just a medic, someone that helps and patches up and heals the wounded. I was much more. I was an enabler of these missions." Silverstein reports that Aguayo self-describes as a "conscientious objector/war resister." The Acorn reports that Aguayo will speak this Thursday from 7:00 pm to 8:30 pm at Grant Brimhall, Thousand Oaks Library, 1401 E. James Rd., that the event is "free and open to the public" and more information is available by calling (805) 375-9939.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Jared Hood and James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Joshua Key, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Jeremy Hinzman, Stephen Funk, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Care, Kyle Huwer, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty-one US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters.
In a press briefing (via videolink) with reporters at the US Pentagon, General Walter E. Gaskin, declared Friday, that "we have turned the corner. . . .we truly turned the corner". Reality? As noted by Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) today, "New Pentagon statistics show that the number of attacks in Iraq last month reached their highest daily average since May 2003. The data, which was obtained by Reuters, shows an upward trend in daily attacks in the four months since President Bush decided to escalate the war. During the month of June there was a daily average of 178 attacks against coalition troops, Iraqi security forces, civilians and infrastructure."
Over the weekend, the US military conducted an air strike in the heavily populated area north of the capital. Richard A. Oppel Jr. and Qais Mizher (New York Times) reported that the US military asserted they had killed 'insurgents' only. Molly Hennessy-Fiske (Los Angeles Times) reported that the Saturday air attack was disputed by eye witnesses in Husseiniya "said U.S. helicopters attacked three houses in a four-hour period, killing at least 18 people, including women and children. They said about 21 people were wounded in the attacks, which leveled the buildings" and quoted Hazim Hussein stating, "It was a war and not a response to an attack targeting them. It was a war against civilians inside their houses."
Hannah Allam and Jenan Hussein (McClatchy Newspapers) quoted Salam al Rubaiye who disputed the US military's account and declared, "Lies, lies, lies.The Americans always try to change the truth, especially when it concerns the Sadrists," and Bassem Musawi who stated, "I took out with my own hands the bodies of two young children, two men, two adult women and four little girls. I don't know why the Americans bombed these homes. I know one was the house of Abu Mustafa. He's a very poor man with only one boy and the rest of his family are girls. And he didn't even have a rifle." Democracy Now! today quoted one unidentified resident declaring, "This is what the occupation does. The occupation. Look at the fork-lift trucks, they've turned the world upside down, our relatives have been ripped to pieces. Does God accept this? Does Mohammed accept it? Why, are we heathens? Even Israel hasn't done anything like this. Israel did not do what America has done to us." And Amy Goodman (DN!) informed that "Sunday nearly 1,000 Iraqis rallied in Husseiniya to protest the killings."
In some of today's violence . . .
Bombings?
Sinan Salaheddin (AP) noted three car bombings in Baghdad today "within thirty minutes" Mohammed al Dulaimy and Hannah Allam (McClatchy Newspapers) report that three car bombs were followed later in the day by a fourth with an estimated 18 people being killed while at least 40 were wounded, that "Madhi Army militiamen barred a journlist from photographing the scene," that the Badr militia "set up their own checkpoing" within a 100 feet of the US forces (with apparently no US objection), and quote locals including Haider who declared, "We don't have a government! It's worthless. Bring me one honest man from the Sunnis or the Shiites!" and an elderly woman who asked, "Why are they killing us? We have no one left! They aren't saving anyone, they're killing civilians. And who's behind this?"
before pointing "to the American soldiers."
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad bus bombing claimed 1 life and left seven more wounded, a Baghdad mortar attack left four people injured, a bombing on Kafri - Tooz St. targeting Soleman Beck (who survived), a Mosul mortar attack that claimed the lives of 3 members of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, a child was wounded in a rocket attack in Basra, and one person was killed in Basra bombing by British forces which left eight more injured and damaged homes. BBC reports, "At least two policemen were killed and 10 wounded when a woman hiding an explosives belt under her Islamic gown blew herself up in the western Anbar province."
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports the inury of 4 Iraqi soldiers from gunfire in Baghdad, 2 people shot dead in Baghdad, 2 people shot dead in Mosul, "2 electricity directorate workers" shot dead in Baquba (a third wounded), 2 shot dead at a fake check point in Khalis (five kidnapped, one wounded), and 2 shot dead at a fake check point in Khanaqeen (one wounded and at least two kidnapped). BBC reports, "Two people were shot dead in the town of Iskandariya, south of the Iraqi capital " CBS and AP report that the two were husband and wife and that a police officer was also killed.
Corpses?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 24 corpses discovered in Baghdad, 3 in Tooz, 1 in Bani Saad, and 8 in Mosul. CBS and AP report 3 corpses discovered "at a construction site in Iskandariyah".
Today the US military announced: "One MNC-I Soldier was killed when an improvised explosive device detonated next to his vehicle during combat operations in Baghdad Saturday." The announcement brings the ICCC total to 3633 US service members killed in the illegal war with 54 of those for the month of July thus far.
Turning to political news. On Sunday, Turkey held elections. Today's Zaman reports that the results of the election meant no big changes with the AK Party retaining their hold on power in "a landslide victory" leaving it "projected to win 340 seats in the 550-member Parliament." AP is calling it "a mandate" while noting "the new government faces a series of challenges, including a presidential election, Kurdish rebel violence and lingering tension over the role of Islam in society." Al Jazeera quotes Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan declaring, "This is the first time in 52 years that a party in power has increased its votes for a second term. We will continue to work with determination to achieve our European Union goal" but notes EU membership remains elusive with France objecting and other countries wanting to see more reforms. Today's Zaman notes there was a record and peaceful turnout with an estimated 42,533,041 people casting ballots. The Kurdish also won more seats in the election and this applies to Iraq in that the PKK, defined as a "terrorist group" by many Western nations including the United States, has favored a separatist movement in Turkey and is said to receive support in northern Iraq which has led to cross-border excursions by the Turkish military in recent months as well an exchange of mortars. As The Turkish Daily News noted Friday, Turkey is asking Iraq to extradite Ali Riza Altun (head of the PKK) after Austria waived him through. The Turkish Daily News also reports that Kurdish leader Leyla Zana is under investigation for remarks at a Friday get-out-the-vote rally where she allegedly called for the partitioning of Turkey supposedly stating, "It is time to divide Turkey into states. Ankara: Divide the country into states and establish the state of Kurdistan."
In United States political news, John V. Walsh (CounterPunch) reports that the tired and boring Toad is back in the news penning an op-ed whining about Ralph Nader who may or may not run in the 2008 presidential election. Walsh notes that chants of "Run, Ralph, Run!" sprang up while Nader was speaking at this month's Green Party convention. Walsh reports that Toad gives a sloppy wet kiss to WalkOn.org and hails it for its close relationship with DC (a relationship some might characterize as fondeling) despite the reality that "Gallup shows . . . the public is fed up with the crowd in Congress" referencing the fact that Congress' current approval rating is lower than when the Republicans were in charge in 2006.
