|
|
Nov 22, 2009
The Rainbow Tour ends with a whimper
BULLY BOY PRESS &
CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE
KOOL-AID TABLECELEBRITY
IN CHIEF BARRY O RETURNED FROM CHINA WITH A WHIMPER. Face the
facts, the rainbow's starting to fadeI don't think she'll
make it to England nowIt wasn't on the schedule
anyhow
DESPITE THE PUBLIC
REJECTION AND THE LACK OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS, MANY IN THE PRESS APPEAR
SURPRISED BY THE
PUBLIC'S COOLING TOWARDS THE OVERLY PRAISED HACK. OH
WELL AT LEAST HIS ASS SHOT GOT HIM SOME HEADLINES. FROM
THE TCI WIRE:"According to the
Defense Manpower Data Center, at the Department of Defense, approximately 35,000
service members have been wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan," explained US House
Rep Stephanie Herseth Sandlin yesterday afternoon. She was opening the House
Veterans Affairs' Subcommittee on Economic Development's hearing entitled
Adaptive Housing Grants. What are Adaptive Housing Grants? The VA
explains: "Veterans or servicemembers who have specific service-connected
disabilities may be entitled to a grant from the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) for the purpose of constructing an adapted home or modifying an existing
home to meet their adaptive needs. The goals of the Specially Adapted Housing
(SAH) Grant Program is to provide a barrier-free living environment that affords
the veterans or servicemembers a level of independent living he or she may not
normally enjoy." The first panel was composed of Disabled American
Veterans' John L. Wilson, Paralyzed Veterans of America's Richard Daley, Blinded Veterans
Association's Thomas Zampieri and Homes For Our Troops' John S. Gonsalves. From Daley's opening
statement, we'll note this section: The $63,700 currently available using
the Specially Adapted Housing grant is a significant help for a veteran to make
the needed modifications to their existing home or newly purchased previously
owned home. Since it is difficult to find an existing home that can be made
totally accessible, some veterans choose to design a new house incorporating
accessibility into the plans. Often financial considerations or a convenient
living location near family members may preclude designing a new home. In those
situations the often monumental task of making the existing structure accessible
must be considered. Guidance and information to make modifications for
accessibility can be found in the VA's newly issued VA pamphlet 26-13, Handbook
for Design: Specially Adapted Housing for Wheelchair Users, which was also
reviewed by PVA's Architecture Department before its publication. Many
existing homes can be modified to improve access for a wheelchair user and
enhance the function of the home. Some basic alterations would include creating
an accessible entrance to the home including an accessible route to the entrance
door, a level platform that is large enough for maneuvering during door
operation, and enlarging entrance doorways. One bathroom would need complete
renovation including plumbing arrangements if an accessible roll-in shower is
required. The movement of an existing wall may be necessary for a person in a
wheelchair to use each fixture of the bathroom, allow room for door operation
and general circulation in the bathroom. Similar construction alterations would
be required for the kitchen to be accessible and usable, and perhaps alterations
to the master bedroom. The current grant amount of $63,700 in many situations
would not pay for the entire project of making a home accessible for a
wheelchair user. Since the house must be made accessible for the veteran, they
would have no other option than to pay for remaining construction costs from
personal savings, arrange a loan from a bank, or borrow needed funds from family
members. We have been told that more often, than not, this is the situation the
veteran faces. That provides a general overview of some needs shared by
many disabled veterans. We'll now zero in on an example of one person's needs in
particular. Thomas Zampieri: I had an OIF blinded service member that
sent me an e-mail about the special housing grant program which I included in my
[prepared] testimony because it sort of explains some of the frustration. While
he was happy that he got the $10,000 grant in 2007, I actually had to spend
$27,000 to do the adapted housing changes that he needed to provide room and
space for his computer, the monitors, the scanners, the printers and the
magnifiers in order for him to complete his college degree. All of this was
great VA adaptive technology that was provided to him as a blind veteran but you
have to have a place in order to store it and a way for that equipment to be
connected. A lot of the blind veterans have unique, uh, requirements in regards
to lighting and electrical work and the current amounts don't cover
that. Today Kerry Feltner (The New Hampshire) reports on
Nathan Webster's campus lecture "Can't Give This War Away: Three Iraqi Summers
of Change and Conflict." Webster is a photo journalist. Feltner spoke with
people who attended the lecture. Gretchen Forbes declared, "It's really unusual
to get a first-hand report of the war. You'd think by now it would be our duty
to have major news organizations over there to write about the war . . . that
really surprises me. I feel like it's the media's responsibility." Betty
Nordgren declared, "I'm always interested in hearing about the war and the
images were great to see, but I think that the news organizations are in trouble
if they don't start covering this war more thoroughly." Both women are correct
and it's also true that the least covered in any war are the ones with visible
wounds. It's apparently too tempting to look away. That's true of the challenged
and disabled population in general but especially true of those members of that
population whose wounds derive from a war or military conflict. We'll note the
following exchange from the hearing. Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin: One
of the concerns, I know that, Dr. Zampieri, you have in terms of the updated
version -- Well, maybe not a concern. But maybe you could elaborate for us. With
the updated version of the handbook, is that helpful for visually impaired
veterans. What further provisions would your organizations like to see in-in the
handbook? Thomas Zampieri: Yeah, the handbook is helpful. A lot of the
modifications in regards to lighting and additional electrical outlets and all
those things. And then the -- Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin: You had
mentioned that in your oral statement. That you would like to see those types of
adaptions added. Thomas Zampieri: Right. Chair Stephanie Herseth
Sandlin: So maybe a comprehensive list of what would be available
-- Thomas Zampieri: Okay. Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin: Is
that? Thomas Zampieri: Right. And the voice activated types of devices
are also, you know, he [John Gonsalves] had mentioned. Especially for blind
veterans who now days live alone. All those things add to safety and other
things. Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin: And then, Mr. Gonsalves, you had
expressed concerns that I think that in terms of some requirements in the grants
-- that there are injuries that require some sort of adaptions or its sort of
mandatory but to have some additional flexibility in the grants would be
helpful. John Gonsalves: Right. Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin:
Is that correct? John Gonsalves: Yes, and I think some of that may have
been taken I hadn't seen the new VA pamphlet. I-I hadn't seen it before the
testimony but one of the things that Homes For Our Troops does now -- and you
can kind of tell from one of the pictures that we have here -- we have a soldier
who actually, before his house is being built -- this is under the Fully
Functioning Kitchens For Mobility. We qualify what kind of adaptations are going
to happen in a house based on injury. And I guess it would sort of work the way
VA rates disability percentage. We -- At the time a service member gets
qualified for SAH, we have enough information at that time. And what Homes For
Our Troops has done is we have an adaptation check list. We only have five sets
of home plans that we build. And the home, the footprint is always the same. The
windows are always the same. The floor plan is always the same. But there's an
adaptation check list based on what the soldier needs and that's why I provided
some photos in here. It really gives you an idea. Obviously a quadriplegic would
need a lifting care system where somebody that has the mobility of their upper
arms probably doesn't need it. And I think at the time of being qualified for
SAH, basically all of the technology is there. We've built for, I think, every
type of injury out there from amputees who are blind to different levels of
spinal cord injuries. So we know what's available to put in a home and it would
be really great to be out in the front once they qualify. A whole checklist be
put together. Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin: I think that that's very
helpful and you have some ideas and recommendations that would be helpful and
would like you to share those with us, with the VA. I think that with addition
to what they've done to update their pamphlet, to have someone who's undertaken
the mission that you've undertaken doing this work on the ground would be
beneficial in creating those types of checklists. I would also think that it
would be somewhat beneficial based on the work that you've done in having these
checklists for the different types of injuries that the veteran may have
suffered from and how to construct a home suitable to his or her needs as it
relates to the overall cost of that. And I know that you agree in addition to
TRA that the specially adapted housing grant be increased and again that's sort
of the historical analysis that you're providing specific in Exhibit One for
that grant. What do you -- do you have a ballpark figure? I mean, knowing again
that if we adjust ed it to inflation, it would be up to $170,000. But based on
the work you've done and the relative cost of doing that, do you have a ballpark
figure? John Gonsalves: Yes. On average, uhm, we've averaged $343,00 for
the cost of building a new home. Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin: Okay.
So that's even greater than the average new home price. John Gonsalves:
Right. But these are 100% fully adapted homes -- Chair Stephanie Herseth
Sandlin: Yes. John Gonsalves: -- which they do cost a little more to build.
You need a little extra square footage compared to what the average home that
the census bureau uses. [. . .] Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin:
One last question. Mr -- Dr. Zampiri. Can you explain the difference in changing
the Specially Adaptive Housing Grant from 5 - 200 to 20 - 200 with regard to
visual impairment? Thoomas Zampieri: Yes. In fact, thank you very much. I
was afraid someone didn't notice that. And also I appreciate that Congressman
[John] Boozman [Ranking Member] just coincidentally showed up at the right time
[laughter from Zampieri and Boozman]. I'm legally blind. I can't drive. A lot of
jobs I can't do. My vision is worse than 20/200. And I don't qualify for
anything under this program because the requirement is 5/200 which is really
just you can't tell if there's a light on. There's no light/dark perception for
lack of a better way to describe it. If somebody has 5/200 and they waive their
hand in front of your face and you don't see it, you're quote-quote, 'meet this
requirement, "totally blind." Our concern is -- and this is growing thing -- a
lot of the Traumatic Brain Injured service members who have significant
functional impairments, who need extra lighting and all these other things get
zip. When I was in Houston and I was first service-connected for my blindness,
for example, because of the 20/200 vision, they said no. So I went and I ended
up spending not a whole lot but almost $7,000 to do the modifications to my
house in Houston because, you know. And so the total number of service members
coming back that would be 5/200 is fairly low. In fact, the Navy says there's
less than 20 in the last 8 years out at Bethesda. But there are 140 that are
enrolled in the VA with this 20/200 and are told "nope" and -- So it's a
frustrating thing. And I realize of course that the magic problem is that if you
change this section and you open it up to 20/200 as the definition of blindness
then of course, you know, the automatic reaction is "Uh-oh. You're going to
expand the costs of the program." And-and, I'm always suspicious of that. It's
sort of like a few years ago, a couple of years ago when you did the TRA
legislation. I'm sure people initially reacted by saying this is going to cost
millions and millions and you're going to have all sorts of veterans applying
for this. And the experience that I have is it usually isn't that way. People
don't apply automatically. But I think Mr. Boozman may have some thoughts about
this problem of the vision complications. Ranking Member John Boozman: I
appreciate you bringing that up and you make such an important comment -- that
probably the VA's the only entity in the world that uses that standard versus
the 20/200 standard. As an optometrist, I helped start -- in fact I started the
School For The Blind's low vision program in Little Rock. And I would say
probably about 90% of the kids in there did not -- would not meet the -- did you
say 5/200 was the standard? Yeah, I mean, that's the standard I'm familiar with
because nobody uses it. But I would say that if you looked at all the kids in
blind schools or schools for the impaired, the vast majority, the vast-vast
majority, there's no way that they would meet a 5/200. Most people, and lay
people don't understand this but, most people that-that are blind have a lot of
usable vision that can be worked with. And it truly does, you know, going in and
setting up a kitchen or setting up a house so that a person can easily pour a
cup of coffee -- you know, do things, that we just take for granted. Somebody
might really struggle with that that did not meet this definition of vision
which is so stringent in the VA so I think you make a great point. Thursday's snapshot noted the House Foreign
Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia which Kat covered Thursday night. Wednesday's snapshot covered the Senate Veterans
Affairs Committee hearing and Kat covered that Wednesday night. Remember
the two women in New Hampshire noting the lack of Iraq coverage in the media? On
NPR today, The
Diane Rehm Show didn't have time for Iraq but it did have time for Nadia
Bilbassy to laugh condescendingly at an e-mailer (Tom from Jacksonville,
Florida) caller and presumably all Americans before she went on to declare what
American tax payer money should be spent on. Nadia scored a double: She managed
to (a) be insulting and (b) also pimp opinion passed off as fact. It was not
attractive. And it was cute the way she worked every answer back to her own
community and issues -- a fact not revealed on the broadcast. I wonder if the
Basques in Spain will next be brought on to lobby for an hour without NPR
revealing who they are? Her remarks did not approach journalism. But, hey, she
got to be rude and insulting and isn't that what NPR is all about? Strangely,
Diane's show last week (with a guest host) told people the vote was on track in
Iraq. That's now up in the air so you'd think they would have felt the need to
do an update. But possibly when one guest keeps talking about 'her people' (but
forgetting to inform the listeners of that) there's very little time for
anything else. RECOMMENDED: " Iraq snapshot" " Those 'intended' elections" " The fallen" " I Hate The War" " Feinstein
questions at the NSA hearings" " Easy
Enchilada Bake in the Kitchen" " Economy,
abortion, mammograms" " Drama
Queen tries to upstage the Great Wall" " Top
10 reasons Oprah's quitting" " An underrated 80s classic" " How they waste our time" " sexual beings" " katty van-van gets smacked" " The
bribes" " New
Jersey's important vote" " House
Veterans Affairs" " House
Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia" " Day of
rememberance " " Jayne
Lyn Stahl strikes again" " The
Pirate" " Bye
Oprah, don't hurry back" " Hillary
Is 44 on Elizabeth Drew" " House ArmedServices Committee" " Ahnuld goes to Iraq, abortion, etc." " THIS JUST IN! BARRY O DOES EMPLOYMENT!" " Barack finds some jobs"
Posted at 04:42 pm by cedricsbigmix
Permalink
Nov 21, 2009
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills)
Friday, November 20, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the US Defense Dept announces a death in Iraq, the 'intended' January elections remain murky, a War Hawk is denied a title, another War Hawk refuses to meet with the parent of a child kidnapped in Iraq, Congress explores the wounded, and more.
Today the Defense Department issued a release noting "the death of a sailor who was supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom. Petty Officer 2nd Class Brian M. Patton, 37, of Freeport, Ill., died Nov. 19 in Kuwait in a non-combat accident." M-NF missed announcing the death (DoD is only supposed to identify the fallen) and the announcement brings to
4363 the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war.
"According to the Defense Manpower Data Center, at the Department of Defense, approximately 35,000 service members have been wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan," explained US House Rep Stephanie Herseth Sandlin yesterday afternoon. She was opening the House Veterans Affairs' Subcommittee on Economic Development's hearing entitled Adaptive Housing Grants. What are Adaptive Housing Grants? The VA explains: "Veterans or servicemembers who have specific service-connected disabilities may be entitled to a grant from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for the purpose of constructing an adapted home or modifying an existing home to meet their adaptive needs. The goals of the Specially Adapted Housing (SAH) Grant Program is to provide a barrier-free living environment that affords the veterans or servicemembers a level of independent living he or she may not normally enjoy."
The $63,700 currently available using the Specially Adapted Housing grant is a significant help for a veteran to make the needed modifications to their existing home or newly purchased previously owned home. Since it is difficult to find an existing home that can be made totally accessible, some veterans choose to design a new house incorporating accessibility into the plans. Often financial considerations or a convenient living location near family members may preclude designing a new home. In those situations the often monumental task of making the existing structure accessible must be considered. Guidance and information to make modifications for accessibility can be found in the VA's newly issued VA pamphlet 26-13, Handbook for Design: Specially Adapted Housing for Wheelchair Users, which was also reviewed by PVA's Architecture Department before its publication.
Many existing homes can be modified to improve access for a wheelchair user and enhance the function of the home. Some basic alterations would include creating an accessible entrance to the home including an accessible route to the entrance door, a level platform that is large enough for maneuvering during door operation, and enlarging entrance doorways. One bathroom would need complete renovation including plumbing arrangements if an accessible roll-in shower is required. The movement of an existing wall may be necessary for a person in a wheelchair to use each fixture of the bathroom, allow room for door operation and general circulation in the bathroom. Similar construction alterations would be required for the kitchen to be accessible and usable, and perhaps alterations to the master bedroom. The current grant amount of $63,700 in many situations would not pay for the entire project of making a home accessible for a wheelchair user. Since the house must be made accessible for the veteran, they would have no other option than to pay for remaining construction costs from personal savings, arrange a loan from a bank, or borrow needed funds from family members. We have been told that more often, than not, this is the situation the veteran faces.
That provides a general overview of some needs shared by many disabled veterans. We'll now zero in on an example of one person's needs in particular.
Thomas Zampieri: I had an OIF blinded service member that sent me an e-mail about the special housing grant program which I included in my [prepared] testimony because it sort of explains some of the frustration. While he was happy that he got the $10,000 grant in 2007, I actually had to spend $27,000 to do the adapted housing changes that he needed to provide room and space for his computer, the monitors, the scanners, the printers and the magnifiers in order for him to complete his college degree. All of this was great VA adaptive technology that was provided to him as a blind veteran but you have to have a place in order to store it and a way for that equipment to be connected. A lot of the blind veterans have unique, uh, requirements in regards to lighting and electrical work and the current amounts don't cover that.
Today Kerry Feltner (The New Hampshire) reports on Nathan Webster's campus lecture "Can't Give This War Away: Three Iraqi Summers of Change and Conflict." Webster is a photo journalist. Feltner spoke with people who attended the lecture. Gretchen Forbes declared, "It's really unusual to get a first-hand report of the war. You'd think by now it would be our duty to have major news organizations over there to write about the war . . . that really surprises me. I feel like it's the media's responsibility." Betty Nordgren declared, "I'm always interested in hearing about the war and the images were great to see, but I think that the news organizations are in trouble if they don't start covering this war more thoroughly." Both women are correct and it's also true that the least covered in any war are the ones with visible wounds. It's apparently too tempting to look away. That's true of the challenged and disabled population in general but especially true of those members of that population whose wounds derive from a war or military conflict. We'll note the following exchange from the hearing.
Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin: One of the concerns, I know that, Dr. Zampieri, you have in terms of the updated version -- Well, maybe not a concern. But maybe you could elaborate for us. With the updated version of the handbook, is that helpful for visually impaired veterans. What further provisions would your organizations like to see in-in the handbook?
Thomas Zampieri: Yeah, the handbook is helpful. A lot of the modifications in regards to lighting and additional electrical outlets and all those things. And then the --
Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin: You had mentioned that in your oral statement. That you would like to see those types of adaptions added.
Thomas Zampieri: Right.
Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin: So maybe a comprehensive list of what would be available --
Thomas Zampieri: Okay.
Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin: Is that?
Thomas Zampieri: Right. And the voice activated types of devices are also, you know, he [John Gonsalves] had mentioned. Especially for blind veterans who now days live alone. All those things add to safety and other things.
Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin: And then, Mr. Gonsalves, you had expressed concerns that I think that in terms of some requirements in the grants -- that there are injuries that require some sort of adaptions or its sort of mandatory but to have some additional flexibility in the grants would be helpful.
John Gonsalves: Right.
Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin: Is that correct?
John Gonsalves: Yes, and I think some of that may have been taken I hadn't seen the new VA pamphlet. I-I hadn't seen it before the testimony but one of the things that Homes For Our Troops does now -- and you can kind of tell from one of the pictures that we have here -- we have a soldier who actually, before his house is being built -- this is under the Fully Functioning Kitchens For Mobility. We qualify what kind of adaptations are going to happen in a house based on injury. And I guess it would sort of work the way VA rates disability percentage. We -- At the time a service member gets qualified for SAH, we have enough information at that time. And what Homes For Our Troops has done is we have an adaptation check list. We only have five sets of home plans that we build. And the home, the footprint is always the same. The windows are always the same. The floor plan is always the same. But there's an adaptation check list based on what the soldier needs and that's why I provided some photos in here. It really gives you an idea. Obviously a quadriplegic would need a lifting care system where somebody that has the mobility of their upper arms probably doesn't need it. And I think at the time of being qualified for SAH, basically all of the technology is there. We've built for, I think, every type of injury out there from amputees who are blind to different levels of spinal cord injuries. So we know what's available to put in a home and it would be really great to be out in the front once they qualify. A whole checklist be put together.
Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin: I think that that's very helpful and you have some ideas and recommendations that would be helpful and would like you to share those with us, with the VA. I think that with addition to what they've done to update their pamphlet, to have someone who's undertaken the mission that you've undertaken doing this work on the ground would be beneficial in creating those types of checklists. I would also think that it would be somewhat beneficial based on the work that you've done in having these checklists for the different types of injuries that the veteran may have suffered from and how to construct a home suitable to his or her needs as it relates to the overall cost of that. And I know that you agree in addition to TRA that the specially adapted housing grant be increased and again that's sort of the historical analysis that you're providing specific in Exhibit One for that grant. What do you -- do you have a ballpark figure? I mean, knowing again that if we adjust ed it to inflation, it would be up to $170,000. But based on the work you've done and the relative cost of doing that, do you have a ballpark figure?
John Gonsalves: Yes. On average, uhm, we've averaged $343,00 for the cost of building a new home.
Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin: Okay. So that's even greater than the average new home price.
John Gonsalves: Right. But these are 100% fully adapted homes --
Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin: Yes.
John Gonsalves: -- which they do cost a little more to build. You need a little extra square footage compared to what the average home that the census bureau uses.
[. . .]
Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin: One last question. Mr -- Dr. Zampiri. Can you explain the difference in changing the Specially Adaptive Housing Grant from 5 - 200 to 20 - 200 with regard to visual impairment?
Thoomas Zampieri: Yes. In fact, thank you very much. I was afraid someone didn't notice that. And also I appreciate that Congressman [John] Boozman [Ranking Member] just coincidentally showed up at the right time [laughter from Zampieri and Boozman]. I'm legally blind. I can't drive. A lot of jobs I can't do. My vision is worse than 20/200. And I don't qualify for anything under this program because the requirement is 5/200 which is really just you can't tell if there's a light on. There's no light/dark perception for lack of a better way to describe it. If somebody has 5/200 and they waive their hand in front of your face and you don't see it, you're quote-quote, 'meet this requirement, "totally blind." Our concern is -- and this is growing thing -- a lot of the Traumatic Brain Injured service members who have significant functional impairments, who need extra lighting and all these other things get zip. When I was in Houston and I was first service-connected for my blindness, for example, because of the 20/200 vision, they said no. So I went and I ended up spending not a whole lot but almost $7,000 to do the modifications to my house in Houston because, you know. And so the total number of service members coming back that would be 5/200 is fairly low. In fact, the Navy says there's less than 20 in the last 8 years out at Bethesda. But there are 140 that are enrolled in the VA with this 20/200 and are told "nope" and -- So it's a frustrating thing. And I realize of course that the magic problem is that if you change this section and you open it up to 20/200 as the definition of blindness then of course, you know, the automatic reaction is "Uh-oh. You're going to expand the costs of the program." And-and, I'm always suspicious of that. It's sort of like a few years ago, a couple of years ago when you did the TRA legislation. I'm sure people initially reacted by saying this is going to cost millions and millions and you're going to have all sorts of veterans applying for this. And the experience that I have is it usually isn't that way. People don't apply automatically. But I think Mr. Boozman may have some thoughts about this problem of the vision complications.
Ranking Member John Boozman: I appreciate you bringing that up and you make such an important comment -- that probably the VA's the only entity in the world that uses that standard versus the 20/200 standard. As an optometrist, I helped start -- in fact I started the School For The Blind's low vision program in Little Rock. And I would say probably about 90% of the kids in there did not -- would not meet the -- did you say 5/200 was the standard? Yeah, I mean, that's the standard I'm familiar with because nobody uses it. But I would say that if you looked at all the kids in blind schools or schools for the impaired, the vast majority, the vast-vast majority, there's no way that they would meet a 5/200. Most people, and lay people don't understand this but, most people that-that are blind have a lot of usable vision that can be worked with. And it truly does, you know, going in and setting up a kitchen or setting up a house so that a person can easily pour a cup of coffee -- you know, do things, that we just take for granted. Somebody might really struggle with that that did not meet this definition of vision which is so stringent in the VA so I think you make a great point.
Remember the two women in New Hampshire noting the lack of Iraq coverage in the media? On NPR today, The Diane Rehm Show didn't have time for Iraq but it did have time for Nadia Bilbassy to laugh condescendingly at an e-mailer (Tom from Jacksonville, Florida) caller and presumably all Americans before she went on to declare what American tax payer money should be spent on. Nadia scored a double: She managed to (a) be insulting and (b) also pimp opinion passed off as fact. It was not attractive. And it was cute the way she worked every answer back to her own community and issues -- a fact not revealed on the broadcast. I wonder if the Basques in Spain will next be brought on to lobby for an hour without NPR revealing who they are? Her remarks did not approach journalism. But, hey, she got to be rude and insulting and isn't that what NPR is all about? Strangely, Diane's show last week (with a guest host) told people the vote was on track in Iraq. That's now up in the air so you'd think they would have felt the need to do an update. But possibly when one guest keeps talking about 'her people' (but forgetting to inform the listeners of that) there's very little time for anything else.
Let's turn to the issue of the elections. Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) reported this afternoon that "the country's top election official said that even if lawmakers resolved all their differences, it would be impossible to hold elections in January" and quoted Independent High Electoral Commission's Faraj al-Haydari stating, "We have already stopped all our work." Arraf reminds that both the "IHEC and the United Nations officials have said they need at least 60 days to prepare a credible election."
The Constitution requires the election by the end of January. Election officials had said that the law needed to be done by Oct. 15 to allow enough time to prepare for the voting. Even though Iraq's Parliament overshot that deadline when it approved compromise legislation, the election was expected to take place between Jan. 18 and Jan. 23. But the Presidency Council (composed of the president, a Kurd, and two vice presidents, a Sunni and a Shiite) has the final say. And Mr. Hashimi chose to exercise his veto power and put in doubt Iraq's second national election, a critical test of whether democracy can endure as the United States withdraws its troops.
The editorial board thinks the Constitution matters . . . sometimes. Sometimes Iraq's Constitution doesn't matter. It appears the editorial board is concerned with the Constitution only when what they want doesn't happen. Refuse to conduct a national census? The editorial board's okay with that. Refuse to resolve the Kirkuk issue (as the Constitution mandated be done by 2007)? The editorial board's okay with that. It's a funny sort of semi-devotion to the Constitution but then the New York Times is a funny sort of news outlet. Sami Moubayed covers the developments in Iraq at Asia Times notes the argument that the Iraqi refugees will be underrepresented in the Parliament (true even if there wasn't an effort to expand the number of seats and to hand the bulk to Shi'ites). Mouybayad explains, "Frantically [Nouri al-] Maliki responded. On Thursday evening, the Constitutional Court (over which Maliki has plenty of influence) overruled Hashemi's veto, calling it 'unconstitutional'." Let's jump to what's happening and then come back to the 'unconstitutional' assertion. Waleed Ibrahim, Suadad al-Salhy, Aseel Kami, David Alexander, Deepa Babington, Samia Nakhoul and Todd Eastham (Reuters) report, "Instead of addressing Hashemi's demand that the law give more seats to Iraqi refugees and minorities, lawmakers squabbled over whether the veto was legal. They scheduled a session Saturday in which they would vote on whether to reject Hashemi's veto and send the law back for approval by the three-person presidency council without changes, said the speaker of parliament, Ayad al-Samarai." Now back to the "unconstitutional" claim. The reporters go on to address the claims Baha al-Araji was making (see yesterday's snapshot) about the veto being "unconstitutional" and how this is "political wrangling" and MP Saleh al-Mutlaq states, "To my knowledge, the federal court did not say the veto is not constitutional. They are trying to create a real political crisis."
Turning to the daily violence. First, a correction. McClatchy was included in yesterday's daily violence and that was Wednesday's daily violence. Not Thursdays. It will not be counted in the weekly total at Third. McClatchy didn't do a violence report on Thursday or, thus far, on Friday. Apparently, there were other things to do. Reuters noted the following violence today a Mosul roadside bombing today which injured a police officer, a Mosul stabbing of "an Egyptian" last night and another civilian shot dead in Mosul last night as well as a Thursday Baghdad bombing which left nine people injured.
Moving to Europe where noted War Hawk Tony Blair was delivered some, for him, bad news. As Middle East Online reports, "Former British premier Tony Blair took a blow after being rejected as EU president, mainly due to his stained repuation after supporting and taking part in the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003." There is no joy in the killing fields tonight, Poodle Tony has struck out. Blair is the former British prime minister. His roll dog Gordon Brown is the current one. Leicester Mercury reports Brown is refusing to meet with the father of Peter Moore who was kidnapped along with 4 other British citizens in Iraq back in May 2007. The other four are all dead or thought by the government to be dead. Only Peter Moore is assumed to be alive at this point. But Brown has refused to meet with him and the reason given is that the "designated next of kin" is not Graeme Moore. Though some are shocked by Brown's decision, it should be remembered that Gordon is himself a War Hawk and, as such, may not be able to fake compassion very well and just attempting to do so may wear Gordon Brown out. In which case, he needs to limit the occassions on which he fakes sympathy in public.
Nora Barrows-Freidman: We are now joined on the phone by Stephen Funk. He was one of the earliest who refused to serve in the occupation of Iraq. And, Stephen, thank you so much for being with us again on Flashpoints.
Stephen Funk: Thanks for having me.
Nora Barrows-Freidman: Tell us a little bit about your own history of refusing military service and then what can you say about this international push to dismantle militarism and the specific relationship between the United States and its expanding policies of entrenched occupations in the Middle East and Israel's ongoing and long suffering project of occupation and colonialism? What are the similarities that-that you're seeing there on the ground in Palestine, Israel? And what about the solidarity and the meetings you've been having with Israeli refuseniks?
Stephen Funk: I guess, with my own story, I joined the military after 9-11. I voluntarily enlisted in the Marine Corps. I came from a background of activism. I grew up in Seattle, organized for the WTO and I moved to LA and protested against the Democratic National Committee in 2000 and I also spent two months in the Philippines when their president was being impeached -- that was at the same time George W. Bush was being inaugurated for the first time and I was hoping that the same kind of thing could happen in the United States that was happening in the Philipines. But despite that background, I enlisted. I feel -- maybe as an activist, I thought I could be a more reasonable person in Afghanistan and not be like a racist, hot head which is what I thought a lot of people joining at the time -- there was a lot of a fear going on and lot of people joining at the time were very reactionary about 9-11 and, you know that was -- that was where I was coming from. But when I went to the Marine Corps, I went to the violent training and I had to shout "Kill! Kill! Kill!" all the time and, you know, I also had to deal with being queer in the military. And I realize that I didn't want to be violent and I did not want to participate in any war -- especially the Iraq War for political reasons. But then, that I couldn't aim a gun at anybody and pull the trigger and that, ultimately, that is what I would be doing if I stayed in the marines. I had the option -- because I was gay, I had the option to get out under Don't Ask, Don't Tell. And everybody knew I was gay, everybody thought I was gay. It wouldn't have been difficult. But my issue wasn't that I was being oppressed it was that I was being asked to oppress others. And I felt that it would be more honest to get out under conscientious objection. So I started work on that. I went back to San Francisco and participated in the shut down before the war began and kept on protesting and was speaking out anonymously. But then there wasn't very -- despite all of the rallies that were happening every weekend, despite, you know, all of the worldwide mobilizations and all of the people that were in the streets, the media wasn't paying attention to anybody. And I believe the difference between 2003 and the war began, it was as if everybody in the United States agreed with it -- despite the fact that I was living in San Francisco and clearly people were not happy that the war was happening. So I guess I just talked to people and I decided that I would become a public war resister. And I was the first person to do it. And, you know, the next several months, traveling the country -- I was based in New Orleans -- and I traveled the country. I was eventually sent to jail. That was the long story.
Eddie Falcon is a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War and he writes about the current project that he and others are working on here.
TV notes, NOW on PBS debuts its latest episode Friday on most PBS stations and this one examines:
The Pentagon estimates that as many as one in five American soldiers are coming home from war zones with traumatic brain injuries, many of which require round-the-clock attention. But lost in the reports of these returning soldiers are the stories of family members who often sacrifice everything to care for them. On Friday, November 20 at 8:30 pm (check local listings), NOW reveals how little has been done to help these family caregivers, and reports on dedicated efforts to support them. Washington Week also begins airing on many PBS stations tonight (and throughout the weekend, check local listings) and joining Gwen around the roundtable are John Dickerson (CBS News, Slate), Doyle McManus ( Los Angeles Times), David Sanger ( New York Times) and Karen Tumulty ( Time magazine). Meanwhile Bonnie Erbe will sit down with Avis Jones-Deweever, Page Gardner, and Tara Setmayer to discuss the week's events on PBS' To The Contrary. Check local listings, on many stations, it begins airing tonight. And turning to broadcast TV, Sunday CBS' 60 Minutes offers:
The Cost of Dying Many Americans spend their last days in an intensive care unit, subjected to uncomfortable machines or surgeries to prolong their lives at enormous cost. Steve Kroft reports. | Watch Video
Witness Recently freed after four months of interrogation and torture at the hands of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, Newsweek reporter Maziar Bahari tells his story to Bob Simon and writes about his ordeal in the next issue of Newsweek.
Cameron's AvatarMorley Safer gets the first broadcast look at how "Titanic" director James Cameron created his $400 million 3D fantasy "Avatar." | Watch Video
60 Minutes, Sunday, Nov. 22, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.
|
Posted at 12:26 pm by cedricsbigmix
Permalink
Nov 20, 2009
BULLY BOY PRESS &
CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE
KOOL-AID TABLECELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O FOUGHT BACK TODAY ON
CLAIMS THAT HE HAS DONE NOTHING FOR THE ECONOMY OR TO HELP PEOPLE GET
JOBS. "I'VE GOTTEN PLENTY OF PEOPLE JOBS, PEOPLE WHO BUNDLED
AT LEAST $800,000 FOR MY CAMPAIGN! ALL MY BIG DONORS ARE BECOMING AMBASSADORS!
BARRY O CREATES JOBS AND DON'T LET ANYONE SAY HE DOESN'T! I CREATE JOBS AND I
STAFF THEM! WITH DONORS!" IN OTHER NEWS, U.S.
HOUSE REPRESENTATIVE JOHN CONYERS BECAME THE LATEST TO CALL BARRY O ON HIS
EMBARRASSING TENDENCY TO CONSTANTLY BEND OVER. SAID CONYERS, "I
SWEAR, WHEN HE WAS A BOY, THE ONLY WORDS HE MUST HAVE EVER HEARD WERE 'BEND
OVER'." FROM
THE TCI WIRE: "The reports already out," declared
Michael H. Posner this afternoon to US House Rep Jim Costa. "Those designations
will happen in the next few months. The human rights -- the broader human rights
report is just a factual summary." Posner, the Assistant Secretary for Bureau of
Democracy, Human Rights and Labor at the US State Dept, was appearing before the
US House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia. The
report he was refering to was the State Dept's International Religious Freedom Report which was released
October 26, 2009. On Iraq, the State Dept's publication notes: At the end
of the reporting period, national identity cards continued to note the holder's
religion, which has been used as a basis for discrimination; however, passports
did not note religion. Law No. 105 of 1970 prohibits the Baha'i Faith, and a
2001 resolution prohibits the Wahhabi branch of Islam. Although provisions on
freedom of religion in the new Constitution may supersede these laws, no court
challenges have been brought to have them invalidated, and no legislation has
been proposed to repeal them. In April 2007 the Ministry of Interior's
Nationality and Passport Section canceled Regulation 358 of 1975, which
prohibited the issuance of a nationality identity card to those claiming the
Bahai' Faith. In May 2007 a small number of Baha'is were issued identity cards.