On the Green Party convention, Kimberly Wilder reported on it at her site and you can click here for video of Nadar addressing ballot access. No known video exists of Toad fueling rumors that he is the Dark Lord; however, several Manhattan adult video outlets may be of assistance.
In diplomatic news, CBS and AP report that Iran and the US will meet in Baghdad tomorrow as a follow up to their May Baghdad meeting and that the US continues its whisper campaign accusing the Iranian government of arming Iraqis opposed to the US illegal war and occupation in their own country. In a Thursday press briefing (via videolink) with reporters, Lt. General Ray Odierno attempted to up the whisper campaign by claiming that
there was "a link between Iranian support to extremists" meaning al Qaeda but, when questioned further, admitted, "We don't see any evidence -- significant evidence".
Mohammed al Dulaimy and Hannah Allam (McClatchy Newspapers) report that "some Iraqi officials had complained that they were being sidelined; another example of overlapping forces at play in Iraq. It was later agreed that Iraqi officials would observe the talks, though U.S.-Iranian interests would take center stage."
This as Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) informs that 'benchmarks' are stalled in Iraq for a number of reasons including the planned vacation by the Iraqi Parliament next month (due to the increase heat) which makes it unlikely that anything will be passed before the US Congress receives the September 'progress' report that the White House had set as its own 'benchmark' but now tries to back peddle away from furiously with US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker declaring that the 'benchmarks' really don't matter. This follows the down playing of the September report by Lt. General Ray Odierno, Commander Multinational Corps-Iraq, in the Thursday press briefing where he stated that November was the time the escalation could really, really be measured. When questioned about the push-back in the briefing, Odierno responded, "What I was saying is -- again, my remarks were, in 45 days I will have a better idea if the trends are continuing, and that's September. Obviously, we have an assessment we will conduct in September that will provide -- that General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker will provide. I was not looking at extending that time frame when they have to report back. What I imagine we'll have to do is do assessments that follow that initial assessment in September, and that's -- I'm assuming we'll continue to do assessments while we're here." Odierno never stated the September report would not take place -- nor could he, Congress accepted Bully Boy's talk of 'benchmarks,' wrote them into legislation and they are now Congressionally mandated.
Despite those facts (Congressionally mandated and Odierno being clear that he wasn't saying the report was off), Thom Shanker and David E. Sanger (New York Times) spun Saturday trying to make 'good news' out of the fact that the September report was still 'on' -- it was never off. This was grasped on Thursday (by those paying attention) and on Friday when Tony Snow, White House flack, gave a press briefing and tried to Happy Talk the way Sanger and Shanker would the following day. When Snow attempted that, a reporter at the press briefing responded, "We know that he [Odierno] didn't ask to change the September reporting date. That isn't the point." But the New York Times tried to play dumb and make it the point on Saturday. The actual point is that the White House is attempting a push-back wherein they begin selling, "Ignore the September report we've repeatedly cited. It doesn't matter. What really matters is the November report." The push-back is to lower expectations, clampdown on public outrage and attempt to buy more time for the illegal war.
iraq
agustin aguayolos angeles timesdemocracy now
amy goodmanmcclatchy newspapersthe new york timesthom shankerdavid e. sanger
alissa j. rubin
Saturday, July 21, 2007
Dave Lindorff and Impeachment
My teens and my twenties are long, long ago. So these late nights that the rest of the gan can handle really are beyond me. (They are, however, fun.) Do not expect a great deal. I was whining that to Ruth and she gave me a hug and said, "You're still not as old as me." Just the way she said it made me laugh so if there's anything coherent in this, give Ruth the credit for giving me a second wind. Thank you to everyone who's e-mailed. I'm on vacation and Sunny is as well. Sunny's actually on her honeymoon which I hope is okay to mention. She had a wonderful wedding and I'm eagerly awaiting pictures of the honeymoon because they went somewhere really beautiful. But Sunny usually goes through the e-mails for me. So I'm more than a little behind in that department. But I do appreciate the e-mails. (In answer to one person, no, I didn't ask C.I. to highlight me. In fact, if I'm told of it, I usually say, "Please don't." That was really nice of C.I. to work me into the snapshot twice this week. I know how much work goes into those -- more than I do in a week's worth of posts here -- so it is nice, but, no, I didn't request it and never have.)
"Democrats are their Own Worst Enemies" (Dave Lindorff, This Can't Be Happening):
If it weren't so depressing, it would be entertaining to watch the loathed, ridiculed and remarkably unpopular Bush administration continue to run circles around the supposedly ascendant Democrats in Congress.
Now that Democrats have provided Bush with full summer funding for his outrageous and doomed escalation of the Iraq War, they are finding themselves incapable of stopping even that affront to the American public, which last November made it clear it wanted this bloody madness in Iraq to end.
Having accepted Bush's terms--that cutting funds for the war is "undermining the troops"--the Democrats in Congress are now unable to challenge Bush’s new line--that they should provide even more money to the troops for raises. They are also vulnerable to the new pitch--that they should "listen to the generals" and give the escalation (still being called a "surge" after six full months) until November. All of this is obviously setting the stage for September, when Bush will come back to Congress with a 2008 supplemental funding request to fund the war through the rest of his sorry term of office.
Of course, come November, the generals, who know who gives out the promotions and who are loath to admit that they've lost yet another war, will accommodate their commander in chief and say that they need more time again--say until next February or March. And in this way they'll string out the war, and keep the killing and dying going on, until Bush and Cheney can safely leave office and hand their mess to a new administration.
If the Democrats want to escape this trap of their own making, they are going to have to do something that has eluded Democrats for a generation--really back to the presidency of Lyndon Johnson. They are going to have to stand up and be leaders. (Okay, Johnson was a war criminal and should have been impeached for the Gulf of Tonkin fraud, but he did stand up and lead on Civil Rights legislation, Medicare and the so-called War on Poverty.)
One of the gang showed me this when I was saying, "It's not just that I'm tired, I really don't think I have anything to say tonight/this morning." Oh really, was the reply and I was steered to a print out of this. (It was probably Jim who steered me to it but I'm tired.) Lindoff's point is one that Rebecca and C.I. have been making as well: the elected Democrats are their own worst enemies. His argument, if you read in full, is that impeachment is the only answer at this point and he outlines it very well including by noting that the judge who dismissed Valerie Plame's case is one of Kenneth Starr's Whitewater goons who also, once being appointed to the federal courts, ruled against the General Accountability Office (independent arm of Congress) on the release of information from Dick Cheney's energy meetins.