The Nationality and Passport Section's legal advisor stopped issuance of the
cards thereafter, claiming Baha'is had been registered as Muslims since 1975 and
citing a government regulation preventing the conversion of "Muslims" to another
faith. Without this official citizenship card, Baha'is experience difficulty
registering their children for school and applying for passports. Despite the
cancellation of the regulation, Baha'is whose identy records were changed to
"Muslim" after Regulation 358 was instituted in 1975 still could not change
their identity cards to indicate their Baha'i faith, and their children were not
recognized as Baha'is. A March 2006 citizenship law specifically precludes
Jews from regaining citizenship if it is ever withdrawn. [. . .] There
were allegations that the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) engaged in
discriminatory behavior against religious minorities. Christians and Yezidis
living north of Mosul claimed that the KRG confiscated their property without
compensation and that it began building settlements on their land. Assyrian
Christians alleged that the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP)-dominated judiciary
in Ninewa routinely discriminated against non-Muslims and failed to enforce
judgments in their favor. There were reports that Yezidis faced restrictions
when entering the KRG and had to obtain KRG approval to find jobs in areas
within Ninewa Province administred by the KRG or under the security protection
of the Peshmerga. There were also allegations that the KRG exhibited
favoritism toward the Christian religious establishment, and it was alleged that
on February 17, 2008, KRG authorities arrested and held incommunicado for four
days an Assyrian blogger, Johnny Khoshaba Al-Rikany, based on articles he had
posted attacking corruption in the church. Yezidi and Shabak political
leaders alleged that Kurdish Peshmerge forces regularly committed abuses against
and harassed their communities in Ninewa Province. Districts that are within the
security control of the Peshmerga include Sinjar, Sheikhan, Ba'asheq
(sub-district of Mosul), and Bartalla (sub-district of Hamdaniya). Minority
leaders alleged that Kurdish forces were intimidating minority communities to
identify themselves as Kurds and support their inclusion in the KRG. Yezidi
political representatives also reported that because of their religious
affiliation, they were not allowed to pass through security checkpoints in areas
controlled by Kurdish Peshmerga as they traveled from Baghdad to their
communities in northern Iraq. The KRG denied allegations that it was behind
violent incidents directed at Christians and other minorities. Moreover, despite
such allegations, many non-Muslims reside in northern Iraq and the KRG area, and
there were reports that some sought refuge there from other parts of the country
where pressures to conform publicly to narrow interpretations of Islamic tenets
were greater. In February 2009, the IOM estimated that there were 19,100
internally displaced families in the Ninewa Plain and that 43,595 internally
displaced families were located in the Kurdistan region. In reply to a
question from US House Rep Bob Inglis today, Posner said there were three things
the US government could do to support religious communities being targeted
around the world: 1) Be very viligant when religious communities are
targeted and in trouble. 2) The US government can help amplify their
voices. 3) The US government can provide direct, material, financial
support. With regards to the US government speaking out against targeting
of religious communities, Posner declared that "governments take notice of that"
and that "it is always valuable for us to speak out." Religious
minorities are among Iraq's refugee population. The genocide and ethnic
cleansing of Iraq led to millions of refugees -- some internal, some external.
Julien Barnes-Dacey (Christian Science Monitor) reports that
"up to 2 million" of the external refugees "remain stranged in neighboring
countries" while the United Nations faces shortfalls in funding. As Barnes-Dacey
reports, that has not prevented Iraqi refugees from continuing to leave Iraq.
One example of that is Abu Ali who entered Syria in August and states, "I had to
leave: they say there's security, but on the ground it's a different story. They
still kill you because of your ID papers." As a backdrop to the crisis, the US
State Dept's Eric Schwartz wrapped up a multi-day bad will tour today. Over the
weekend, Schwartz made the usual ass of himself including when AP interviewed him and, despite the fact that
various humanitarian organizations have issued studies this year pointing out
how little the Baghdad government or 'government' has done for refugees, he
declared 'strides have been made'. And the 'answer' is for Iraqi refugees to
return to Iraq -- despite the fact that the Red Cross and the United Nations
both have stated that that Iraq is not 'safe' enough for refugees to begin
returning nor is that country able to handle a mass return. Wednesday he was in Syria which estimates they currently house 1.2
million Iraqi refugees. Khaled Yacoub Oweis (Reuters) reports that
Schwartz declared the influx of Iraqi refugees to the US this current fiscal
year would be "substantial." And Schwartz declares it will be "at least 17,000."
That's substantial? By whose measurement? Or have we forgotten Schwartz promised
20,000 would be settled in FY '09 -- a little over 18,000 were re-settled in the
US for that fiscal year. So 'substantial' is now even less than his predications
for the last fiscal year? Phil Sands (The National) reports: Abdul
Rahman Attar, the president of the Syrian Arab Red Crescent, criticised the
international community and the Iraqi government, saying both were failing in
their duty to care for displaced Iraqis. And he cautioned there were dangerous
implications in four million people continuing to live as refugees, many of them
struggling to cope with increasing levels of poverty. "Perhaps the world is
underestimating the significance of the Iraqi refugees issue," he said. "It is
not a short-term matter. We are talking about medium- and long-term impacts. It
has already been six years or more for some refugees and they need greater
support. "The international community should not allow its attention to drift
easily away from the refugees. This issue is a bomb that can still explode at
any time." It would certainly seem that Eric Schwartz is underestimating
the significance. But the State Dept has always done that with Iraq --
especially with regards to Iraq's LGBT community and the continued assault on
the community. Tuesday, Kelvin Lynch (Dallas Examiner) was reporting that
Iraqi LGBT was estimating the number of LGBT men
and women murdered in Iraq since the start of the illegal war is 720 and Lynch
observes, "But the big question continues to be, why hasn't the U.S. government
done anything to help?" Taylor Luck (Jordan Times) reports on the Sabian
Mandaeans who left Iraq due to the violence and are currently in
Jordan: Fatwas were issued declaring Mandaens kuffar, or infidels.
Mandaens, known for their gold and jewellery craftsmanship, became frequent
targets of kidnappings, with ransoms set as high as $100,000. Since the
US-led invasion, the Mandaean Human Rights Group has recorded around 180
killings, 275 kidnappings and 298 assualts and forced conversions within
Iraq. RECOMMENDED: " Iraq snapshot" " Iraq's executions" " Pentagon identifies another fallen" " A joke re:
economy" " Arnold
visits Iraq" " Truest?" " it is an issue" " Parking
garages" " Senate
Veterans Affairs Committee" " On
that which we can agree" " Just not into it" " Brief" " Grab bag" " Barry's turn to cry" " THIS JUST IN! HE'S JUST NOT SEXY!"
Posted at 03:01 pm by cedricsbigmix
Permalink
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills)
Thursday,
November 19, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the 'intended'
elections remain up in the air, the US State Dept ignores warnings on
refugees, another Iraqi is sentenced to execution, and more. Starting
with the 'intended' January elections in Iraq which are in question as
a result of the veto by Iraq's Sunni vice president Tariq al-Hashemi. Waleed Ibrahim, Suadad al-Salhy, Aseel Kami and Deepa Babington (Reuters) reports
that the MPs are stating presently they intend to ignore his objection
and just revote on the same draft law -- while exploring whether or not
he has the 'power' to veto. This will reportedly take place on
Saturday. Abu Dhabi's the National condems
al-Hashemi's action in an editorial, "Mr al Hashemi has claimed that
his veto was in defence of the constitution, but that is seriously in
doubt. Even his right to a veto is dubious as the constitutional
provisions regulating the presidency council state that all its
decisions must be unanimous. This was not the case here. If anything,
it appeared to be motivated by blind sectarian interest, which is all
the more shameful considering the effort it took to overcome those same
interests and pass the law in the first place." But the paper's Phil Sands and Nizar Latif report
that Iraqi exiles are ecstatic over al Hashemi's move and quotes Jalil
Abu Arshad stating (from Syria), "I fully support the need to give more
seats to exiles. The .parliament agreed to have one MP representing
each 100,000 Iraqis and nobody can believe that the seven or so seats
that would be chose by refugees is enough. There are millions of Iraqis
with no choice but to live outside the country and they have the right
to a say in choosing the next government. This is a matter of
democratic principles, it has nothing to do with Sunni, Shia or Kurd." Now,
unfortunately, the Obama administration -- in the beginning, it was
good in being vocal and clear about the withdrawal being time-based,
not conditions-based, which is the main difference between the Obama
plan and the Bush plan. Bush talked for six years about how the US will
leave when conditions permit. But Obama talked about a timetable for
withdrawal that is not conditions-based, and that's why his plan had a
lot of support in the US and Iraq. Poor, stupid
Raed, apparently play-acting tires him out. Reality, Barack always
talked conditions based. Raed was too busy self-stroking to posters of
Barry O to deal with reality but those of us who aren't WHORES knew
reality some time ago. Let's drop back to the January 15th snapshot --
before Barack was even sworn in: Today Elisabeth Bumiller and Thom Shanker (New York Times) report on the US military commanders contingency plan for Iraq. Last month Bumiller and Shanker reported
on the military commanders presenting a partial drawdown of US troops
in Iraq on a slower scale than Barack's 'pledge' of 16 month
withdrawal (of "combat" troops only). No objections were raised over
the timeframe by the president-elect but, in case objections are
registered in the immediate future, they've come up with an alternate
plan they could implement. This calls for a high of 8,000 a month
(more likely four to six thousand) to be pulled. Using the high
figure, 48,000 US service members could be out of Iraq (with at least
30,000 of that number redeployed to Afghanistan) in six months. That
would still leave close to 100,000 US troops in Iraq. And there is no
full withdrawal planned by Barack. That is why he refused to promise
that, if elected, all US troops would be out of Iraq by the end of his
first term (2012). Of course, Barack also rushed to assure the Times
(2007) that he would easily halt any drawdown and rush more troops back
into Iraq (and no words to declare this a temporary measure) when he
sat down with Michael Gordon and Jeff Zeleny (see this Iraq snapshot and Third's article and the actual transcript
of the interview -- a transcript Tom Hayden should have read before
humiliating himself in public, then again Tom-Tom seems to enjoy public
humiliation). So the article tells you that the military's preparing
for all possibilities . . . except the possibility the American people
want (and some foolishly believe Barack ever promised) full withdrawal
of Iraq. That is not an option the military even considers. "In
the beginning," Raed? Before Baby Jarar Jarar grabs his crayola to do
another one of those laughable e-mails, let's note that the "this Iraq
snapshot" links back to November 2, 2007.
Yes, before Barack was even the Democratic Party nominee, he was
explaining any subtracting of troops (not a full withdrawal -- he never
promised that outside of campaign slogans) would be conditions based.
From the November 2, 2007 snapshot: So
let's be clear that the 'anti-war' Obama told the paper he would send
troops back into Iraq. Furthermore, when asked if he would be willing
to do that unilaterally, he attempts to beg off with, "We're talking
too speculatively right now for me to answer." But this is his heavily
pimped September (non)plan, dusted off again, with a shiny new binder.
The story is that Barack Obama will NOT bring all US troops home. Even
if the illegal war ended, Obama would still keep troops stationed in
Iraq (although he'd really, really love it US forces could be stationed
in Kuwait exclusively), he would still use them to train (the police0
and still use them to protect the US fortress/embassy and still use
them to conduct counter-terrorism actions. Facts is hard for Baby Raed. Someone change his diaper, he's looking cranky. Raed
does what Amy loves her guests to do: Channel spirits from the Land of
Fantasy. Having no facts, Raed starts offering fantasies of why the
vice president vetoed the election law. Naturally, since Raed wants
the election law, the vice president must be evil and full of malice to
do something Raed doesn't approve of. Amy laps that s**t up because,
after all, this is the Crazy who, in Decmeber 2003, was broadcasting
across the air waves -- with fellow lunatic John Nichols -- that
Hillary would take over the 2004 DNC convention in an attempt to grab
that year's presidential nomination. It takes a lot of crazy to live
in Amy Goodman's world and Raed's crazy enough to qualify as a
next-door neighbor. Raed's real tight with
CODESTINK -- which we all know isn't a peace group (by their actions,
they revealed themselves) -- so he spins for Barry and states that the
US military withdrew from all Iraqi cities at the end of June. The
bases? Raed doesn't want to think about them, that would require work
and the only work most could picture him doing is deciding which photo
of Barry to place on his pillow while he humps the bed to climax each
night. Hey, anyone remember when Raed was 'informing' that the 'surge'
was really going to be used to attack Shi'ite militias? Oh,
that fact-free, wacky child. Kisses, Raed, kisses. Also
making an ass out of himself is Baha al-Araji who has given multiple
statements to the press today (they may or may not print them
tomorrow). The Shi'ite who serves on Iraq's Constitutional Court
states/rules (depending upon which outlet he's speaking to) that Tariq
al-Hashmi doesn't have the power to veto the election law. Now that
would toss the issue up in the air and require examination but chatty
al-Araji goes on to weaken his own case by blathering on about how his
own (al-Araji) deciding was based on what al-Hashmi objected to. That
would undercut al-Araji's alleged conclusion. Either the presidential
council has the power to veto or they don't -- it doesn't matter what
their reasoning is. They possess the power or they don't. At every
other point, the council's possessed this power. Most outlets will
probably ignore the ravings of al-Araji because the Parliament's taking
up the issue on Saturday. Today at the Pentagon, US Secretary of
Defense Robert Gates spoke on the subject of the veto and where things
stand currently, "And we hope that the concerns that have been
expressed can be resolved quickly and a -- and new legislation passed
to that the election can take place within the constitutional
framework, meaning before the end of January." Tariq
al-Hashemi: What I have done in fact is based on my Constitutional
obligation. When I discovered there was a major loophole, it's our duty
-- according to the Constitution -- to try to make some sort of remedy
on a legal basis and that is what I have done today. Kamahl
Santamaria: Okay, so you've done it according to the Constitution.
You've done what you say is legal. My question to you though is the
repercussions of this. If this election can't happen as it is supposed
to happen by January the 31st, then what happens? It is a huge
opportunity lost for Iraq. Well I
don't think that this sort of amendment is going to defer the timetable
of the commission. I made a thorough discussion with the commission
staff the day before yesterday. I very much assured that all logistic
had been already covered, action had been taken, so just to make this
amendment is going to take one or two days, is not going to make any
major shift to the timetable that has been agreed upon. Kamahl
Santamaria: But what's interesting is I spoke to a member of the
electoral commission only an hour ago. He said everything's off,
they're not pressing on with anything, of course it's been thrown into
doubt. Tariq al-Hashemi:
I'm not -- I'm not agree. I think this announcement is not based on any
-- on any acceptable ground because, as I told you in fact, I-I-I had a
lengthy discussion the day before yesterday. I checked everything and
the chairman of the commission told me specifically that all action
being taken, all what we need in fact to press the button on the form
which will be according to number of seats and this could be sorted out
within hours. Kamahl Santamaria: Why is
five-percent, the sticking point of five-percent for Iraqis in exile,
Iraqis abroad, why is five-percent not enough? Tariq al-Hashemi:
Well five-percent, in fact, if you just -- if you just reflect it to a
number of seats -- we are talking a number not exceeding, in no way,
seven seats. Seven seats according to Article 49 of the Constitution
doesn't mean anything. According to the text of this article, we have
to ensure that each 100,000 Iraqis, whether they are living inside or
out -- or outside Iraq, they should be entertained by one seat. So
seven seats doesn't entertain the least figure which ministry of
migration has maintained time being. The number of Iraqis outside
of-of Iraq which has been recorded as per Ministry of Migration
is one-million-five hundred. If you're talking NGOs, international
human rights, this figure could reach to 4.5 million. So if we are
allocating only seven seats, this means that we are entertaining
700,000 Iraqis and ignored 800,000. If
you paid attention, not only did Amy Goodman not book anyone to present
the side above, it was never addressed. Just nutty conspiracy theories
from Raed. Amy calls it "public affairs" -- no one knowledgable would
use that term. Monday's snapshot
noted the assassinations of the Sahwa members in Sadan village and that
the assassins were said to be wearing Iraqi forces uniforms. Aswat al-Iraq reports
Tariq al-Hashemi declared at a Wednesday news conference, "What
happened in Abu-Ghraib two days ago is that groups in army uniform
arrested 17 people from their houses, then killed them with cold blood
in a nearby ceremony." Staying with the topic of Sahwa, we're dropping
back to the March 30th snapshot: Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) explained Saturday,
"16 people were injured (seven Sahwa members, four Iraqi soldiers and
four civilians) after clashes broke out between the Iraqi army and
Sahwa members in Fadhil neighborhood in downtown Baghdad around 2 p.m.
The clashes broke out during an operation of the Iraqi army to arrest
the leader of Fadhil Sahwa and one of his deputies. Five Iraqi soldiers
were kidnapped in the incident." McClatchy's Leila Fadel added
Adel Mashhadani was the arrest target and that the arrest of him (as
well as an assistant) "heightened fears among Sunnis that the Iraqi
government plans to divide and disband the movements now that its taken
control of all but a few thousands of the 94,000 members across the
country." Adel Mashhadani is in today's news cycle. The Telegraph of London reports that he has been "condemned to death" for an alleged kidnapping and murder. John Leland (New York Times) adds
that he has his defenders and detractors and that rumors swirl
including: "Many Fadhil residents said that Mr. Mashhadani was not in
police custody but was in Turkey, and that the courts announced the
sentence to incite Sunni violence and justify a government crackdown.
Some said the plan was led by Iranians in the government." Larry Johnson (Seattle PostGlobal) reports,
"Iraq is planning to excute up to 126 women by the end of the year. At
least 9 may be hanged with the next two weeks. Human rights goupt say
the only crime committed by many of these women was to serve in the
government of Saddan Hussein. Others, according to human rights groups
like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, were convicted of
common crimes based on confessions that were the result of torture."
Last September, Amnesty International released a report [PDF format
warning] entitled " A Thousand People Face The Death Penalty In Iraq" which noted that the country "now has one of the highest rates of executed in the world" and: Defendants
commonly complain that "confessions" were extracted from them under
torture during pre-trial interrogation, often when they were held
incommunicado in police stations or detention facilities controlled by
the Ministry of Interiror. These "confessions" are then often used as
evidence against them at their trials, and are accepted by the courts
without taking any or adequate steps to investigate defendants'
allegations of torture. Defendants also complain that they are not able
to choose their own defence lawyers; those tried before the CCCI
[Central Criminal Court of Iraq] on capital charges have defence
lawyers appointed by the court if they are unable to pay for defence
counsel, but the quality of such representation is low. Some lawyers
refuse to represent defendants accused of "terrorism", mostly Sunni
Muslims, fearing reprisals by armed milita groups linked to Shi'a
political parties represented in the Iraqi Council of Representatives
(parliament). Back in November of 2006, Brian Bennett (Time magazine) reported
on the "glitches and logistical snafus" in the executions including a
man hanged September 6th -- the rope broke and he fell fifteen feet and
declared "Allah saved me! Allah saved me!" while a debate took place
among officials for forty minutes over whether it was divine
intervention or not. In October of 2008, Robert Fisk (Independent of London) reported
on the executions and quoted an unnamed British official who explained
a hanging recently observed, "They made him stand on the bench, put the
rope round his neck and pushed him off. But he jumped on to the floor.
He could stand up. So they shortened the length of the rope and got
him back on teh bench and pushed him off again. It didn't work. They
started digging into the floor beneath the bench so that the guy would
drop far enough to snap his neck. They dug up the tiles and the cement
underneath. But that didn't work. He could still stand up when they
pushed him off the bench. So they just took him to a corner of the cell
and shot him in the head." "The reports
already out," declared Michael H. Posner this afternoon to US House Rep
Jim Costa. "Those designations will happen in the next few months. The
human rights -- the broader human rights report is just a factual
summary." Posner, the Assistant Secretary for Bureau of Democracy,
Human Rights and Labor at the US State Dept, was appearing before the
US House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and South
Asia. The report he was refering to was the State Dept's International Religious Freedom Report which was released October 26, 2009. At
the end of the reporting period, national identity cards continued to
note the holder's religion, which has been used as a basis for
discrimination; however, passports did not note religion. Law
No. 105 of 1970 prohibits the Baha'i Faith, and a 2001 resolution
prohibits the Wahhabi branch of Islam. Although provisions on freedom
of religion in the new Constitution may supersede these laws, no court
challenges have been brought to have them invalidated, and no
legislation has been proposed to repeal them. In
April 2007 the Ministry of Interior's Nationality and Passport Section
canceled Regulation 358 of 1975, which prohibited the issuance of a
nationality identity card to those claiming the Bahai' Faith. In May
2007 a small number of Baha'is were issued identity cards. The
Nationality and Passport Section's legal advisor stopped issuance of
the cards thereafter, claiming Baha'is had been registered as Muslims
since 1975 and citing a government regulation preventing the conversion
of "Muslims" to another faith. Without this official citizenship card,
Baha'is experience difficulty registering their children for school and
applying for passports. Despite the cancellation of the regulation,
Baha'is whose identy records were changed to "Muslim" after Regulation
358 was instituted in 1975 still could not change their identity cards
to indicate their Baha'i faith, and their children were not recognized
as Baha'is. A March 2006 citizenship law specifically precludes Jews from regaining citizenship if it is ever withdrawn. [. . .] There
were allegations that the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) engaged
in discriminatory behavior against religious minorities. Christians and
Yezidis living north of Mosul claimed that the KRG confiscated their
property without compensation and that it began building settlements on
their land. Assyrian Christians alleged that the Kurdistan Democratic
Party (KDP)-dominated judiciary in Ninewa routinely discriminated
against non-Muslims and failed to enforce judgments in their favor.
There were reports that Yezidis faced restrictions when entering the
KRG and had to obtain KRG approval to find jobs in areas within Ninewa
Province administred by the KRG or under the security protection of the
Peshmerga. There were also allegations
that the KRG exhibited favoritism toward the Christian religious
establishment, and it was alleged that on February 17, 2008, KRG
authorities arrested and held incommunicado for four days an Assyrian
blogger, Johnny Khoshaba Al-Rikany, based on articles he had posted
attacking corruption in the church. Yezidi
and Shabak political leaders alleged that Kurdish Peshmerge forces
regularly committed abuses against and harassed their communities in
Ninewa Province. Districts that are within the security control of the
Peshmerga include Sinjar, Sheikhan, Ba'asheq (sub-district of Mosul),
and Bartalla (sub-district of Hamdaniya). Minority leaders alleged that
Kurdish forces were intimidating minority communities to identify
themselves as Kurds and support their inclusion in the KRG. Yezidi
political representatives also reported that because of their religious
affiliation, they were not allowed to pass through security checkpoints
in areas controlled by Kurdish Peshmerga as they traveled from Baghdad
to their communities in northern Iraq. The
KRG denied allegations that it was behind violent incidents directed at
Christians and other minorities. Moreover, despite such allegations,
many non-Muslims reside in northern Iraq and the KRG area, and there
were reports that some sought refuge there from other parts of the
country where pressures to conform publicly to narrow interpretations
of Islamic tenets were greater. In February 2009, the IOM estimated
that there were 19,100 internally displaced families in the Ninewa
Plain and that 43,595 internally displaced families were located in the
Kurdistan region. In reply to a
question from US House Rep Bob Inglis today, Posner said there were
three things the US government could do to support religious
communities being targeted around the world: 1) Be very viligant when religious communities are targeted and in trouble. 2) The US government can help amplify their voices. 3) The US government can provide direct, material, financial support. With
regards to the US government speaking out against targeting of
religious communities, Posner declared that "governments take notice of
that" and that "it is always valuable for us to speak out." Religious
minorities are among Iraq's refugee population. The genocide and
ethnic cleansing of Iraq led to millions of refugees -- some internal,
some external. Julien Barnes-Dacey (Christian Science Monitor) reports
that "up to 2 million" of the external refugees "remain stranged in
neighboring countries" while the United Nations faces shortfalls in
funding. As Barnes-Dacey reports, that has not prevented Iraqi
refugees from continuing to leave Iraq. One example of that is Abu Ali
who entered Syria in August and states, "I had to leave: they say
there's security, but on the ground it's a different story. They still
kill you because of your ID papers." As a backdrop to the crisis, the
US State Dept's Eric Schwartz wrapped up a multi-day bad will tour
today. Over the weekend, Schwartz made the usual ass of
himself including when AP interviewed him
and, despite the fact that various humanitarian organizations have
issued studies this year pointing out how little the Baghdad government
or 'government' has done for refugees, he declared 'strides have been
made'. And the 'answer' is for Iraqi refugees to return to Iraq --
despite the fact that the Red Cross and the United Nations both have
stated that that Iraq is not 'safe' enough for refugees to begin
returning nor is that country able to handle a mass return. Wednesday he was in Syria which estimates they currently house 1.2 million Iraqi refugees. Khaled Yacoub Oweis (Reuters) reports
that Schwartz declared the influx of Iraqi refugees to the US this
current fiscal year would be "substantial." And Schwartz declares it
will be "at least 17,000." That's substantial? By whose measurement?
Or have we forgotten Schwartz promised 20,000 would be settled in FY
'09 -- a little over 18,000 were re-settled in the US for that fiscal
year. So 'substantial' is now even less than his predications for the
last fiscal year? Phil Sands (The National) reports: Abdul
Rahman Attar, the president of the Syrian Arab Red Crescent, criticised
the international community and the Iraqi government, saying both were
failing in their duty to care for displaced Iraqis. And he cautioned
there were dangerous implications in four million people continuing to
live as refugees, many of them struggling to cope with increasing
levels of poverty. "Perhaps the
world is underestimating the significance of the Iraqi refugees issue,"
he said. "It is not a short-term matter. We are talking about medium-
and long-term impacts. It has already been six years or more for some
refugees and they need greater support. "The international
community should not allow its attention to drift easily away from the
refugees. This issue is a bomb that can still explode at any time." It
would certainly seem that Eric Schwartz is underestimating the
significance. But the State Dept has always done that with Iraq --
especially with regards to Iraq's LGBT community and the continued
assault on the community. Tuesday, Kelvin Lynch (Dallas Examiner) was reporting that Iraqi LGBT
was estimating the number of LGBT men and women murdered in Iraq since
the start of the illegal war is 720 and Lynch observes, "But the big
question continues to be, why hasn't the U.S. government done anything
to help?" Taylor Luck (Jordan Times) reports on the Sabian Mandaeans who left Iraq due to the violence and are currently in Jordan: Fatwas
were issued declaring Mandaens kuffar, or infidels. Mandaens, known for
their gold and jewellery craftsmanship, became frequent targets of
kidnappings, with ransoms set as high as $100,000. Since
the US-led invasion, the Mandaean Human Rights Group has recorded
around 180 killings, 275 kidnappings and 298 assualts and forced
conversions within Iraq. Bombings? Shootings? Please
note, Reuters has filed no story on violence today. That is why you do
not use ICCC for an Iraqi body count -- ICCC only goes by Reuters,
'their' count is a tally of Reuters. Meanwhile in the United States, Gidget Funetes (Navy Times) reports
that Ray Mabus, Secretary of the Navy, "rejected a clemency request
from a Marine infantry squad leader convicted of killing an Iraqi man
in 2006, a case that drew two jury convictions and five guilty please
from seven other members of his squad." This is the case where US
service members ("the Penleton 8") plotted to kill an Iraqi and went to
his home April 26, 2006 only to find him not at home and instead
grabbed another Iraqi whom they bound, dragged and shot dead. Jeanette Steele (San Diego Union-Tribune) reports
Mabus was asked to review the case in terms of Lawrence Hutchins
conviction and eleven year sentence and that Mabus denied Hutchins
clemency and "also ordered that four of the other seven defendants in
the case be discharged from the military." Mark Nero (LA Examiner) identifies
the four, "Marine Lance Cpls. Tyler Jackson, Jerry Shumate and John
Jodka III, and Navy Corpsman Melson Bacos were the servicemembers
ordered removed. They had been originally been allowed to stay on
active duty after serving short jail terms for lesser offenses." Finally, NOW on PBS debuts its latest episode Friday on most PBS stations and this one examines: The Pentagon estimates that as many as one in five American soldiers are coming home from war zones with traumatic brain injuries, many of which require round-the-clock attention. But lost in the reports of these returning soldiers are the stories of family members who often sacrifice everything to care for them. On Friday, November 20 at 8:30 pm (check local listings), NOW reveals how little has been done to help these family caregivers, and reports on dedicated efforts to support them.
Posted at 11:23 am by cedricsbigmix
Permalink
Nov 19, 2009
BULLY BOY PRESS &
CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE
KOOL-AID TABLEIN A DESPARATE ATTEMPT FOR ATTENTION, CELEBRITY IN CHIEF
BARRY O BEGAN DISCUSSING THE RUMORS OF HIS EATING DISORDER WITH THE PRESS
TODAY. WHAT UPSET BARRY O SO? THOUGH HE'S BEEN SHOWERED WITH
MANY AN UNDESERVED AWARD THIS YEAR, THE
ONE HE HAD HIS HEART SET ON, THE ONE HE THOUGHT HE WAS A SHOO-IN FOR WAS HANDED
OUT TO SOMEONE ELSE. " JOHNNY
F**KING DEPP?" BARRY O WAS HEARD TO EXCLAIM. "I GUESS IF I WALKED AROUND
WITH A PARROT ON MY SHOULDER, PEOPLE WOULD THINK I WAS SEXY TOO. IS THAT IT? IS
THAT IT?" FROM THE
TCI WIRE:
"These are difficult times for many
Americans," declared US Senator Daniel Akaka today, "with an unemployment number
higher than it has been for 20 years. When the number of those who have given up
looking for work because they believe none is available is combined with those
who are only able to find part-time employment, the extent of our challenge is
staggering. For our nation's veterans, especially those who have recently
separated from active duty, the search for a job can be particularly difficult.
Skills honed on the battlefield are not easily translated to a resume for the
civilian job market. Add to that the need for a readjustment to civilian life
and the problem is compounded." Akaka was chairing the Senate Veterans
Affairs Committee's hearing entitled Easing The Burdens Through Employment. To
underscore the problems with employment, Senator Patty Murray explained that the
citizen-soldiers of the 81st Brigade Combat Team of the Washington Army National
Guard "just returned this summer after serving their country honorably in Iraq,"
that there were approximately 2300 in the brigade "about 1/2 of them tried to
get direct job placement or job training" but "only 20% have been able to get a
job so far." The first panel was the Assistant Secretary for Veterans
Employment and Training from the US Dept of Labor, Raymond Jefferson who noted
that this was his 100th day on the job in his current position andh touted the
Dept of Labor's Veterans Employment and Training Service (VETS) in his opening
remarks. He also noted that the veterans population included under-served
populations such as (from prepared remarks, except for a nod to Senator Jon
Tester, more or less the same as what he stated to the committee) "Native
American Veterans, especially those on tribal lands, are one such population.
[Labor] Secretary [Hilda] Solis hosted a Summit of Tribal Leaders at the
Department of Labor earlier this month that VETS participated in. We discussed
the challenges facing Native American Veterans and potential solutions. This
event began the process of better serving this community. VETS will also be
participating in a number of major Native American outreach events in 2010.
Furthermore, we are conducting a study on the employment needs of Native
American Veterans living on tribal lands to identify best practices for serving
this population." Another population he noted was "wounded, ill or injured"
veterans which the VETS program is mainly addressing via REALifelines and America's
Heroes At Work. We'll note one exchange from this panel for two reason. (A)
I don't think we've noted Senator Mark Begich in any hearing before. (B) Because
the exchange resulted in some laughter. Senator Mark Begich: Let me, if I
can add, expand a little bit on, Senator Tester commentary. Being from Alaska,
you know we also have a very strong rural component of our state but also of
Indian country can you -- I was listening carefully to what you were describing
to Senator Tester. What it sounds like, and I don't want to put words in your
mouth, but I -- and I want this to be viewed as positive -- that there has not
been an aggressive approach in reaching out to rural communities, especially
American Indian country. Is that a fair statement? Raymond Jefferson:
Senator, when I took office 100 years ago, and I've assessed it -- [Laughs] 100
days ago, Senator Mark Begich: 100 days ago. Senator Jon Tester: I
like the way he looks for 100 years. Raymond Jefferson: It's been a lot
of midnights. Senator Mark Begich: It feels like 100 years, I
know. Raymond Jefferson: But, senator, I'm just not
satisified. Senator Mark Begich: Okay. Raymond Jefferson: I
realize that with the resources we have, we have to work. Working harder isn't
going to cut it, I think we have to work more innovatively. And there's two key
components. The first is the dialogue we're having with the Native American
veterans and the tribal leaders and also, as Senator Tester alluded to,
broadening that to the representatives of the rural community to find out from
them what will best serve them. And then what I'm looking at is parternships,
partnerships with other agencies and specifically non-profits and some of these
new veteran volunteer initiatives can be helpful there. Panel two was
composed of America Works's Peter Wikul (US Navy Capt, retired), Vietnam
veteran Dexter Daniel (with Marriott), National Organization On Disability's Helen
Tymes, Iraq War veteran Joshua Lawton-Belous (with Oracle) and Lutz Ziob
(Microsoft). We'll provide a sample exchange from the second panel. Chair
Daniel Akaka: It seems that one of the themes running through all of your
testimonies this morning is mentoring, coaching and hands-on approach to
providing assistance. Let me ask each of you to rate this aspect of any program
that might be developed in terms of its value and as a factor for
success. Helen Tymes: I'll make a statement on that. Chair Daniel
Akaka: Ms. Thymes. Helen Tymes: Yes, sir. As far as the effectiveness of
our program, it is right now 90% as far as the veterans that we serve and the
opportunities that we have assisted to get. We -- we give individualized
services to veterans. As far as the transition from being in the military has
been stated later and to the civilian sector, many of those skill sets, the
individual, the veteran, is not aware of what they are. Because of our education
and history and knowledge of the military, we are able to get those skill sets
out and come up with resumes that are working resumes, not just a show resume,
but something that actually has substance to make that veteran competent for
employment and to also help with any other application process there is for
education. Our veterans today are facing a lot of mental problems -- PTSD, TBI,
a combination of both. This makes the veterans upset, they get angry, have a
very low temper tolerance and, because of our services -- because of our
personalized services, we're able to assist the veteran with what needs to get
accomplished. Dexter Daniel: I concur with -- Chair Daniel Akaka:
Mr. Daniels. Dexter Daniel: -- Miss Helen. Thank you very much, Mr.
Chairman. What I personally experienced was I was so ashamed when I came home, I
just couldn't, you know, really face the reality of wanting to talk to people
about my problems and I just didn't reach out. And, you know, the shame that I
felt caused me to react in a lot of the ways that I did. Again, I always thank
God for MAC VETS (Maryland Center for Veteran's Education and Training
1-410-642-1693) because they reached out in a way that no one else ever had. You
know, I was literally in prison and they had a represenative that came around, I
was in the cell and, at that time, I knew I was facing a lot. Then an individual
came around and found out first and foremost, he's a veteran, number two, this
is an availability of a program that we have. Longterm, two year availability to
be able to do it, that to me is personalized. Once I got there, the counselors
welcomed me with open arms and I still had a lot on my plate at that time. I
still had obligations and commitments to the division of parole and probation to
come out. They went the extra mile to even talk to my probation agent and the
judge, to solidify this one final -- and that's how I felt, one final --
opportunity that I'd have in this life to do good. They gave me my shot and, you
know, we've just had a wonderful partnership ever since then. That's the effect
that it's had on me. Chair Daniel Akaka: Mr. Belous? Joshua
Lawton-Belous: Mr. Chairman, as a representative of Oracle corporation, we've
found that there are many reasons we don't actually need to ask for money from
the federal government to run our wounded warrior program. Mainly because each
wounded warrior we take in is a value added proposition for Oracle corporation.