The Democratic 'plan' seems to be 'ride it out.' Whether it's the illegal war or Bully Boy's abuses there or elsewhere, "ride it out!" But you can't "ride out" Constitutional abuses. To do so is not just to condone them, it's to encourage everyone who comes after to abuse the Constitution. When they do, it will be pointed out that if it's so bad, why didn't the Congress go after Bully Boy?
Congress abdicates their power and this isn't a recent development. They've long abdicated their war declaration powers to the point that when it is ignored today, no one raises an eyebrow. They can point to blank and blank and blank that ignored Congress' power and just went ahead with war. That's what will happen with impeachment.
If they refuse to use it now, it will be that much harder to use it in the future. Bully Boy's actions clearly (and loudly) call for impeachment. It's amazing that in what has to be an all time power grab by the executive branch, Congress is willing to "ride it out" instead of asserting their own Constitutional powers.
Bully Boy, with a recent executive order, has already stripped FEMA of their power in the case of a disaster. Guess where he relocated that power? The White House? Correct. It's been a non-stop power grab and Congress has gone along with it.
When he finally (and thankfully) leaves office, if Congress hasn't impeached him, we will have the weakest Congress and have it for years and years to come. That, for the record, is one of the things Dick Cheney has pushed all along.
So by refusing to impeach, they aren't just disrespecting the Constitution and the citizenry, they aren't just shirking their duties, they are weakening the legislative branch for all who will come after. The last seven years have been a democracy disaster for this country and, while it's easy to pin the blame solely on the Bully Boy, it's equally true that Congress has carved out their own blame by refusing to use the powers they do have to stop the power grab.
Bully Boy has, in effect, charted the next 40 or 50 years. When people have to live with that, this goes beyond the courts, and they look back, they should blame him and the Congress. When we're battling with Russia or North Korea or whomever (either in out right war, covert war or a cold war), it will be traceable back to this period. "Ride it out" is for the really inept because there have been huge alterations made that many aren't even following.
If you're in the business of manufacturing weapons, Bully Boy is your godsend (even more so than he is Big Oil's) because he has posioned a world system and created so much ill will and so many enemies that this is what we will all be living with for many decades to come.
He didn't do this by bungling or by chance. He knew what he was doing. He needed enemies and he created them. Keeping the country on a war footing brings in a lot of cash for the weapons manufacturing business, keeps a lot of fat cats happy. The new possiblities we were supposed to see in the 90s are gone. You can't kill those possibilities without an aggressive posture that destroys relations between countries. The attack on the French wasn't just good for the illegal war currently being dragged on, it was also good for future tensions and rivalries. Things on the chess board were a little too calm when Bully Boy came into office. He'll leave with the US held in the lowest opinion globally and with other countries we had been allies with and some we had been working with now firmly suspicious or outright opposed to the US.
We've witnessed (though we may not realize it) the creation of a new Cold War. The USSR was never a threat to the US. But that lie was pushed and promoted and it wasn't until the fall of the USSR that we actually grasped how much we were fooled (some still haven't grasped that). A lot of money was wasted on weapons (many of which did not work and were known not to work) and the people were screwed. Bully Boy's created the new stage for that to take place. He's launched it all. This is not just about an eight or seven year term (seven if we are lucky and he's impeached), this is about generations to come and Congress has betrayed themselves, the people and the future by refusing to explore impeachment let alone bring impeachment proceedings.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Friday, July 20. 2007. Chaos and violence continue, the death toll mounts, a military judge sends the message that even if you're convicted in the killing of an innocent Iraqi you won't get any prison time, and the latest wave of Operation Happy Talk is Operation Push-Back.
Starting with war resisters. Ian Munro (Australia's The Age) explores the "estimated 250" US service members who have self-checked out and moved to Canada and zooms in on Dean Walcott and Phillip McDowell. Munro writes, "Mr Walcott's life was up-ended in 2004 at a military hospital in Germany when burns survivors from the Mosul mess tent bombing were shipped in." Like Walcott, McDowell served in Iraq before deciding to self-check out. Munro quotes McDowell stating, "I believed everything the Government told us about weapons of mass destruction, that there were links between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda. I was aware of the international opposition to going in, but growing up I always trusted my government" and reports, "By the end of his tour he saw the war as wrong, illegal and counterproductive, and was disturbed by the treatment of some prisoners. But he thought he was clear by the middle of last year when his enlistment expired. Then the army called him back. With his family's support, he and his partner Jamine took the Canada option in Ocotber." Jeffry House tells Munro that he estimates the number of war resisters in Canada to be 250 and, "Some don't want to go through the war resisters because they are a political group. Some people want to make the point about their concern but don't want to be part of a campaign." House represents many including Kyle Snyder, Joshua Key and Jeremy Hinzman. Lee Zaslofsky of the War Resisters Support Campaign tells his story, how he self-checked during Vietnam and moved to Canada -- where he's lived ever since and happily (to refute some of the nonsense offered earlier this week by a spokesperson for a group that does not represent self-checkouts) and he estimates there are hundreds who have self-checked out from today's illegal war and moved to Canada.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Jared Hood and James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Augstin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Joshua Key, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Jeremy Hinzman, Stephen Funk, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Care, Kyle Huwer, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty-one US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters.
Yesterday, Elaine (Like Maria Said Paz) noted that alleged 'withdrawals' pushed by Democratic leadership in the US Congress some how tend to factor in leaving troops in northern Iraq and the effects the Kurdish separatist movement has on neighboring Turkey which has its own Kurdish separatist movement. Today on Democracy Now!, Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzales addressed the issue with the independent journalist Scott Peterson (Peterson reports for The Christian Science Monitor which actually is an independent publication and structured as one). As noted before, Turkey has an upcoming election and the tensions flaring between the regions has only increased -- whether or not for electoral gain is for someone else to determine. The region of northern Iraq has its own elections coming up which will determine its autonomy and with very little coverage from Western media, Kurdish flags have been planeted, families run off and those belonging to religious minorities have been either run off from the region or killed. Turkey alleges and identifies the PKK (Kurdish Workers Party) as a terrorist organization and has argued that it is granted harbor in northern Iraq. Mortars have been exchanged and, on at least one occassion, Turkish troops have recently entered northern Iraq. From the broadcast:
JUAN GONZALEZ: Scott Peterson, this allegation by Turkey that the United States is indirectly assisting the PKK, is there any evidence of that, given the fact, obviously, that the -- isn't the PKK really a more, historically more of a leftwing insurgency, a secular insurgency that would be unlikely to be supported by the United States?
SCOTT PETERSON: Well, the PKK really disappeared as an organization for the past five or six years. In 1999, its leader, Abdullah Ocalan, was captured by the Turks, in fact. And in his first appearance in court, Ochalan said that the PKK had made a number of mistakes during the fifteen-year separatist war, that they should now try and work within the state and with state structures to find recognition of Kurdish rights and recognition of Kurdish culture. And he also said that they're no longer fighting for a separate Kurdish state. So those were all quite important changes that really kind of took the wind out of the PKK sails for many years. What we've seen in the last year or two now is a surge of PKK activity in terms of attacks -- certainly in terms of attacks that the government attributes to the PKK, and those are both in Ankara, others also in Istanbul, some targeting civilians and many targeting also soldiers, especially in Kurdish areas in southeast Turkey. Now, of course, the issue of who is supporting the PKK is a very thorny one, because, of course, the PKK remains on the list of terrorist groups, as officially designated by the US State Department. The United States has identified and chosen a special envoy specifically for countering the PKK. That's the title of Joe Ralston, General Joe Ralston. And so -- and, of course, the US denies that it is giving any support to the PKK, but from the Turkish point of view they say, Wait a minute, there are American forces who control all of Iraq, and therefore since the PKK has bases in northern Iraq, that means that by definition there are -- you know, that the US is somehow involved, if nothing else, in turning a blind eye. And you've also got apparently safe haven given to the PKK by Iraqi Kurds in northern Iraq. And the reason for these latest accusations or allegations is, just in the past ten days or so there was a press conference that was purported to be from four PKK members who had fled northern Iraq. They appeared in Ankara at a press conference wearing masks and saying, we have just fled, that PKK militants are leaving their bases, expecting a Turkish invasion, and that also they had witnessed, they say, American troops actually offloading weapons at PKK bases for the PKK. And I have spoken to senior Turkish police officers who feel that the entire story is concocted, and I'm sure that would be the American view, too, but, again, it really does raise a lot of popular questions in the minds of Turks.
Elections in Turkey take place Sunday and for more on that you can read Scott Horton's latest piece in today's Christian Science Monitor. In addition, Katharine Kendrick (Turkish Daily News) reports that political parties in Turkey have forgotten to court one group: "recent Turkish citizens." Some context re: the conflict between northern Iraq and Turkey. The US administration is attempting to lay the groundwork for a potential attack on Iran with a lot of loosely sourced claims which -- at best -- if true would only demonstrate that some Iranians have involvement in Iraq. The US administration uses that unproven link to argue that the Iranian government, therefore, must be assisting. In Bite Back In Your Own Ass news, Today's Zaman reports that not only has Turkey's Foreign Minister Abdulla Gul declared that the US is arming the PKK in Turkey but also: "The US Department of Defense has launched an investigation into US-registered weapons sent to the Iraqi army ending up in the hands [of] the outlawed Kurdistan Worker's Party (PKK) based in northern Iraq."In addition, the paper reports, "Former members of the PKK escaping from mountain camps in northern Iraq recently gave testimony in which they told securities authorities and prosecutors they had seen US trucks delivering arms to PKK camps." By the US administration's 'logic' with regards to Iran, Turkey should be drawing up their battle plans. Reuters reports that Turkey was shelling northern Iraq. Meanwhile the Turkish Daily News reports conflicts between Turkey and Austria after Austraia refused to arrest "Ali Riza Altun, a founding member and the chief financial operator of the PKK, listed as a terrorist group by Turkey, the European Union and the United States" when he surfaced in Austria this month before moving on to northern Iraq.
Turning to England, the United Kingdom's Military of Defence announced: "It is with profound sadness that the Ministry of Defence must confirm the deaths of one serviceman from 504 Squadron Royal Auxiliary Air Force and two servicemen from 1 Squadron RAF Regiment on Thursday 19th July 2007. They were killed in an indirect fire attack on the Contingency Operating Base in Basra, Iraq." Robin Stringer (Bloomberg News) noted that British forces are "the second-largest contingent of the American-led coalition in Iraq." ICCC lists the total number of British troops who have died in Iraq since the start of the illegal war at 162. ITV News reports that 126 of the deaths are classified as having "died in action" while the BBC reports the three deaths come after the announcement that "british troops in Iraq will be cut to 5,000 by the end of 2007." Michael Evans and Fiona Hamilton (Times of London) observe that the three deaths come "ten days after three British soldiers were killed in the same area of southern Iraq" Earlier this week, Sean Rayment (Telegraph of London) reported, on a new study by the Royal Stastistical Society that "found the death rate of British troops has now surpassed that of Americans, following a sustained upsurge of violence in the southern city of Basra."
Turning to the United States, today on KPFK's Uprising, Sonali Kolhatkar spke with Erik Leaver of IPS (Institute for Policy Studies) on the topic of empire, Iraq and more topics addressed in the new report [PDF format warning] "Just Security." With regards to Iraq, the first step, stressed repeatedly, is getting all foreign troops out of Iraq. Kolhatkar brought up the demonizing the administration is attempting to do with regards to US Senator Hillary Clinton. As The Chicago Tribune reports: "Undersecretary of Defense Eric Edelman, a former aide to Vice President Dick Cheney, accused Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) of aiding the enemy by calling for contingency plans for a troop pullout. 'Premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq,' Edelman wrote in reply to Clinton's May inquiry. Clinton spokesman Philippe Reines called Edelman's letter 'outrageous'." The demonization of Clinton for reqeusting information on contingency plans (which do already exist) is part of a full out assault by the administration, a push-back effort attempting to resell the illegal war long after the majority of Americans have turned against it and are calling for a withdrawal from Iraq.
That's why, yesterday, US ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, did a song and dance (via video link) for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Wally ("THIS JUST IN! THAT'S A CROCK!") and Cedric ("It's a Crock") covered it in their joint-post. Crocker was selling the 'fear' because the administration knows to get what they want, honesty doesn't work; however, if they can scare the American public, they might stand a shot. Starting with the Crock which existed to sell the fear (as did all parts of the marketing). Reneee Schoof (McClatchy Newspapers) reports US Senator Richard Lugar asked, "Are you planning for an eventual change of mission or redeployment of American forces in Iraq?" But Crocker refused to admit a Plan B existed or was being created. Thom Shanker and David S. Cloud (New York Times) report that Crock said the benchmarks weren't being met and probably wouldn't. Cloud's whines were laughable since the US administration created the benchmark talk long before Congress even considered legislation on it. But with more bad news coming, they needed to stall with something. Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) would be reporting today, "A committee directed by Prime Minister Nouri Maliki and President Bush to accelerate the transfer of security responsibility to Iraq's army and police has warned that Iraq is lagging in a number of categories. The quarterly report, a copy of which was obtained by The Times, says the Finance Ministry is blocking the Iraqi military from spending $660 million to build a logistical network; that militias are an obstacle to handing over to Iraqis responsibility for security in three mainly Shiite Muslim provinces; and that competition among rival security organizations has prevented the country from settling on a national security structure."