They add something to it. And it's a dual mentorship. It's a two-way street on
the mentorship role. One is that those who are in the industry need to mentor
wounded warriors, soldiers, marines, veterans coming out of the military to
explain to them the career path. It's a completely different world when you go
inside and understanding it will take some time. There's always that uptick no
matter what job you go to where there's a learning curve. But secondly, it
behooves veterans to mentor those who are mentoring them to show them 'This is
exactly what I learned in the military, this is what I'm capable of doing.'
Because, as we find now, only 1/2 of 1% of the population is actually serving in
the wars that we are fighting today which means that over time -- and it has
already occured where those who are hiring do not understand the valued added
proposition that service members can bring to an organization. That, I believe,
is the greatest effect of the mentorship program. That way programs that we have
today to help veterans transition out of the military will be more successful
when the vast majority of senior to mid-level managers are no longer military
veterans. Chair Daniel Akaka: Captain? Peter Wikul: Chairman Akaka
when America Works is racked and stacked against organizations that do similar
types of work in the New York area, we consistently rank number one in terms of
getting people jobs. People come in the door, we give them mentoring, we give
them mentoring. We give them interview skills so that when we get them an
interview, they give the right answers to the right questions so they can get
them the jobs. We don't get them the jobs, we get them the interviews. They have
to get the job and we coach them in that process. If you're a veteran and you
need a suit, we get 'em a suit. There's a program to get them a suit. And I have
to tell you just recently with in the last two weeks, I went to two veterans
homeless shelters in New York City to give a motivational speech and some of
these guys are really whipped down and they're broken. And you start talking to
them and I try to motivate them and I try to tell them, "Look when we help you
get a job, you will get back your self-respect and dignity and-and it will put
you on the road to getting an even better job." And so we go there, we go right
into the shelters, we talk to them, we give them a speech, and around town, we
have a card and it says: "Do you need a job? America Works. If you're a New York
City resident and are having difficulty finding a job, call this number and go
here. No fee." And we are right in the trenches, we get these people, we bring
them in the door . What's amazing is when I first hooked up with this company,
which I really find amazing, is you walk in the door at the beginning of the day
and it's loaded with people. It's just, you have to fight your way in to get to
the offices. And I came back, we went on some sales calls, and I came back about
five hours later and I said, "Where are all the people?" And they said, "Out on
interviews getting jobs." And so this is what this company does. Against similar
companies, we're ranked number one. We get people jobs. We're right on the
streets. We're in the trenches. We go to homeless veterans shelters, we talk to
the people, we mentor them, we bring them out of their shells, we give them the
interview skills and a suit if necessary and we help them restore their dignity
and their self-respect so that they can become whole and good American
citizens. Lutz Ziob: To answer your question, Chairman Akka, I believe
internships are very important. Occupational success is typically the
combination of subject matter expertise. You have to be a good nurse, system
manager, but also know how to navigate the world of work, the changing world of
work. It's your - your - what you know about your job. The mentorship people
that are in the trenches can provide that guidance. The difficulty is they have
a day job as well so we need to free up their time and find the opportunity to
connect them -- mentor and mentee -- in an effective way. This was
more of a fact finding hearing and Senators Tester and Begich set up time next
month with Raymond Jefferson to address concerns for rural veterans and Senator
Murray sounded out Lutz Ziob specifically on potential legislation (a bill)
she's attempting to draft and plans to bring to the Senate floor next
year. This morning Anthony Shadid (Washington Post) reported that
Tariq al-Hashimi, Iraq's Sunni vice president (they have two vice presidents,
one Shia -- Adel Abdul Mehdi, one Sunni) vetoed the election law: "The veto by
Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi was the latest wrinkle in growing criticism over
the law by the country's biggest minorities, Sunni Arabs and Kurds. Both groups
are effectively demanding the allocation of more seats to their blocs in the
next parliament, which is almost assured of having a Shiite Muslim majority." In
yesterday's snapshot, we noted that the food
rations cards being used for the registry was a joke and included a number of
reasons why. All Shadid can do is tell you that the food rations cards are
overseen by the Trade Ministry. The name we used yesterday -- the one Shadid
fails to attach to this story -- is Abdel Falah al-Sudani -- a Nouri appointee,
to Minister of Trade, a member of Nouri's own political party and someone who
was forced to resign in May of this year over corruption issues. It is not a
minor issue when your voter roll was overseen by a minister who has had to
resign in disgrace. In real time, Bloomberg News noted that al-Sudani "acknowledged
cases of corruption and said the system needed to be revised" in May of this
year and that "Iraq's Commission on Public Integrity earlier this month charged
nine trade ministry officials with financial and administrative corruption
related to the country's food import program." "Financial and administrative
corruption related to" what is now being hailed as a legitimate voter roll. CNN added this morning that Tariq al-Hashimi
"refused to sing the law without an amendment that would increase the number of
seats allocated to refugees, many of whom are Sunnis, from five percent to 15
percent. The Constitution stipulates that every 100,000 Iraqis should have one
representative in the country's parliament but al-Hashemi said that refugee
numbers are not included in how seats have been calculated." Martin Chulov (Guardian) observes, "However,
Hashimi's move has set the scene for a showdown between MPs and the Sunni
minority, which increasingly feared it was likely to lose even more political
ground. The last election, almost five years ago, was boycotted en masse by
Sunnis." Liz Sly and Raheem Salman (Los Angeles Times) provide
this context: "Iraq's constitution stipulates that elections must be held by
the end of January, and failure to meet that deadline could plunge the country
into a constitutional crisis. The vote was originally slated for Jan. 16, but
the commission had already said that would be impossible. Hussaini estimated
that the latest date on which it can feasibly be held is Jan. 21. It will be
impossible to hold the election in the last 10 days of January, Hussaini said,
because of the Shiite Ashura holiday, when millions of pilgrims converge on foot
on the holy city of Karbala from all over the country and the world. The roads
will be clogged, and many Shiites will be away from their home constituencies
and unable to vote." Anne Barker (Australia's ABC) reminds that the
current Parliament is set to expire by the end of January. So where are things
right now? Anthony Shadid and Daniel Dombey (at the Financial
Times of London) flip through the memory books to pull this now-forgotten
reality back out, "The election deal was only reached after sustained lobbying
by Joe Biden, US vice-president, and had been portrayed by the Obama
administration as a rare piece of good news from the Middle East and 'critically
important' for Iraq's prospects". On today's All Things Considered (NPR), Corey
Flintoff examined the latest news. Corey Flintoff: When President
Obama hailed the passage of the law on November 8th, he cited the link between
elections and the US withdrawal. US President Barack Obama (November
8th): This agreement advances the political process that can bring lasting peace
and unity to Iraq and allow for the orderly and responsible transition of
American combat troops out of Iraq by next September. Corey Flintoff: US
officials have said that if the security situation in Iraq is stable they can
begin withdrawing troops 60 days after the election. Iraq's Constitution calls
for a new Parliament to be elected by the end of January when the current
government's mandate expires. Flintoff notes that Constitutional crisis could
take place but that some MPs state that the Parliament has the authority to
extend the term by one month. At the US State Dept today, in the daily press
briefing, spokesperson Ian Kelly declared: We're disappointed at these
developments related to the elections law. We urge the Iraqi leaders and
Parliament to take quick action to resolve any of the outstanding concerns that
have been expressed. And this is so elections can go forward. And these
elections, of course are mandated by the Iraqi Constitution. We believe that
it's the responsibility of all Iraqi partiest to ensure that the Iraqi people
are able to exercsie their democratic right to vote and this election law
represent the best way forward for the Iraqi government to be able to
consolidate the democratic and political achievements. The proper
response to Kelly's statement was: "Oh, explain that law to us." Naturally, no
one embarrassed Kelly with a difficult question -- one his laughable remarks
begged for. RECOMMENDED: " Iraq snapshot" " About those 'intended' January elections" " Military suicide rate" " Not in the mood" " Katha
Pollitt, alleged feminist" " Millions
of Women Could Lose Abortion Coverage" " don't become 'the battered woman of the house'" " Stupak" " Reading
on the road" " Danny
Schechter, the eternal idiot" " Center for Reproductive Rights" " CRR
(yea!), CCR (boo!)" " I feel just like Elizabeth Edwards" " Indecision is killing him" " THIS JUST IN! ONE TANKS THE OTHER DOESN'T!"
Posted at 03:28 pm by cedricsbigmix
Permalink
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills)
Wednesday,
November 18, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the Army's suicide rate
for 2009 is already higher than last year, the US Senate explores
veterans employment, the Iraq election law has met a veto, Anderson
Cooper 360 began their 4-part series on the murder of 4 Iraqis last
night, and more. "These are difficult times for
many Americans," declared US Senator Daniel Akaka today, "with an
unemployment number higher than it has been for 20 years. When the
number of those who have given up looking for work because they believe
none is available is combined with those who are only able to find
part-time employment, the extent of our challenge is staggering. For
our nation's veterans, especially those who have recently separated
from active duty, the search for a job can be particularly difficult.
Skills honed on the battlefield are not easily translated to a resume
for the civilian job market. Add to that the need for a readjustment to
civilian life and the problem is compounded." Akaka
was chairing the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee's hearing entitled
Easing The Burdens Through Employment. To underscore the problems with
employment, Senator Patty Murray explained that the citizen-soldiers of
the 81st Brigade Combat Team of the Washington Army National Guard
"just returned this summer after serving their country honorably in
Iraq," that there were approximately 2300 in the brigade "about 1/2 of
them tried to get direct job placement or job training" but "only 20%
have been able to get a job so far." The first
panel was the Assistant Secretary for Veterans Employment and Training
from the US Dept of Labor, Raymond Jefferson who noted that this was
his 100th day on the job in his current position andh touted the Dept
of Labor's Veterans Employment and Training Service (VETS) in his
opening remarks. He also noted that the veterans population included
under-served populations such as (from prepared remarks, except for a
nod to Senator Jon Tester, more or less the same as what he stated to
the committee) "Native American Veterans, especially those on tribal
lands, are one such population. [Labor] Secretary [Hilda] Solis hosted
a Summit of Tribal Leaders at the Department of Labor earlier this
month that VETS participated in. We discussed the challenges facing
Native American Veterans and potential solutions. This event began the
process of better serving this community. VETS will also be
participating in a number of major Native American outreach events in
2010. Furthermore, we are conducting a study on the employment needs of
Native American Veterans living on tribal lands to identify best
practices for serving this population." Another population he noted
was "wounded, ill or injured" veterans which the VETS program is mainly
addressing via REALifelines and America's Heroes At Work.
We'll note one exchange from this panel for two reason. (A) I don't
think we've noted Senator Mark Begich in any hearing before. (B)
Because the exchange resulted in some laughter. Senator
Mark Begich: Let me, if I can add, expand a little bit on, Senator
Tester commentary. Being from Alaska, you know we also have a very
strong rural component of our state but also of Indian country can you
-- I was listening carefully to what you were describing to Senator
Tester. What it sounds like, and I don't want to put words in your
mouth, but I -- and I want this to be viewed as positive -- that there
has not been an aggressive approach in reaching out to rural
communities, especially American Indian country. Is that a fair
statement? Raymond Jefferson: Senator, when I took office 100 years ago, and I've assessed it -- [Laughs] 100 days ago, Senator Mark Begich: 100 days ago. Senator Jon Tester: I like the way he looks for 100 years. Raymond Jefferson: It's been a lot of midnights. Senator Mark Begich: It feels like 100 years, I know. Raymond Jefferson: But, senator, I'm just not satisified. Senator Mark Begich: Okay. Raymond
Jefferson: I realize that with the resources we have, we have to work.
Working harder isn't going to cut it, I think we have to work more
innovatively. And there's two key components. The first is the
dialogue we're having with the Native American veterans and the tribal
leaders and also, as Senator Tester alluded to, broadening that to the
representatives of the rural community to find out from them what will
best serve them. And then what I'm looking at is parternships,
partnerships with other agencies and specifically non-profits and some
of these new veteran volunteer initiatives can be helpful there. Panel two was composed of America Works's Peter Wikul (US Navy Capt, retired), Vietnam veteran Dexter Daniel (with Marriott), National Organization On Disability's Helen
Tymes, Iraq War veteran Joshua Lawton-Belous (with Oracle) and Lutz
Ziob (Microsoft). We'll provide a sample exchange from the second
panel. Chair Daniel Akaka: It seems
that one of the themes running through all of your testimonies this
morning is mentoring, coaching and hands-on approach to providing
assistance. Let me ask each of you to rate this aspect of any program
that might be developed in terms of its value and as a factor for
success. Helen Tymes: I'll make a statement on that. Chair Daniel Akaka: Ms. Thymes. Helen
Tymes: Yes, sir. As far as the effectiveness of our program, it is
right now 90% as far as the veterans that we serve and the
opportunities that we have assisted to get. We -- we give
individualized services to veterans. As far as the transition from
being in the military has been stated later and to the civilian sector,
many of those skill sets, the individual, the veteran, is not aware of
what they are. Because of our education and history and knowledge of
the military, we are able to get those skill sets out and come up with
resumes that are working resumes, not just a show resume, but something
that actually has substance to make that veteran competent for
employment and to also help with any other application process there is
for education. Our veterans today are facing a lot of mental problems
-- PTSD, TBI, a combination of both. This makes the veterans upset,
they get angry, have a very low temper tolerance and, because of our
services -- because of our personalized services, we're able to assist
the veteran with what needs to get accomplished. Dexter Daniel: I concur with -- Chair Daniel Akaka: Mr. Daniels. Dexter
Daniel: -- Miss Helen. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. What I
personally experienced was I was so ashamed when I came home, I just
couldn't, you know, really face the reality of wanting to talk to
people about my problems and I just didn't reach out. And, you know,
the shame that I felt caused me to react in a lot of the ways that I
did. Again, I always thank God for MAC VETS (Maryland Center for
Veteran's Education and Training 1-410-642-1693) because they reached
out in a way that no one else ever had. You know, I was literally in
prison and they had a represenative that came around, I was in the cell
and, at that time, I knew I was facing a lot. Then an individual came
around and found out first and foremost, he's a veteran, number two,
this is an availability of a program that we have. Longterm, two year
availability to be able to do it, that to me is personalized. Once I
got there, the counselors welcomed me with open arms and I still had a
lot on my plate at that time. I still had obligations and commitments
to the division of parole and probation to come out. They went the
extra mile to even talk to my probation agent and the judge, to
solidify this one final -- and that's how I felt, one final --
opportunity that I'd have in this life to do good. They gave me my shot
and, you know, we've just had a wonderful partnership ever since then.
That's the effect that it's had on me. Chair Daniel Akaka: Mr. Belous? Joshua
Lawton-Belous: Mr. Chairman, as a representative of Oracle corporation,
we've found that there are many reasons we don't actually need to ask
for money from the federal government to run our wounded warrior
program. Mainly because each wounded warrior we take in is a value
added proposition for Oracle corporation. They add something to it. And
it's a dual mentorship. It's a two-way street on the mentorship role.