None dare call it progress. Which is why the big talking point is "Forget September, We Need To Wait Until November." As Kat noted last night, the new 'deadline' is supposed to November. Barbara Slavin's "General: September too soon to assess Iraq" (USA Today) noted that "the number two" (in Iraq), Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno, was leading that pushback. Shanker and Sanger (New York Times) report, "Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the No. 2 commander in Iraq, told Pentagon reporters that while he would provide the mid-September assessment of the new military strategy that Congress has required, it would take 'at least until November' to judge with confidence whether the strategy was working."To really make the push, Bully Boy left DC and the national press corps hoping to yet again get soft press from local outlets. James Gerstenzang (Los Angeles Times) reports the stop yesterday was Nashville to the always hyper-enthused audience of a local Chamber of Commerce, "Such visits draw little national attention, but the out-of-town stops gain extensive local coverage sought by the White House to counter the steady beat of the Iraq war on news pages, websites, television and radio. And they provide a backdrop of a White House seeking, city by city, to portray the president as focused on the breadth of his job and not just the war."
The pushback comes as Nouri al-Maliki's promise that Iraqi troops would be ready to take over responsibilities in Iraq is revealed to be just one more bad sales pitch. CBS and AP report Mouwaffak al-Rubaie, the national security adviser, did everything but sing Don Henley's "Not Enough Love In The World" as he declared that promise was no more: "We had hopes and intentions to take over security in all provinces and command of all army divisions before the end of the year. But there are difficulties and challenges that appeared along the way, in arming, equipping, recruiting and training our armed forces."
Al-Rubaie droned on about how difficult it was "to predict a certain time." A difficulty al-Maliki wasn't bothered by in April. And the endless, illegal war that doesn't result in the puppet or his masters getting upset has now claimed the lives of 52 US service members this month and the lives of 3631 US service members since the start of the illegal war (ICCC). The number of Iraqis killed since the start of the illegal war gets closer to one million but no reason for a puppet government, hidden away in the Green Zone and protected and flattered by foreign forces and government, to care too much.
In the real world . . .
Bombings?
Jenan (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Diyala mortar attack that injured eleven. Reuters notes a Baghdad roadside bombing that injured a police officer. DPA reports, "An Iraqi civilian was killed in a US helicopter attack in Mosul . . . The Iraqi civilian was killed and five others wounded Friday morning when a US helicopter bombed a residential area in Mosul" and two of the injured were children while two more women.
Shootings?
Jenan (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 person was shot dead in an attack on a car in Baghdad (three were wounded) and notes 2 more shot dead in Al Muqdaya suburb and 2 women shot dead "in Nawfal" and that an attack in Al Wajehia has left numerous people displaced and at least 5 dead -- Jenan also notes that on Wednesday "gunmen attacked Waheda Abd Al Muhsan Member of Salahudding governorate council. The gunmen shot her convoy when she was going to Tikret."
Corpses?
Jenan (McClatchy Newspapers) reports and that a corpse was turned over to Al Muqdadya hospital while, yesterday, the corpses of Zena ans Suha Khusai (sisters kidnapped two days prior) were discovered in Mosul. Richard A. Oppel Jr. and Abdul Razzaq al-Saiedi (New York Times) report that 17 corpses were discovered in Baghdad yesterday.
Turning to legal news. Yesterday, we noted that Trey A. Corrales and Christopher P. Shore were each charged with the murder of an Iraqi civilian on or around June 23rd. Today, AP reports that Albert Corrales Sr. has stated his son is innocent (though "he hadn't talked to his 34-year-old son about the death") and quotes him stating, "I think that it's wrong because the people he supposedly shot, they were terrorists and he was under orders to clean them out, and he did." In other father and son legal news, Michael Vick (19-year-old) and James Vick (44-year-old) have both been charged. Lindsay Wilcox (KLTV, Tyler, TX) reports that the father's been held by authorities since May while the son "was arrested at DFW Airport [Dallas, TX] on Tuesday after returning home from Iraq" and that the two men are charged in the sexual assault of an eight-year-old girl and a nine-year-old girl who had been foster children in the Vick home during 2003 and 2004. Cindy Mallette (Tyler Morning Telegraph) spoke with Sgt. Wendell Wilcher of the Anderson county's sheriff's department who stated that "the Army released Michael Vick from his Iraq duties after the sherrif's department obtained a warrant for his arrest. He said the Army is considering Vick's status and may discharge him at some point in the future." Paul Stone (The Palestine Herald) also spoke with Wilcher who has been interviewing other children who stayed with the Vicks and states there will be more names added: "There's definitely going to be more than two. We may have a considerable amount of children. It's hard to say." AP notes the bail for each man is set at $300,000 and that Michael Vick is "assigned to Fort Lewis, Washington." On Wednesday, marine Trent Thomas was found guilty in the death of Hashim Ibrahim Awad who was dragged from his home, bound and murdered. Thomas was convicted of kidnapping and conspiracy to murder by a jury of his military peers. Although he could have been sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole, the military judge instead decided murder, lying, and more was no big deal. AP reports Trent Thomas' 'punishment' is to be discharged from the military and face a reduction in pay. And? That's it. No prison time for the man convicted by his peers in the murder of an innocenct civilian.
iraqlos angeles timesdemocracy now
amy goodmanjuan gonzalez mcclatchy newspapersusa todayned parkerthe new york timesthom shankerdavid e. sangerthe chicago tribunekats kornercedrics big mixthe daily jot
the new york timesrichard a. oppel jr.
kpfk
"Democrats are their Own Worst Enemies" (Dave Lindorff, This Can't Be Happening):
If it weren't so depressing, it would be entertaining to watch the loathed, ridiculed and remarkably unpopular Bush administration continue to run circles around the supposedly ascendant Democrats in Congress.
Now that Democrats have provided Bush with full summer funding for his outrageous and doomed escalation of the Iraq War, they are finding themselves incapable of stopping even that affront to the American public, which last November made it clear it wanted this bloody madness in Iraq to end.
Having accepted Bush's terms--that cutting funds for the war is "undermining the troops"--the Democrats in Congress are now unable to challenge Bush’s new line--that they should provide even more money to the troops for raises. They are also vulnerable to the new pitch--that they should "listen to the generals" and give the escalation (still being called a "surge" after six full months) until November. All of this is obviously setting the stage for September, when Bush will come back to Congress with a 2008 supplemental funding request to fund the war through the rest of his sorry term of office.
Of course, come November, the generals, who know who gives out the promotions and who are loath to admit that they've lost yet another war, will accommodate their commander in chief and say that they need more time again--say until next February or March. And in this way they'll string out the war, and keep the killing and dying going on, until Bush and Cheney can safely leave office and hand their mess to a new administration.
If the Democrats want to escape this trap of their own making, they are going to have to do something that has eluded Democrats for a generation--really back to the presidency of Lyndon Johnson. They are going to have to stand up and be leaders. (Okay, Johnson was a war criminal and should have been impeached for the Gulf of Tonkin fraud, but he did stand up and lead on Civil Rights legislation, Medicare and the so-called War on Poverty.)
One of the gang showed me this when I was saying, "It's not just that I'm tired, I really don't think I have anything to say tonight/this morning." Oh really, was the reply and I was steered to a print out of this. (It was probably Jim who steered me to it but I'm tired.) Lindoff's point is one that Rebecca and C.I. have been making as well: the elected Democrats are their own worst enemies. His argument, if you read in full, is that impeachment is the only answer at this point and he outlines it very well including by noting that the judge who dismissed Valerie Plame's case is one of Kenneth Starr's Whitewater goons who also, once being appointed to the federal courts, ruled against the General Accountability Office (independent arm of Congress) on the release of information from Dick Cheney's energy meetins.
The Democratic 'plan' seems to be 'ride it out.' Whether it's the illegal war or Bully Boy's abuses there or elsewhere, "ride it out!" But you can't "ride out" Constitutional abuses. To do so is not just to condone them, it's to encourage everyone who comes after to abuse the Constitution. When they do, it will be pointed out that if it's so bad, why didn't the Congress go after Bully Boy?
Congress abdicates their power and this isn't a recent development. They've long abdicated their war declaration powers to the point that when it is ignored today, no one raises an eyebrow. They can point to blank and blank and blank that ignored Congress' power and just went ahead with war. That's what will happen with impeachment.
If they refuse to use it now, it will be that much harder to use it in the future. Bully Boy's actions clearly (and loudly) call for impeachment. It's amazing that in what has to be an all time power grab by the executive branch, Congress is willing to "ride it out" instead of asserting their own Constitutional powers.
Bully Boy, with a recent executive order, has already stripped FEMA of their power in the case of a disaster. Guess where he relocated that power? The White House? Correct. It's been a non-stop power grab and Congress has gone along with it.
When he finally (and thankfully) leaves office, if Congress hasn't impeached him, we will have the weakest Congress and have it for years and years to come. That, for the record, is one of the things Dick Cheney has pushed all along.
So by refusing to impeach, they aren't just disrespecting the Constitution and the citizenry, they aren't just shirking their duties, they are weakening the legislative branch for all who will come after. The last seven years have been a democracy disaster for this country and, while it's easy to pin the blame solely on the Bully Boy, it's equally true that Congress has carved out their own blame by refusing to use the powers they do have to stop the power grab.
Bully Boy has, in effect, charted the next 40 or 50 years. When people have to live with that, this goes beyond the courts, and they look back, they should blame him and the Congress. When we're battling with Russia or North Korea or whomever (either in out right war, covert war or a cold war), it will be traceable back to this period. "Ride it out" is for the really inept because there have been huge alterations made that many aren't even following.
If you're in the business of manufacturing weapons, Bully Boy is your godsend (even more so than he is Big Oil's) because he has posioned a world system and created so much ill will and so many enemies that this is what we will all be living with for many decades to come.
He didn't do this by bungling or by chance. He knew what he was doing. He needed enemies and he created them. Keeping the country on a war footing brings in a lot of cash for the weapons manufacturing business, keeps a lot of fat cats happy. The new possiblities we were supposed to see in the 90s are gone. You can't kill those possibilities without an aggressive posture that destroys relations between countries. The attack on the French wasn't just good for the illegal war currently being dragged on, it was also good for future tensions and rivalries. Things on the chess board were a little too calm when Bully Boy came into office. He'll leave with the US held in the lowest opinion globally and with other countries we had been allies with and some we had been working with now firmly suspicious or outright opposed to the US.
We've witnessed (though we may not realize it) the creation of a new Cold War. The USSR was never a threat to the US. But that lie was pushed and promoted and it wasn't until the fall of the USSR that we actually grasped how much we were fooled (some still haven't grasped that). A lot of money was wasted on weapons (many of which did not work and were known not to work) and the people were screwed. Bully Boy's created the new stage for that to take place. He's launched it all. This is not just about an eight or seven year term (seven if we are lucky and he's impeached), this is about generations to come and Congress has betrayed themselves, the people and the future by refusing to explore impeachment let alone bring impeachment proceedings.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Friday, July 20. 2007. Chaos and violence continue, the death toll mounts, a military judge sends the message that even if you're convicted in the killing of an innocent Iraqi you won't get any prison time, and the latest wave of Operation Happy Talk is Operation Push-Back.
Starting with war resisters. Ian Munro (Australia's The Age) explores the "estimated 250" US service members who have self-checked out and moved to Canada and zooms in on Dean Walcott and Phillip McDowell. Munro writes, "Mr Walcott's life was up-ended in 2004 at a military hospital in Germany when burns survivors from the Mosul mess tent bombing were shipped in." Like Walcott, McDowell served in Iraq before deciding to self-check out. Munro quotes McDowell stating, "I believed everything the Government told us about weapons of mass destruction, that there were links between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda. I was aware of the international opposition to going in, but growing up I always trusted my government" and reports, "By the end of his tour he saw the war as wrong, illegal and counterproductive, and was disturbed by the treatment of some prisoners. But he thought he was clear by the middle of last year when his enlistment expired. Then the army called him back. With his family's support, he and his partner Jamine took the Canada option in Ocotber." Jeffry House tells Munro that he estimates the number of war resisters in Canada to be 250 and, "Some don't want to go through the war resisters because they are a political group. Some people want to make the point about their concern but don't want to be part of a campaign." House represents many including Kyle Snyder, Joshua Key and Jeremy Hinzman. Lee Zaslofsky of the War Resisters Support Campaign tells his story, how he self-checked during Vietnam and moved to Canada -- where he's lived ever since and happily (to refute some of the nonsense offered earlier this week by a spokesperson for a group that does not represent self-checkouts) and he estimates there are hundreds who have self-checked out from today's illegal war and moved to Canada.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Jared Hood and James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Augstin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Joshua Key, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Jeremy Hinzman, Stephen Funk, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Care, Kyle Huwer, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty-one US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters.