One is that those who are in the industry need to mentor wounded
warriors, soldiers, marines, veterans coming out of the military to
explain to them the career path. It's a completely different world when
you go inside and understanding it will take some time. There's always
that uptick no matter what job you go to where there's a learning
curve. But secondly, it behooves veterans to mentor those who are
mentoring them to show them 'This is exactly what I learned in the
military, this is what I'm capable of doing.' Because, as we find now,
only 1/2 of 1% of the population is actually serving in the wars that
we are fighting today which means that over time -- and it has already
occured where those who are hiring do not understand the valued added
proposition that service members can bring to an organization. That, I
believe, is the greatest effect of the mentorship program. That
way programs that we have today to help veterans transition out of the
military will be more successful when the vast majority of senior
to mid-level managers are no longer military veterans. Chair Daniel Akaka: Captain? Peter
Wikul: Chairman Akaka when America Works is racked and stacked against
organizations that do similar types of work in the New York area, we
consistently rank number one in terms of getting people jobs. People
come in the door, we give them mentoring, we give them mentoring. We
give them interview skills so that when we get them an interview, they
give the right answers to the right questions so they can get them the
jobs. We don't get them the jobs, we get them the interviews. They have
to get the job and we coach them in that process. If you're a veteran
and you need a suit, we get 'em a suit. There's a program to get them a
suit. And I have to tell you just recently with in the last two weeks,
I went to two veterans homeless shelters in New York City to give a
motivational speech and some of these guys are really whipped down and
they're broken. And you start talking to them and I try to motivate
them and I try to tell them, "Look when we help you get a job, you will
get back your self-respect and dignity and-and it will put you on the
road to getting an even better job." And so we go there, we go right
into the shelters, we talk to them, we give them a speech, and around
town, we have a card and it says: "Do you need a job? America Works. If
you're a New York City resident and are having difficulty finding a
job, call this number and go here. No fee." And we are right in the
trenches, we get these people, we bring them in the door . What's
amazing is when I first hooked up with this company, which I really
find amazing, is you walk in the door at the beginning of the day and
it's loaded with people. It's just, you have to fight your way in to
get to the offices. And I came back, we went on some sales calls, and I
came back about five hours later and I said, "Where are all the
people?" And they said, "Out on interviews getting jobs." And so this
is what this company does. Against similar companies, we're ranked
number one. We get people jobs. We're right on the streets. We're in
the trenches. We go to homeless veterans shelters, we talk to the
people, we mentor them, we bring them out of their shells, we give them
the interview skills and a suit if necessary and we help them restore
their dignity and their self-respect so that they can become whole and
good American citizens. Lutz
Ziob: To answer your question, Chairman Akka, I believe internships are
very important. Occupational success is typically the combination of
subject matter expertise. You have to be a good nurse, system manager,
but also know how to navigate the world of work, the changing world of
work. It's your - your - what you know about your job. The mentorship
people that are in the trenches can provide that guidance. The
difficulty is they have a day job as well so we need to free up their
time and find the opportunity to connect them -- mentor and mentee --
in an effective way. This
was more of a fact finding hearing and Senators Tester and Begich set
up time next month with Raymond Jefferson to address concerns for rural
veterans and Senator Murray sounded out Lutz Ziob specifically on
potential legislation (a bill) she's attempting to draft and plans to
bring to the Senate floor next year. This morning Anthony Shadid (Washington Post) reported
that Tariq al-Hashimi, Iraq's Sunni vice president (they have two vice
presidents, one Shia -- Adel Abdul Mehdi, one Sunni) vetoed the
election law: "The veto by Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi was the
latest wrinkle in growing criticism over the law by the country's
biggest minorities, Sunni Arabs and Kurds. Both groups are effectively
demanding the allocation of more seats to their blocs in the next
parliament, which is almost assured of having a Shiite Muslim
majority." In yesterday's snapshot,
we noted that the food rations cards being used for the registry was a
joke and included a number of reasons why. All Shadid can do is tell
you that the food rations cards are overseen by the Trade Ministry. The
name we used yesterday -- the one Shadid fails to attach to this story
-- is Abdel Falah al-Sudani -- a Nouri appointee, to Minister of Trade,
a member of Nouri's own political party and someone who was forced to
resign in May of this year over corruption issues. It is not a minor
issue when your voter roll was overseen by a minister who has had to
resign in disgrace. In real time, Bloomberg News noted that
al-Sudani "acknowledged cases of corruption and said the system needed
to be revised" in May of this year and that "Iraq's Commission on
Public Integrity earlier this month charged nine trade ministry
officials with financial and administrative corruption related to the
country's food import program." "Financial and administrative
corruption related to" what is now being hailed as a legitimate voter
roll. CNN added this morning that
Tariq al-Hashimi "refused to sing the law without an amendment that
would increase the number of seats allocated to refugees, many of whom
are Sunnis, from five percent to 15 percent. The Constitution
stipulates that every 100,000 Iraqis should have one representative in
the country's parliament but al-Hashemi said that refugee numbers are
not included in how seats have been calculated." Martin Chulov (Guardian) observes,
"However, Hashimi's move has set the scene for a showdown between MPs
and the Sunni minority, which increasingly feared it was likely to lose
even more political ground. The last election, almost five years ago,
was boycotted en masse by Sunnis." Liz Sly and Raheem Salman (Los Angeles Times) provide this context:
"Iraq's constitution stipulates that elections must be held by the end
of January, and failure to meet that deadline could plunge the country
into a constitutional crisis. The vote was originally slated for Jan.
16, but the commission had already said that would be impossible.
Hussaini estimated that the latest date on which it can feasibly be
held is Jan. 21. It will be impossible to hold the election in the last
10 days of January, Hussaini said, because of the Shiite Ashura
holiday, when millions of pilgrims converge on foot on the holy city of
Karbala from all over the country and the world. The roads will be
clogged, and many Shiites will be away from their home constituencies
and unable to vote." Anne Barker (Australia's ABC) reminds that the current Parliament is set to expire by the end of January. So where are things right now? Anthony Shadid and Daniel Dombey (at the Financial Times of London) flip through
the memory books to pull this now-forgotten reality back out, "The
election deal was only reached after sustained lobbying by Joe Biden,
US vice-president, and had been portrayed by the Obama administration
as a rare piece of good news from the Middle East and 'critically
important' for Iraq's prospects". On today's All Things Considered (NPR), Corey Flintoff examined the latest news. Corey
Flintoff: When President Obama hailed the passage of the law on
November 8th, he cited the link between elections and the US
withdrawal. US
President Barack Obama (November 8th): This agreement advances the
political process that can bring lasting peace and unity to Iraq and
allow for the orderly and responsible transition of American combat
troops out of Iraq by next September. Corey
Flintoff: US officials have said that if the security situation in Iraq
is stable they can begin withdrawing troops 60 days after the election.
Iraq's Constitution calls for a new Parliament to be elected by the end
of January when the current government's mandate expires. Flintoff
notes that Constitutional crisis could take place but that some MPs
state that the Parliament has the authority to extend the term by one
month. At the US State Dept today, in the daily press briefing,
spokesperson Ian Kelly declared: We're
disappointed at these developments related to the elections law. We
urge the Iraqi leaders and Parliament to take quick action to resolve
any of the outstanding concerns that have been expressed. And this is
so elections can go forward. And these elections, of course are
mandated by the Iraqi Constitution. We believe that it's the
responsibility of all Iraqi partiest to ensure that the Iraqi people
are able to exercsie their democratic right to vote and this election
law represent the best way forward for the Iraqi government to be able
to consolidate the democratic and political achievements. The
proper response to Kelly's statement was: "Oh, explain that law to
us." Naturally, no one embarrassed Kelly with a difficult question --
one his laughable remarks begged for. Ahmed Rasheed and Deepa Babington (Reuters) quote
the Independent High Electoral Commission's chief commissioner Hamdiya
al-Hussaini stating, "As a result of the veto, we have decided to stop
all our activities and work as we await a final law with a presidential
decree that determines the exact date of the election." BBC News quotes
Tariq al-Hashemi stating, "I sent a letter to parliament asking for the
law to be amended. Parliament said I could veto the contested first
article, which is what I have done today. The proposed amendment
affords justice to all Iraqis abroad, in all countries, and not just
those residing in, or forcefully displaced to, neighbouring countries.
Furthermore, the amendment would consecrate the concept of political
pluralism and would preclude the monopolisation of the political scene
by the strong electoral lists that win the elections." Rod Nordland (New York Times) adds,
"Gen. Ray Odierno, the commanding general of U.S. forces, said he
Wednesday was still hopeful elections would be held on time, but he
added that the military could adapt if there were a delay." Ben Lando (Wall St. Journal) explains,
"The election law now appears headed back to parliament, which only
approved it after months of sectarian squabbling and heavy U.S.
lobbying. The key sticking point in the final weeks of debate was how
to carry out the vote in the contested Kirkuk province, claimed by
Kurds, Arabs and Turkmen." Li Xianzhi (Xinhua) notes noted gum flapper Nouri al-Maliki whined today that "the veto is a serious threat to the political process." Richard Spencer (Telegraph of London) quotes Nouri whining, "The high national interests were not taken into consideration." Violence continued today . . . Bombings? Shootings? Last night Anderson Cooper 360 (CNN) began the first part in Abbie Boudreau's four-part investigative series on the killing by US forces of four Iraqis. Click here for transcript, here for video.
"It's the story," explained Anderson, "about three decorated Army
sergeants who killed four Iraqis execution-style on the battlefield.
They were convicted of premeditated murder. And they're all serving
long sentences at Fort Leavenworth. But, as you're going to see
tonight, in war, nothing is cut and dry." Here's an excerpt and note
that Joshua Hartson was not charged or tried for any actions related to
the murders. Abbie Boudreau: The Army
has a strict policy on detainees. At the time, the rules called for
soldiers to drop off detainees at the detainee housing area, of the
DHA. Bu tthat didn't happen. Joshua
Hartson: My 1st Sgt comes up to me and pulls me away from everybody.
Then he asks me, if -- if we take them to the detainee facility, the
DHA, that they're goign to be right back on the streets doing the same
thing in a matter of weeks. He asked if I had a problem if we take care
of them. And I told him "no." Abbie Boudreau: And what do you think he meant by that? Joshua Hartson: To kill them. Abbie Boudreau: How could you be okay with that? Joshua
Hartson: They were bad guys. If we would have let them go or take them
in, we risked the chance of them getting out and killing us, killing
other people. Abbie
Boudreau: So, in a convoy of three vehicles, 13 soldiers holding 4
Iraqi detainees headed down this dusty road leading to the canal. 1st
Sgt John Hatley was in charge. At the end of this canal, the soldiers
lined up the men in their custody. The three leaders, Sgts Hatley,
[Joseph] Mayo and [Michael] Leahy, put their .9-millimeter pistols at
the back of the detainees' heads, shot and killed them. They left their
bodies in the canal. A year later, divers could not find the bodies.
For nine months, the soldiers kept the murders a secret. But, in time,
the truth came out. Earlier this year, 1st Sgt Hatley, Sgt 1st Class
Mayo and Sgt Leahy would be convicted of premeditated murder and
conspiracy to commit premeditated murder. All three are in prison at
Fort Leavenworth. The four-part series
continues through Friday night. Anderson Cooper 360 airs on CNN at
10:00 pm EST and tonight's report includes an interview with Jamie
Leahy who is married to Sgt Michael Leahy. In non Iraq news, Ben Smith (Politico) tackles
an issue today which I've avoided because (a) it belongs at Third and
(b) the 'outside' help Newsweek has so often relied on. Ben Smith
notes that women's groups seem dumbfounded on Palin's assertion that Newsweek
has treated her in a sexist manner. The idiot Marie Wilson of the
laughable White House Project (let's see, they couldn't save a TV show
and they let women go down in flames in 2008 -- maybe they should just
pack it in) says of the Newsweek cover, "It's much more complicated
than sexism." What a piece of trash. She continues that, "What the
[Republican] Party was selling, and people were buying -- and what the
candidate colluded [in] -- is what shows up in that Newsweek picture.
She winked at people, right?" Marie's never winked at people. With
her lopsided and semi-disfigured face, a wink would be incredibly
frightening. Marie wants to blame a woman
for sexist treatment. In Marie's world, any woman who doesn't follow
Marie's rules gets what they deserve. No, it's not feminism. But
Marie's not a feminist. Just another unattractive woman who couldn't
cut it in the real world and tried to build herself a niche. Terri
O'Neill has just made her first IGNORANT move as the head of NOW and
she damn well better be aware that after Kim Gandy's misleadership of
NOW, we're not in the mood. She better get her s**t together and get
it together real damn quick. Her job is not to be a Barack cheerleader,
her job is to defend women. She states of the Newsweek cover that it
"didn't strike me as horribly offensive" but also claims it is part of
a the "basically sexist" world we live in. Terri, what you're willing
to live with, other women aren't. And you are no longer an individual,
you are the president of NOW so start acting like it. The
photo is offensive since Newsweek previously allowed the wives of
employees to screen Barack's cover shot. Or have we all forgotten
that? Trophy wives, even smelly ones, don't feel the need to defend
women, however, which is how the Newsweek cover began. The cover plays
on "How Do You Solve A Problem Like Maria?" which Terri O'Neill tries
to pass off as a "proto-feminist anthem." Terri needs to get out
more. Many a (male) lounge singer has performed that song for decades
now and it's about as feminist as Paul Anka's "You're Having My Baby."
The cover tag line was snide, the photo choice was snide. That's
before you open the magazine. Newsweek's not supposed to be doing
opinion journalism in what they present as news (they have columnists
who write columns). The cover exists to ridicule and mock Palin and to
mock all women. It's no different than when Vanity Fair decided to run
a cheesecake photo of Sherry Lansing (a photo from several decades
prior). What did that have to do with her job of running a studio
(Paramount)? Not a damn thing but teh-hee, look at her body. It was
sexism. It's sexism for Newsweek to run the photo of Palin. There's
nothing wrong with the photo for Runner's World -- which is the
publication Palin posed for. Newsweek ran it to ridicule her and to mock her. And any woman who can't grasp that isn't a feminist. Flip
through the magazine where they will find a 'doll' of Sarah Palin
dressed as though she is Britney Spears filming the ". . . Baby One
More Time" video. You'll find 'noted' woman hater Christopher Hitchens
has contributed an article on Palin. You'll find a sexualized photo --
the same sort that the New York Times used against Hillary's campaign
in 2008 -- of Palin speaking in public that strips away her identity
and her view to render her a sex object. It's disgusting and Newsweek
did it intentionally. I'd thought that could wait until Sunday.
Marie's usual idiocy wasn't surprising but Terri's non-response is
highly distressing. Women's groups are not supposed to be in service of the Democrat Party, they're supposed to exist to fight for women's rights. Ben Smith has another report
which will seem familiar to you -- maybe you'll grasp Maxy Blumenthal
and Thomas Frank just 'wrote' columns with all the same talking points?
Despite the lies, the crowds are turning out for Palin. As Cedric and Wally
pointed out last night, polls are showing Palins' more popular than
Barack. No woman has to silence her disagreement with Sarah Palin's
politics (if she has them -- I do) but she has no business tearing
Palin apart and ignoring that the attacks on Palin are attacks on all
women. Palin's being attacked in such a scorched earth manner that it
damn well effects all women. I honestly don't know why so many women
are willing to whore themselves out. Sarah Palin's not yet said there
were 57 states in the United States so these cries of her being an
"idiot" seem little more than yet another attempt to attack a woman in
order to protect Barack -- Barack who, for the record, declared that he
had visited that many states. Barack makes idiotic remarks like that
and the press (and Saturday Night Live) all play "Lovely robes,
Emperor!" Palin does it and she's ripped apart. When Max Blumenthal's
father was (wrongly) accused of beating his wife, we were offended (on
the left). These days, Sidney's son is one of the people hurling lies
non-stop at Sarah Palin. It's ugly and it needs to stop and women damn
well need to call it out. Too many of us were silent when it was
Hillary, were silent when it became Sarah, were silent when Cynthia
McKinney was rendered invisible. It's no longer acceptable to dismiss
it as, "That's her problem." If your a woman, it is your problem, it
is our problem and we better start calling it out and stop contributing
to it.
Posted at 11:29 am by cedricsbigmix
Permalink
Nov 18, 2009
Indecision is killing him
BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLETHE THING 1 CELEBRITY ALWAYS HAS TO FEAR IS NOT FAMINE OR NATURAL DISASTER, IT'S ANOTHER CELEBRITY. AND CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O IS TREMBLING. AT A TIME WHEN ONLY 42% OF AMERICANS RATE BARRY O'S PERFORMANCE "GOOD OR EXCELLENT," HE REALLY DIDN'T NEED MORE BAD NEWS, BUT HE GOT IT. BY CONTRAST, 51% OF AMERICANS HAD A FAVORABLE VIEW OF SARAH PALIN. IN
FOLLOW UP CALLS THESE REPORTERS MADE TO RESPONDENTS, WE FOUND A SIMILAR
THEME BEST EXPRESSED BY STEVE JONES OF ALBANY, "I JUST WOULD RATHER GET
A BURGER WITH SARAH PALIN. OR A TACO. OR PIZZA. OR SUSHI. I JUST KNOW
IF I WENT OUT TO LUNCH WITH SARAH PALIN, WE'D HAVE AN ENJOYABLE MEAL.
IF I TRIED TO CATCH LUNCH WITH BARRY O? I JUST SEE US CIRCLING FOR
MONTHS AND MONTHS, NEVER GETTING ANY FOOD AS HE REPEATEDLY WONDERED
WHAT GORDON BROWN WAS GOING TO EAT? HE JUST SEEMS UNABLE TO MAKE EVEN A
BASIC DECISION." FROM THE TCI WIRE: Starting with the 'intended' elections in January. There was already objection to the law [ yesterday's snapshot: " Waleed Ibrahim, Michael Christie and Micheal Roddy (Reuters) reports
Iraq's Sunni vice president, Tariq al-Hashimi, has stated the law needs
to be changed to allow external Iraqi refugees to participate and to be
represented. If the law is not changed (by Tuesday afternoon), he
states he will veto it. (The Presidency Council is made up of Iraq's
President and two vice presidents. After Parliament passes a law, it
goes to the council which decides whether to implement it or not.)"].
Today that's even more the case. RTT News reports
that the KRG has "decided . . . to boycott the country's January
national elections, protesting disparity in allocation fo parliamentary
seats for the provinces." Jomana Karadsheh and Yousif Bassil (CNN) report
that this is a threat at present, but one which is "casting further
shadows over a vote" and note that the issue has to do with the
perecentage of seats in the Parliament allocated currently for Kurds.
Tariq al-Hashimi is also concerned with the allocation and the two
reporters note, "He said the country's constitution stipulates that
there should be one seat in the parliamentary Council of
Representatives for every 100,000 Iraqis, but, he said, this does not
take refugees -- or minorities including Christians into account."
Equally true is that this 'development' is neither new nor unrelated. Have
we all forgotten November 2004? The lead up to the 2005 vote? What were
some of the last minute objections? In that case, they were resolved in
time for the vote. That may or may not be the case here. But this issue
of the number of seats and representation popped up in 2004. That was
when exiles, refugees and other groupings (such as "expatriates")
suddenly became an issue and the US and the United Nations had to
change their positions. The UN and the US had stated that no one not in
Iraq would be voting. They had to change their stance (begrudingly) and
the Independent Electoral Commission of Iraq set up polling places in
Jordan, Syria, Turkey, the UK, the US, etc. Whty did that take place
then? The easiest reason is that the Grand Ayatollah Ali
al-Sistani called for it to. The reality was that, at that time, the
bulk of Iraqis outside of Iraq were considered to be Shi'ites so it was
thought that allowing voting to take place outside of Iraq's borders
would benefit Shi'ites. (al-Sistani is a Shi'ite.) Little has ever been
done, since the vote, on the press' part to determine whether that
hypothesis was accurate or not. After Shi'ites, the group then
expected to benefit the most was the Kurds. So today's issues are not
really all that 'new' but traceable back to 2004. The real changes are
(a) that the persecuted who became refugees since 2004 have been Sunnis
and (b) the number of seats. (Thank you to three Western correspondents
in Iraq for walking me through the seats issue over the phone.) To
dilute non-Shi'ite populations, the Shi'ite dominated Parliament is
attempting to expand the number of seats in Parliament from 275 to 323.
The press hasn't really gone into that and you have to wonder why not
until you grasp that the US Embassy is air brushing in their statements
to the press. The additional seats will go across Iraq; however, the
Shi'ite majority provinces are the ones getting the most seats. That
flies in the face of all logic and there's no way that anyone studing
just the internal migration within Iraq -- forget the external -- would
buy the percentage growth that the 'government' in Baghdad is
attempting to claim. For example, northern Iraq is where a large number
of Iraq's internal refugees have fled. And yet this northern region,
the Kurdistan Regional Government, is seeing only 3 additional seats (3
out of the 48 that would be added)? That makes no sense at all to
anyone who's followed the migration patterns within Iraq. The allocation of the new seats becomes even more problematic when reviewing the press release the Kurdistan Regional Government issued today: Dr
Fuad Hussein, the Kurdistan Region Presidency's Chief of Staff, said
that President Masoud Barzani has been closely following the mechanism
recently put in place to allocate parliamentary seats to each Iraqi
governorate for elections. He said that President Barzani believes that
it is not possible to accept such a seat-allocation based on the
food-rationing registry of the Iraqi Trade Ministry, because the
mechanism is illogical, contradicts the reality on the ground and is a
distortion of facts. Dr Hussein stated that the Kurdistan Region
Presidency views this as an attempt to reduce the number of Kurdistan
Region representatives in the next Iraqi parliament and diminish their
achievements. He added that President Barzani is absolutely clear, that
unless this seat allocation formula is reconsidered in a just manner,
the people of Kurdistan Region will be compelled to boycott the
election. As this is an historic moment in the history of Iraq, he also
called on all political parties to shoulder their responsibility to
promote democracy. He urges them to refrain from supporting a deceptive
mechanism that obviously targets the Kurdistan Region, and which
undermines the democratic achievements made so far. The food-rationing registry? At this point, if you listen closely, you'll hear laughter. The
food-rations was a program (a needed one then and now) under Saddam
Hussein that provided staples to Iraqis. The Kurdish north has never
utilized it to the degree other areas of Iraq have. Why is that? Well,
for starters, it was always a wealthier region than most parts of Iraq.
Since the invasion, under US 'assistance,' the rations have been cut
repeatedly to the point that they're nearly 60% less than they were
under Saddam. Now in 2004, the food registry was used (the
cuts to the program hadn't been started yet -- despite efforts by Paul
Bremer). And it was used with apology and, goodness, oh how, oh how
will we ever do a census in time for an election, we have to use this! The
2005 Constitution mandated a census. It has still not been done. So in
2009, it's pretty pathetic and a sign of how little 'progress' has been
made in Iraq that they still haven't done a census. Now the
ration cards are impossible for refugees (for reasons we've outlined
many times) and, for many, they're still listed in their old
neighborhoods -- the ones they left. Which means a number of areas are
being "padded." Not only that, what's not being told is that the
registery got padded itself in the lead up to the 2009 provincial
elections in 14 of Iraq's 18 provinces. This is an important point and
since the press did such a lousy job in January covering those
elections -- many news consumers WRONGLY believe that was elections
across the country, it wasn't -- they'll probably continue to get it
wrong. But [PDF format warning] you can review this United Nations document
and you will see that the 'database' for the 14 provinces got padded.
How? "Approximately 2.9 million Iraqis turned out for the voter
registration update." This is, no doubt, part of that claim of
population surge. But nothing equivalent took part in the four other
provinces -- the ones not voting in January. Those were Kirkuk and the
three provinces making up the Kurdistan Regional Government. There
is no national census. There is an effort by the Shi'ite dominated
government to further increase their gains by expanding the number of
seats in the Parliament and to do so by using the regsitry that was
already laughable before the 2009 elections but that is completely
unfair to the northern region which didn't do an 'update' to it. Before
any vote takes place, the issue of the additonal seats should be
resolved and the smartest thing to do would be to eliminate that, to
add no new seats. But if they're going to try to push that through,
they better be prepared to back up this alleged population growth.
Without a national census, no respectable news outlet should accept any
claims but do we have any respectable news outlets working in Iraq?
(I'm referring to Western media.) If we did, maybe they'd be attempting
to explain what's actually taking place instead of allowing spin from
the US Embassy and their own desire to 'close the chapter' on Iraq to
drive their 'reporting.' They might also note that a minister over the
food ration program was among the ministers to have corruption charges
filed against them. And this is the voter roll? Really? (That was Abdel
Falah al-Sudani -- who resigned in disgrace in May of 2009. He was and
remains a member of al-Maliki's Dawa Party.) Those who remember the
problems with the 14 provinces voting in January may also remember the
complaints that people had to go to one polling station only to be told
go here, go there. This does not in any way indicate that the ration
rolls are accurate. In addition, the new seats and where they
are going need to factored into Nouri's continued assault on minority
rights. Not only has he and his spokesperson repeatedly stated that
guaranteeing minority representation was bad for the government in
recent months, the January 2009 elections saw minorities awarded less
representation due to a law change that 'no one' had 'noticed' until it
was too late. This is not a minor issue and it's really telling that
the expansion of the Parliament didn't raise concerns from election
watchers. One group that has voiced objection to the election law (and
been ignored) is Iraq's Communist Party: "The
Parliament, in the first article of the law, cut down the number of
compensatory seats, originally allocated to the lists that do not meet
the electoral threshold at the provincial level but achieve it at the
national level, from 45 in the original law to about 15 seats! And when
we know that part of these seats will be allocated to quotas for some
of the ethnic and religious minorities (8 seats), and for the deputies
who would be elected by Iraqis living abroad who constitute more than
10 percent of Iraq's population, we can see how this reduction is
arbitrary and irresponsible. The seven or eight remaining seats will
not be enough to cover even the votes abroad." "On the other hand, this
reduction (of the number of compensatory seats) effectively usurps the
right of the lists that achieve the national electoral threshold to
gain representation in Parliament. This reveals the selfishness of most
of the dominant blocs and their disregard of plurality and diversity in
the Parliament, their quest to extend full control over Parliament and
the whole of political power, monopolizing and carving it up among
themselves, in contravention of democratic norms." "In Article 3 of the
law, the big parliamentary blocs went much further in violating
democracy and displaying blatant disregard for the voters. They have
imposed, once again, giving the vacant seats to the top winning lists,
rather than putting them - as obligated by democracy, logic and justice
- at the disposal of the lists that attain the highest remaining votes.
They have thus opened the door again to a repetition of the infamous
experience in the provincial elections earlier this year, when the big
blocs stole the votes of more than two and a quarter million people who
had given their votes to other lists. This was used by those big blocs
to grab additional seats in the provincial councils." Today BBC News reports
the UN Special Envoy to Iraq, Ad Melkert, is dubbing efforts to ensure
a free and fair election which will stand up to world scrutiny a
"Herculean task." He stated that to the United Nations' Security
Council where he put his concerns for emphasis on the time issue. Xinhua quotes
him stating, "Success is far from guaranteed as inside and outside
forces continue their efforts to impose an agenda of division and
destruction." RECOMMENDED: " Iraq snapshot" " Iraq's LGBT community remains under assault" " Burials, memorials and deployments" " The bow" " 49 million Americans going hungry" " Hillary is 44" " nancy pelosi's a moron." " It does matter" " Carly Simon, Neil Young" " Stop the apologizes and excuses" " Isaiah, abuse of Iraqis, Hillary is 44" " Baha Mousa Inquiry" " Isaiah, Silly Solomon, Third" " He can't even do his own Tweets!" " THIS JUST IN! BILL AYERS IS THE GHOST WRITER!"
Posted at 03:27 pm by cedricsbigmix
Permalink
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills)
Tuesday,
October 17, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the 'intended' elections
get more iffy, the US Justice Dept files charges against a contractor,
CNN begins airing a four-part investigation into US abuse of Iraqi
prisoners, and more. Starting with the 'intended' elections in January. There was already objection to the law [ yesterday's snapshot: " Waleed Ibrahim, Michael Christie and Micheal Roddy (Reuters) reports
Iraq's Sunni vice president, Tariq al-Hashimi, has stated the law needs
to be changed to allow external Iraqi refugees to participate and to be
represented. If the law is not changed (by Tuesday afternoon), he
states he will veto it. (The Presidency Council is made up of Iraq's
President and two vice presidents. After Parliament passes a law, it
goes to the council which decides whether to implement it or not.)"].
Today that's even more the case. RTT News reports
that the KRG has "decided . . . to boycott the country's January
national elections, protesting disparity in allocation fo parliamentary
seats for the provinces." Jomana Karadsheh and Yousif Bassil (CNN) report
that this is a threat at present, but one which is "casting further
shadows over a vote" and note that the issue has to do with the
perecentage of seats in the Parliament allocated currently for Kurds.
Tariq al-Hashimi is also concerned with the allocation and the two
reporters note, "He said the country's constitution stipulates that
there should be one seat in the parliamentary Council of
Representatives for every 100,000 Iraqis, but, he said, this does not
take refugees -- or minorities including Christians into account."
Equally true is that this 'development' is neither new nor unrelated. Have
we all forgotten November 2004? The lead up to the 2005 vote? What
were some of the last minute objections? In that case, they were
resolved in time for the vote. That may or may not be the case here.
But this issue of the number of seats and representation popped up in
2004. That was when exiles, refugees and other groupings (such as
"expatriates") suddenly became an issue and the US and the United
Nations had to change their positions. The UN and the US had stated
that no one not in Iraq would be voting. They had to change their
stance (begrudingly) and the Independent Electoral Commission of Iraq
set up polling places in Jordan, Syria, Turkey, the UK, the US, etc.
Whty did that take place then? The
easiest reason is that the Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani called for it
to. The reality was that, at that time, the bulk of Iraqis outside of
Iraq were considered to be Shi'ites so it was thought that allowing
voting to take place outside of Iraq's borders would benefit Shi'ites.
(al-Sistani is a Shi'ite.) Little has ever been done, since the vote,
on the press' part to determine whether that hypothesis was accurate or
not. After Shi'ites,
the group then expected to benefit the most was the Kurds. So today's
issues are not really all that 'new' but traceable back to 2004. The
real changes are (a) that the persecuted who became refugees since 2004
have been Sunnis and (b) the number of seats. (Thank you to three
Western correspondents in Iraq for walking me through the seats issue
over the phone.) To dilute non-Shi'ite populations, the Shi'ite
dominated Parliament is attempting to expand the number of seats in
Parliament from 275 to 323. The press hasn't really gone into that and
you have to wonder why not until you grasp that the US Embassy is air
brushing in their statements to the press. The additional seats will
go across Iraq; however, the Shi'ite majority provinces are the ones
getting the most seats. That flies in the face of all logic and
there's no way that anyone studing just the internal migration within
Iraq -- forget the external -- would buy the percentage growth that the
'government' in Baghdad is attempting to claim. For example, northern
Iraq is where a large number of Iraq's internal refugees have fled.
And yet this northern region, the Kurdistan Regional Government, is
seeing only 3 additional seats (3 out of the 48 that would be added)?
That makes no sense at all to anyone who's followed the migration
patterns within Iraq. Dr
Fuad Hussein, the Kurdistan Region Presidency's Chief of Staff, said
that President Masoud Barzani has been closely following the mechanism
recently put in place to allocate parliamentary seats to each Iraqi
governorate for elections. He said
that President Barzani believes that it is not possible to accept such
a seat-allocation based on the food-rationing registry of the Iraqi
Trade Ministry, because the mechanism is illogical, contradicts the
reality on the ground and is a distortion of facts. Dr Hussein
stated that the Kurdistan Region Presidency views this as an attempt to
reduce the number of Kurdistan Region representatives in the next Iraqi
parliament and diminish their achievements. He added that
President Barzani is absolutely clear, that unless this seat allocation
formula is reconsidered in a just manner, the people of Kurdistan
Region will be compelled to boycott the election. As this is an
historic moment in the history of Iraq, he also called on all political
parties to shoulder their responsibility to promote democracy. He urges
them to refrain from supporting a deceptive mechanism that obviously
targets the Kurdistan Region, and which undermines the democratic
achievements made so far. The food-rationing registry? At this point, if you listen closely, you'll hear laughter. The
food-rations was a program (a needed one then and now) under Saddam
Hussein that provided staples to Iraqis. The Kurdish north has never
utilized it to the degree other areas of Iraq have. Why is that?
Well, for starters, it was always a wealthier region than most parts of
Iraq. Since the invasion, under US 'assistance,' the rations have been
cut repeatedly to the point that they're nearly 60% less than they were
under Saddam. Now
in 2004, the food registry was used (the cuts to the program hadn't
been started yet -- despite efforts by Paul Bremer). And it was used
with apology and, goodness, oh how, oh how will we ever do a census in
time for an election, we have to use this! The
2005 Constitution mandated a census. It has still not been done. So
in 2009, it's pretty pathetic and a sign of how little 'progress' has
been made in Iraq that they still haven't done a census. Now
the ration cards are impossible for refugees (for reasons we've
outlined many times) and, for many, they're still listed in their old
neighborhoods -- the ones they left. Which means a number of areas are
being "padded." Not only that, what's not being told is that the
registery got padded itself in the lead up to the 2009 provincial
elections in 14 of Iraq's 18 provinces. This is an important point and
since the press did such a lousy job in January covering those
elections -- many news consumers WRONGLY believe that was elections
across the country, it wasn't -- they'll probably continue to get it
wrong. But [PDF format warning] you can review this United Nations document
and you will see that the 'database' for the 14 provinces got padded.
How? "Approximately 2.9 million Iraqis turned out for the voter
registration update." This is, no doubt, part of that claim of
population surge. But nothing equivalent took part in the four other
provinces -- the ones not voting in January. Those were Kirkuk and the
three provinces making up the Kurdistan Regional Government. There
is no national census. There is an effort by the Shi'ite dominated
government to further increase their gains by expanding the number of
seats in the Parliament and to do so by using the regsitry that was
already laughable before the 2009 elections but that is completely
unfair to the northern region which didn't do an 'update' to it.
Before any vote takes place, the issue of the additonal seats should be
resolved and the smartest thing to do would be to eliminate that, to
add no new seats. But if they're going to try to push that through,
they better be prepared to back up this alleged population growth.
Without a national census, no respectable news outlet should accept any
claims but do we have any respectable news outlets working in Iraq?
(I'm referring to Western media.) If we did, maybe they'd be
attempting to explain what's actually taking place instead of allowing
spin from the US Embassy and their own desire to 'close the chapter' on
Iraq to drive their 'reporting.' They might also note that a minister
over the food ration program was among the ministers to have corruption
charges filed against them. And this is the voter roll? Really?
(That was Abdel Falah al-Sudani -- who resigned in disgrace in May of
2009. He was and remains a member of al-Maliki's Dawa Party.) Those
who remember the problems with the 14 provinces voting in January may
also remember the complaints that people had to go to one polling
station only to be told go here, go there. This does not in any way
indicate that the ration rolls are accurate. In
addition, the new seats and where they are going need to factored into
Nouri's continued assault on minority rights. Not only has he and his
spokesperson repeatedly stated that guaranteeing minority
representation was bad for the government in recent months, the January
2009 elections saw minorities awarded less representation due to a law
change that 'no one' had 'noticed' until it was too late. This is not
a minor issue and it's really telling that the expansion of the
Parliament didn't raise concerns from election watchers. One group
that has voiced objection to the election law (and been ignored) is Iraq's Communist Party: "The
Parliament, in the first article of the law, cut down the number of
compensatory seats, originally allocated to the lists that do not meet
the electoral threshold at the provincial level but achieve it at the
national level, from 45 in the original law to about 15 seats! And when
we know that part of these seats will be allocated to quotas for some
of the ethnic and religious minorities (8 seats), and for the deputies
who would be elected by Iraqis living abroad who constitute more than
10 percent of Iraq's population, we can see how this reduction is
arbitrary and irresponsible. The seven or eight remaining seats will
not be enough to cover even the votes abroad." "On the
other hand, this reduction (of the number of compensatory seats)
effectively usurps the right of the lists that achieve the national
electoral threshold to gain representation in Parliament. This reveals
the selfishness of most of the dominant blocs and their disregard of
plurality and diversity in the Parliament, their quest to extend full
control over Parliament and the whole of political power, monopolizing
and carving it up among themselves, in contravention of democratic
norms." "In Article 3 of the law, the big
parliamentary blocs went much further in violating democracy and
displaying blatant disregard for the voters. They have imposed, once
again, giving the vacant seats to the top winning lists, rather than
putting them - as obligated by democracy, logic and justice - at the
disposal of the lists that attain the highest remaining votes. They
have thus opened the door again to a repetition of the infamous
experience in the provincial elections earlier this year, when the big
blocs stole the votes of more than two and a quarter million people who
had given their votes to other lists. This was used by those big blocs
to grab additional seats in the provincial councils."