Yesterday, Elaine (Like Maria Said Paz) noted that alleged 'withdrawals' pushed by Democratic leadership in the US Congress some how tend to factor in leaving troops in northern Iraq and the effects the Kurdish separatist movement has on neighboring Turkey which has its own Kurdish separatist movement. Today on Democracy Now!, Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzales addressed the issue with the independent journalist Scott Peterson (Peterson reports for The Christian Science Monitor which actually is an independent publication and structured as one). As noted before, Turkey has an upcoming election and the tensions flaring between the regions has only increased -- whether or not for electoral gain is for someone else to determine. The region of northern Iraq has its own elections coming up which will determine its autonomy and with very little coverage from Western media, Kurdish flags have been planeted, families run off and those belonging to religious minorities have been either run off from the region or killed. Turkey alleges and identifies the PKK (Kurdish Workers Party) as a terrorist organization and has argued that it is granted harbor in northern Iraq. Mortars have been exchanged and, on at least one occassion, Turkish troops have recently entered northern Iraq. From the broadcast:
JUAN GONZALEZ: Scott Peterson, this allegation by Turkey that the United States is indirectly assisting the PKK, is there any evidence of that, given the fact, obviously, that the -- isn't the PKK really a more, historically more of a leftwing insurgency, a secular insurgency that would be unlikely to be supported by the United States?
SCOTT PETERSON: Well, the PKK really disappeared as an organization for the past five or six years. In 1999, its leader, Abdullah Ocalan, was captured by the Turks, in fact. And in his first appearance in court, Ochalan said that the PKK had made a number of mistakes during the fifteen-year separatist war, that they should now try and work within the state and with state structures to find recognition of Kurdish rights and recognition of Kurdish culture. And he also said that they're no longer fighting for a separate Kurdish state. So those were all quite important changes that really kind of took the wind out of the PKK sails for many years. What we've seen in the last year or two now is a surge of PKK activity in terms of attacks -- certainly in terms of attacks that the government attributes to the PKK, and those are both in Ankara, others also in Istanbul, some targeting civilians and many targeting also soldiers, especially in Kurdish areas in southeast Turkey. Now, of course, the issue of who is supporting the PKK is a very thorny one, because, of course, the PKK remains on the list of terrorist groups, as officially designated by the US State Department. The United States has identified and chosen a special envoy specifically for countering the PKK. That's the title of Joe Ralston, General Joe Ralston. And so -- and, of course, the US denies that it is giving any support to the PKK, but from the Turkish point of view they say, Wait a minute, there are American forces who control all of Iraq, and therefore since the PKK has bases in northern Iraq, that means that by definition there are -- you know, that the US is somehow involved, if nothing else, in turning a blind eye. And you've also got apparently safe haven given to the PKK by Iraqi Kurds in northern Iraq. And the reason for these latest accusations or allegations is, just in the past ten days or so there was a press conference that was purported to be from four PKK members who had fled northern Iraq. They appeared in Ankara at a press conference wearing masks and saying, we have just fled, that PKK militants are leaving their bases, expecting a Turkish invasion, and that also they had witnessed, they say, American troops actually offloading weapons at PKK bases for the PKK. And I have spoken to senior Turkish police officers who feel that the entire story is concocted, and I'm sure that would be the American view, too, but, again, it really does raise a lot of popular questions in the minds of Turks.
Elections in Turkey take place Sunday and for more on that you can read Scott Horton's latest piece in today's Christian Science Monitor. In addition, Katharine Kendrick (Turkish Daily News) reports that political parties in Turkey have forgotten to court one group: "recent Turkish citizens." Some context re: the conflict between northern Iraq and Turkey. The US administration is attempting to lay the groundwork for a potential attack on Iran with a lot of loosely sourced claims which -- at best -- if true would only demonstrate that some Iranians have involvement in Iraq. The US administration uses that unproven link to argue that the Iranian government, therefore, must be assisting. In Bite Back In Your Own Ass news, Today's Zaman reports that not only has Turkey's Foreign Minister Abdulla Gul declared that the US is arming the PKK in Turkey but also: "The US Department of Defense has launched an investigation into US-registered weapons sent to the Iraqi army ending up in the hands [of] the outlawed Kurdistan Worker's Party (PKK) based in northern Iraq."In addition, the paper reports, "Former members of the PKK escaping from mountain camps in northern Iraq recently gave testimony in which they told securities authorities and prosecutors they had seen US trucks delivering arms to PKK camps." By the US administration's 'logic' with regards to Iran, Turkey should be drawing up their battle plans. Reuters reports that Turkey was shelling northern Iraq. Meanwhile the Turkish Daily News reports conflicts between Turkey and Austria after Austraia refused to arrest "Ali Riza Altun, a founding member and the chief financial operator of the PKK, listed as a terrorist group by Turkey, the European Union and the United States" when he surfaced in Austria this month before moving on to northern Iraq.
Turning to England, the United Kingdom's Military of Defence announced: "It is with profound sadness that the Ministry of Defence must confirm the deaths of one serviceman from 504 Squadron Royal Auxiliary Air Force and two servicemen from 1 Squadron RAF Regiment on Thursday 19th July 2007. They were killed in an indirect fire attack on the Contingency Operating Base in Basra, Iraq." Robin Stringer (Bloomberg News) noted that British forces are "the second-largest contingent of the American-led coalition in Iraq." ICCC lists the total number of British troops who have died in Iraq since the start of the illegal war at 162. ITV News reports that 126 of the deaths are classified as having "died in action" while the BBC reports the three deaths come after the announcement that "british troops in Iraq will be cut to 5,000 by the end of 2007." Michael Evans and Fiona Hamilton (Times of London) observe that the three deaths come "ten days after three British soldiers were killed in the same area of southern Iraq" Earlier this week, Sean Rayment (Telegraph of London) reported, on a new study by the Royal Stastistical Society that "found the death rate of British troops has now surpassed that of Americans, following a sustained upsurge of violence in the southern city of Basra."
Turning to the United States, today on KPFK's Uprising, Sonali Kolhatkar spke with Erik Leaver of IPS (Institute for Policy Studies) on the topic of empire, Iraq and more topics addressed in the new report [PDF format warning] "Just Security." With regards to Iraq, the first step, stressed repeatedly, is getting all foreign troops out of Iraq. Kolhatkar brought up the demonizing the administration is attempting to do with regards to US Senator Hillary Clinton. As The Chicago Tribune reports: "Undersecretary of Defense Eric Edelman, a former aide to Vice President Dick Cheney, accused Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) of aiding the enemy by calling for contingency plans for a troop pullout. 'Premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq,' Edelman wrote in reply to Clinton's May inquiry. Clinton spokesman Philippe Reines called Edelman's letter 'outrageous'." The demonization of Clinton for reqeusting information on contingency plans (which do already exist) is part of a full out assault by the administration, a push-back effort attempting to resell the illegal war long after the majority of Americans have turned against it and are calling for a withdrawal from Iraq.
That's why, yesterday, US ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, did a song and dance (via video link) for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Wally ("THIS JUST IN! THAT'S A CROCK!") and Cedric ("It's a Crock") covered it in their joint-post. Crocker was selling the 'fear' because the administration knows to get what they want, honesty doesn't work; however, if they can scare the American public, they might stand a shot. Starting with the Crock which existed to sell the fear (as did all parts of the marketing). Reneee Schoof (McClatchy Newspapers) reports US Senator Richard Lugar asked, "Are you planning for an eventual change of mission or redeployment of American forces in Iraq?" But Crocker refused to admit a Plan B existed or was being created. Thom Shanker and David S. Cloud (New York Times) report that Crock said the benchmarks weren't being met and probably wouldn't. Cloud's whines were laughable since the US administration created the benchmark talk long before Congress even considered legislation on it. But with more bad news coming, they needed to stall with something. Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) would be reporting today, "A committee directed by Prime Minister Nouri Maliki and President Bush to accelerate the transfer of security responsibility to Iraq's army and police has warned that Iraq is lagging in a number of categories. The quarterly report, a copy of which was obtained by The Times, says the Finance Ministry is blocking the Iraqi military from spending $660 million to build a logistical network; that militias are an obstacle to handing over to Iraqis responsibility for security in three mainly Shiite Muslim provinces; and that competition among rival security organizations has prevented the country from settling on a national security structure."
None dare call it progress. Which is why the big talking point is "Forget September, We Need To Wait Until November." As Kat noted last night, the new 'deadline' is supposed to November. Barbara Slavin's "General: September too soon to assess Iraq" (USA Today) noted that "the number two" (in Iraq), Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno, was leading that pushback. Shanker and Sanger (New York Times) report, "Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the No. 2 commander in Iraq, told Pentagon reporters that while he would provide the mid-September assessment of the new military strategy that Congress has required, it would take 'at least until November' to judge with confidence whether the strategy was working."To really make the push, Bully Boy left DC and the national press corps hoping to yet again get soft press from local outlets. James Gerstenzang (Los Angeles Times) reports the stop yesterday was Nashville to the always hyper-enthused audience of a local Chamber of Commerce, "Such visits draw little national attention, but the out-of-town stops gain extensive local coverage sought by the White House to counter the steady beat of the Iraq war on news pages, websites, television and radio. And they provide a backdrop of a White House seeking, city by city, to portray the president as focused on the breadth of his job and not just the war."
The pushback comes as Nouri al-Maliki's promise that Iraqi troops would be ready to take over responsibilities in Iraq is revealed to be just one more bad sales pitch. CBS and AP report Mouwaffak al-Rubaie, the national security adviser, did everything but sing Don Henley's "Not Enough Love In The World" as he declared that promise was no more: "We had hopes and intentions to take over security in all provinces and command of all army divisions before the end of the year. But there are difficulties and challenges that appeared along the way, in arming, equipping, recruiting and training our armed forces."
Al-Rubaie droned on about how difficult it was "to predict a certain time." A difficulty al-Maliki wasn't bothered by in April. And the endless, illegal war that doesn't result in the puppet or his masters getting upset has now claimed the lives of 52 US service members this month and the lives of 3631 US service members since the start of the illegal war (ICCC). The number of Iraqis killed since the start of the illegal war gets closer to one million but no reason for a puppet government, hidden away in the Green Zone and protected and flattered by foreign forces and government, to care too much.
In the real world . . .
Bombings?
Jenan (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Diyala mortar attack that injured eleven. Reuters notes a Baghdad roadside bombing that injured a police officer. DPA reports, "An Iraqi civilian was killed in a US helicopter attack in Mosul . . . The Iraqi civilian was killed and five others wounded Friday morning when a US helicopter bombed a residential area in Mosul" and two of the injured were children while two more women.
Shootings?
Jenan (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 person was shot dead in an attack on a car in Baghdad (three were wounded) and notes 2 more shot dead in Al Muqdaya suburb and 2 women shot dead "in Nawfal" and that an attack in Al Wajehia has left numerous people displaced and at least 5 dead -- Jenan also notes that on Wednesday "gunmen attacked Waheda Abd Al Muhsan Member of Salahudding governorate council. The gunmen shot her convoy when she was going to Tikret."
Corpses?
Jenan (McClatchy Newspapers) reports and that a corpse was turned over to Al Muqdadya hospital while, yesterday, the corpses of Zena ans Suha Khusai (sisters kidnapped two days prior) were discovered in Mosul. Richard A. Oppel Jr. and Abdul Razzaq al-Saiedi (New York Times) report that 17 corpses were discovered in Baghdad yesterday.
Turning to legal news. Yesterday, we noted that Trey A. Corrales and Christopher P. Shore were each charged with the murder of an Iraqi civilian on or around June 23rd. Today, AP reports that Albert Corrales Sr. has stated his son is innocent (though "he hadn't talked to his 34-year-old son about the death") and quotes him stating, "I think that it's wrong because the people he supposedly shot, they were terrorists and he was under orders to clean them out, and he did." In other father and son legal news, Michael Vick (19-year-old) and James Vick (44-year-old) have both been charged. Lindsay Wilcox (KLTV, Tyler, TX) reports that the father's been held by authorities since May while the son "was arrested at DFW Airport [Dallas, TX] on Tuesday after returning home from Iraq" and that the two men are charged in the sexual assault of an eight-year-old girl and a nine-year-old girl who had been foster children in the Vick home during 2003 and 2004. Cindy Mallette (Tyler Morning Telegraph) spoke with Sgt. Wendell Wilcher of the Anderson county's sheriff's department who stated that "the Army released Michael Vick from his Iraq duties after the sherrif's department obtained a warrant for his arrest. He said the Army is considering Vick's status and may discharge him at some point in the future." Paul Stone (The Palestine Herald) also spoke with Wilcher who has been interviewing other children who stayed with the Vicks and states there will be more names added: "There's definitely going to be more than two. We may have a considerable amount of children. It's hard to say." AP notes the bail for each man is set at $300,000 and that Michael Vick is "assigned to Fort Lewis, Washington." On Wednesday, marine Trent Thomas was found guilty in the death of Hashim Ibrahim Awad who was dragged from his home, bound and murdered. Thomas was convicted of kidnapping and conspiracy to murder by a jury of his military peers. Although he could have been sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole, the military judge instead decided murder, lying, and more was no big deal. AP reports Trent Thomas' 'punishment' is to be discharged from the military and face a reduction in pay. And? That's it. No prison time for the man convicted by his peers in the murder of an innocenct civilian.
iraqlos angeles timesdemocracy now
amy goodmanjuan gonzalez mcclatchy newspapersusa todayned parkerthe new york timesthom shankerdavid e. sangerthe chicago tribunekats kornercedrics big mixthe daily jot
the new york timesrichard a. oppel jr.
kpfk
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)