Today BBC News reports
the UN Special Envoy to Iraq, Ad Melkert, is dubbing efforts to ensure
a free and fair election which will stand up to world scrutiny a
"Herculean task." He stated that to the United Nations' Security
Council where he put his concerns for emphasis on the time issue. Xinhua quotes
him stating, "Success is far from guaranteed as inside and outside
forces continue their efforts to impose an agenda of division and
destruction." One thing that never gets postponed is the daily violence . . . Bombings? Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad stationary store bombing which wounded four people, a Kirkuk sticky bombing which wounded two police officers. Reuters notes
a Falluja roadside bombing which left one police officer injured, a
Falluja home bombing which left three members of a family injured and a
Kirkuk liquor store bombing which injured two people. Shootings? Corpses? Over
a million Iraqis have died since the start of the illegal war. One is
Baha Mosua whose 'crime' was going to work. The 26-year-old was
arrested in a dragnet at the hotel -- arrested by British forces and he
went on to die in their custody. As Adrian Shaw (Daily Mirror) reminds, Baha died of 93 injuries -- all while in British custody. The ongoing inquiry into Baha Mosua's death is taking place in England. Yesterday's testimony by War Criminal Donald Payne got some press attention. Press TV notes that Payne "accused his superiors of routinely abusing and threatening civilian detainees in Iraq." Thomas Harding (Telegraph of London) adds:
He
also alleged that a platoon commander, Lt Craig Rodgers placed a petrol
can in front of a young prisoner's hooded face then poured water over
him and lit a match simulating a threat to his life. Minutes
before he arrived to give evidence before the inquiry in London into
the death of Baha Mousa, an Iraqi who died in British custody in Basra
in 2003, Payne issued a short statement in which he accepted the
disclosures would "harm the reputation of the both my former regiment
and the British Army". Changing
the evidence he had given to previous investigations, Payne said he saw
every member of a unit commanded by Lt Rodgers "forcefully kick or
punch" the group of Iraqi prisoners that included Mr Mousa. Payne claims that he previously covered up the extent of the abuse of Iraqis by British soldiers out of "misguided loyalty".
Yes, he did make that claim in his prepared statement as well as in his testimony. He also made another claim. As noted in yesterday's snapshot:
Gerald Elias: Can you help about this, Mr Payne: why were you lying about orders that you had received?
Donald Payne: Self-preservation.
During the hearing, a video was shown. Payne was in the video. He was abusing and cursing the Iraqi detainees. His
verbal abuse included racist remarks. He was asked about prior
experience in the military and whether he used racist language when
dealing with people or prisoners in those countries? Payne replied that
it was only in Iraq. Was he telling the truth? He might have been
telling the truth. I have no idea. He has repeatedly lied to
investigators. He admitted as much in his testimony today -- which was
basically, 'I lied every other time but, this time, I'm telling the
truth!' Along with claiming that he
didn't use racist remarks anywhere else he was stationed, he also
claimed not to know the video was being filmed. Gerald
Elias pointed out that the video was clearly taken by a video camera
and not by a cell phone. Payne replied that he didn't notice it. Elias
then noted the spot in the video where Payne is clearly looking at the
camera. He continued to deny that he knew the
filming was taking place or had taken place immediately after and that
he had no idea who was doing the filming.
His revelations expose a widespread pattern of abuse that extends well beyond Baha. Payne
said that his former commanding officer (CO) held a gun to a prisoner's
head and threatened "to blow his face off". The
inquiry also heard that prisoners were scalded with boiling water,
urinated on, kicked, punched, hooded, sleep deprived and made to stand
in stress positions. Payne said the soldiers in his unit enjoyed an "open season" of punching and kicking Baha and other prisoners. He
described how he was travelling in a patrol with his CO Colonel
Mendonca when someone shot a flare into the air. An Iraqi was arrested and Mendonca interrogated him. Payne
said, "The CO then cocked his pistol and said he was going to blow his
face off. He was holding the pistol above the man's mouth. . . we left
him there on the floor and drove off." Robert Verkaik (Independent of London) observes, "The
new allegations raise concerns about widespread abuse of dozens of
Iraqi detainees and come days after the Ministry of Defence said it was
investigating 33 other separate cases of torture carried out by British
soldiers in Iraq and revealed in The Independent on Saturday." 33
cases? Last night, Stan noted, " UPI reports
today that there's talk this could be "a second Abu Ghraib" -- the
infamous prison the US ran in Iraq in which Iraqi prisoners were
repeatedly tortured and abused. So keep your eyes peeled for
developments on that." The allegations emerged late Friday night. BBC News reported
that Phil Shiner, an attorney for some Iraqis, is calling for an
inquiry into abuse allegations which include British soldiers raping "a
16-year-old boy". Robert Verkaik (Independent of London) explained,
"Claims that British soldiers recreated the torture conditions of Abu
Ghraib to commit the sexual and physical abuse of Iraqi civilians are
being investigated by the Ministry of Defence. The fresh allegations
raise important questions about collusion between Britain and America
over the ill-treatment of Iraqi prisoners during the insurgency." BBC News (link has text and video) noted that
the UK Armed Forces Minister Bill Rammell is insisting that there's no
need for a public inquiry and claiming that any investigation can be
handled (privately) by the Ministry of Defence. ( Mike and Kat noted the story Friday night.) Meanwhile, in the US, CNN's
Anderson Cooper 360 begins a four-part series (Anderson's show airs at
10:00 pm EST) into the way Iraqis were treated in US custody: U.S.
soldiers interrogated by the Army in the 2007 murders of four Iraqi
detainees blamed a military policy they said made it too hard to detain
suspected insurgents, a CNN investigation has found. Soldiers
questioned in the killings said the sergeant in command of their
detachment ordered the suspected insurgents killed because Army rules
made it too difficult to hold them. "They're gonna be right back on the streets," one soldier put it. CNN
obtained an extraordinary 23½ hours of Army interrogation videotapes
that detail the March 2007 executions of the prisoners by three
sergeants who were attached to Alpha Company, 1st Battalion, 18th
Infantry Regiment. The tapes, to be shown
on CNN's "AC360," show one of the sergeants confessing to the crime, as
well as agents from the Army's Criminal Investigations Division telling
soldiers involved in the crime that the military's reputation was at
stake. On one tape, an Army interrogator
compares the potential fallout from the slayings to the scandal over
the treatment of inmates at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison, telling a
soldier, "This is gonna be ugly, 'cause it is." The
United States has joined a whistleblower suit against Public
Warehousing Company (PWC), The Sultan Center Food Products Company
(TSC), and PWC's chief executive officer, Tarek Abbul Aziz Sultan
Al-Essa, the Justice Department announced today.
The
lawsuit, which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Georgia, alleges that since 2003, defendants have violated
the False Claims Act by presenting or causing others to present false
claims for payment under PWC's multi-billion contracts with the Defense
Logistics Agency to supply food for U.S. service members serving in
Kuwait, Iraq and Jordan. The complaint alleges that defendants
knowingly overcharged the United States for locally available fresh
fruits and vegetables that PWC purchased through TSC. The complaint
also alleges that PWC failed to disclose and pass through rebates and
discounts it obtained from its U.S.-based suppliers, as required by its
contracts.
The
case was initially filed under seal by Kamal Mustafa Al-Sultan, the
owner of a Kuwaiti company that originally partnered with PWC to submit
a proposal on the food supply contracts. The case remained under seal
to permit the United States to investigate the allegations and
determine whether it would join the lawsuit. Under the False Claims
Act, the United States may recover three times the amount of its
losses, plus civil penalties.
"We
will not tolerate fraudulent practices from those tasked with providing
the highest quality support to the men and women who serve in our armed
forces," said Tony West, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil
Division. "Those who do business with the government must act fairly
and in accordance with the law. As this case illustrates, the
Department of Justice will investigate and pursue allegations of fraud
against contractors and subcontractors, whether they are foreign or
domestic."
"The
decision to join in this civil lawsuit follows a multi-year probe into
abuses in Middle East subsistence prime vendor contracts," said Acting
U.S. Attorney F. Gentry Shelnutt. "This Office and the Department of
Justice will spare no effort in investigating those persons and
companies, regardless of location, who seek to defraud the United
States."
The
U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Georgia also
announced today that a grand jury returned a six-count indictment
against Public Warehousing Company, also known as Agility, in
connection with its prime vendor
contracts.
Assistant
Attorney General West and Acting U.S. Attorney Shelnutt thanked the
joint investigation team, which includes Special Agents with Defense
Criminal Investigative Service; the Federal Bureau of Investigation;
and U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command (Army CID), auditors from
the Defense Contract Audit Agency, and the Department of Defense,
Office of the Inspector General, for the investigation of this defense
procurement fraud matter. Walter Pincus (Washington Post) explains,
"Under the False Claims Act, the government may recover three times the
amount of its losses plus civil penalties, according to the Justice
Department announcement." Finally, NOW on PBS debuts its latest episode Friday on most PBS stations and this one iexamines: The Pentagon estimates that as many as one in five American soldiers are coming home from war zones with traumatic brain injuries, many of which require round-the-clock attention. But lost in the reports of these returning soldiers are the stories of family members who often sacrifice everything to care for them. On Friday, November 20 at 8:30 pm (check local listings), NOW reveals how little has been done to help these family caregivers, and reports on dedicated efforts to support them.iraq |
Posted at 10:52 am by cedricsbigmix
Permalink
Nov 17, 2009
He can't even do his own Tweets!
BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLETODAY IN CHINA, CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O REVEALED THAT HE DOESN'T ACTUALLY WRITE HIS TWITTER TWEETS. THOUGH HE DID NOT SAY WHO DID, WE'VE GOT $50 IN THE PRESS POOL ON BILL AYERS. MEANWHILE BARY'S BOW JUST WON'T GO AWAY. NO ONE ELSE DOES IT. "I'M
THINKING OF TELLING PEOPLE," BARRY O INFORMED THESE REPORTERS, "THAT I
WAS REHEARSING FOR AMERICA'S GOT TALENT AND WAS GOING TO PERFORM
MADONNA'S 'TAKE A BOW'. DO YOU THINK THAT WILL WORK?" WE ADVISED HIM THAT WE DOUBT PEOPLE WILL STOP TALKING. WE REALLY DOUBT IT. JAKE TAPPER (ABC NEWS) EXPLAINS: "This picture shows two things," my friend writes. "1) The 'right' is wrong about Obama's bow. "2) The 'left' is wrong about Obama's bow. "His bow is neither (1) unprecedented nor (2) a sign of cultural understanding. "At
their 1971 meeting in Alaska, the first visit of a Japanese Emperor to
America, President Nixon bowed and referred to Emperor Hirohito and his
wife repeatedly as 'Your Imperial Majesties.'" (See that picture HERE.) "Yet, (and?) Nixon gets the bow right. Slight arch from the waist hands at his side. "Obama's handshake/forward lurch was so jarring and inappropriate it recalls Bush's back-rub of Merkel. "Kyodo
News is running his appropriate and reciprocated nod and shake with the
Empress, certainly to show the president as dignified, and not in the
form of a first year English teacher trying to impress with Karate
Kid-level knowledge of Japanese customs. "The bow as he performed
did not just display weakness in Red State terms, but evoked weakness
in Japanese terms....The last thing the Japanese want or need is a weak
looking American president and, again, in all ways, he unintentionally
played that part. FROM THE TCI WIRE:In England there is an ongoing inquiry into Baha Mosua's death -- Baha is an Iraqi who died while in British custody. The November 9th snpashot
noted that day's developments: British soldiers Gareth Aspinall and
Garry Reader testified that Baha was abused repeatedly while in British
custody, that he was beaten to death and that they were ordered to keep
quiet about what took place. This morning, Robert Verkaik (Independent of London) reported
that Donald Payne, already convicted for his role in Baha's death (and
kicked out of the military) will testify today. Verkaik notes that
Reader and Cooper identified Payne and Aaron Cooper as being
responsible for the death of Baha -- to clarify that, they did not see
him killed. They saw Payne and Cooper enter the room, they heard the
cries and shreiks of Baha while the two were in the room and they saw
Baha died after the two men left the room. The Daily Mail reports
that Payne has testified today that he saw "every member of the unit
commanded by Lt [Craig] Rogers, known by the call sign G10A,
'forcefully kick and/or punch' the group of Iraqi prisoners that
included Mr Mousa." Payne also asserted that abuses covered up by him
were done due to "misguided loyalty." Under questioning from
Gerald Elias, Payne stated that the purpose of the hooding was to
"disorient" the prisoner. Elias then went through various documents
before picking back up on this thread. Gerald Elias: You were told, you say, about the shock of capture. What do you remember being said about the shock of capture? Donald Payne: Keep it going. Gerald Elias: Were you told why? Donald Payne: No. Gerald Elias: Your statement goes on: ". . . lack of sleep and to keep prisoners confused as much as we could." Donald Payne: Yes. Gerald Elias: Was anything said as to what the purpose of that was: shock of capture, lack of sleep? Donald Payne: It was to aid the tactical questioner, or the interrogator. Gerald
Elias: How did you understand it aided the interrogator to maintain the
shock of capture, lack of sleep and keep them confused? Donald Payne: So that they were disoriented when they was questioned. Gerald Elias: That was your understanding, was it? Donald Payne: Yes. Gerald Elias: You go on in this statement to say: "We were to keep this up until tactical questioning was completed." Donald Payne: Yes. Gerald Elias: Was that what you were told? Donald Payne: Yes. Gerald Elias: What did you understand then would happen when tactical questioning was completed? Donald Payne: They could go to sleep. Payne
referred to receiving orders from a superior doing a handover but he
stated he could not remember who it was or what he looked like. This
was when, according to Payne, they were informed to keep the prisoners
hooded and in stress positions until questioning ended. Not noted in
the exchange but worth noting here is that questioning was not a few
hours. For example, Baha's questioning went on Sunday, Monday and
Tuesday and might have continued was he not murdered Tuesday. While he
was alive and in British custody, his questioning never ended. The
Chair of the inquiry, the Right Honourable William Gage, asked for a
clarification regarding when the stress positioning and other things
ended and Payne established that it ended not when they were done
questioning the prisoner but when they were done questioning everyone
brought in with that prisoner. Gerald Elias: Did you find this
instruction from the TQer contrary to what you believed to be your
orders for humane treatment of detainees? Donald Payne: Yes. Gerald Elias: Did you raise that question with anybody? Donald Payne: No. Gerald Elias: Why not? Donald Payne: Never did. Gerald Elias: Why not? Donald Payne: Just didn't. The
"misquided loyalty" was a prepared statement he submitted to the
inquiry today before questioning began. Gerald Elias asked him about
that and about his admission that, despite what he stated previously
(including in his court-martial), he did use "greater" force with each
visit to the prisoners brought in with Baha. Gerald Elias: Did your conduct in fact include kicking and punching -- Donald Payne: Yes. Gerald Elias: -- routinely to detainees? Donald Payne: Yes. Gerald
Elias: And in relation to these detainees, what I have called the Baha
Mousa detainees, why did you involve yourself in kicking and punching
them? Donald Payne: No reason. Did others do that as
well? Yes, Payne stated, the whole multitude. Everyone but, under
questioning, the drivers, he declared. But he could not give specifics,
he stated he just knew that everyone was involved at one time or
another because he saw them. As Elias brought in Payne's past
statements -- now agreed to by Elias and Payne to have been lies --
Payne yet again did a turn around. From the "misguided loyalty" excuse
for his silence in the prepared statement he submitted to . . . Gerald Elias: Can you help about this, Mr Payne: why were you lying about orders that you had received? Donald Payne: Self-preservation. Payne
took issue with Gerald Elias suggestion that the prisoners were given
"a regular beating" by the Payne and those serving with him, "I
wouldn't say a regular beating, no. [. . .] They were given a beating,
yes, but not constant." Under questioning from Elias, it was
established that Baha and those in his group were being beaten for 48
straight hours. It might have continued after that, Payne didn't know.
He stated that he left after Baha died. Gerald Elias: From that
time of assaulting the detainees on the Sunday evening through until
the death of Baha Mousa, should the Inquiry understand -- tell me this
is wrong if it is -- from your evidence that more or less whenever you
went back to the TDF you would involve yourself in more violence of
this kind? Donald Payne: Yes. We'll stop there. I don't
believe Payne's account of his last treatment of Baha and don't see how
anyone reading the transcript could believe it. It was all the more
embarrassing when you grasped that Payne had already been convicted --
meaning there was no reason to continue lying, especially when he kept
insisting that 'this time' he was 'finally' going to tell the truth. Stephen Bates (Guardian) observes,
"Other members of the unit told the inquiry they covered up a violent
assault by Payne on Mousa shortly before he died. Former private Aaron
Cooper told the inquiry in a statement: 'He seemed to completely lose
his self-control. He started to lash out wildly, punching and kicking
Baha Mousa's ribs. Corporal Payne also certainly kicked Baha Mousa's
head, which rebounded off the wall'." Michael Evans (Times of London) reports, "Colonel Daoud Musa, Mr Musa's father, who attended the hearing today, emerged tearful from the morning session." Meanwhile news out of Iraq is the possible blocking of the election law Parliament passed last Sunday. Waleed Ibrahim, Michael Christie and Micheal Roddy (Reuters) reports
Iraq's Sunni vice president, Tariq al-Hashimi, has stated the law needs
to be changed to allow external Iraqi refugees to participate and to be
represented. If the law is not changed (by Tuesday afternoon), he
states he will veto it. (The Presidency Council is made up of Iraq's
President and two vice presidents. After Parliament passes a law, it
goes to the council which decides whether to implement it or not.) RECOMMENDED: " Iraq snapshot" " Sahwa members assasinated by assailants wearing Iraq military uniforms" " Colorado Springs Gazette: 'time to leave Iraq to the Iraqis'" Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "The Gesture"" And the war drags on . . ." " Inquiries and 'inquiries'" " US military brass forces a child into foster care and screams at a civilian woman that she's a "bitch" Truest statement of the weekTruest statement of the week IIA note to our readersEditorial: The silence said a great dealTV: The nightly talk showsComics and the warsThe Nation endorses and amplifies sexismMailbag (Dona)Bitches for Barack (Ava and C.I.)The Bronze Boob goes to . . .IraqETAN calls for dialogueHighlights" THIS JUST IN! GROVEL IN CHIEF!" " So eager to please"
Posted at 03:51 pm by cedricsbigmix
Permalink
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills)
Monday,
November 16, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the US military
announces another death, a War Criminal testifies in England giving
contradictory answers as to why he abused Iraqis, new problems with the
'intended' elections in January, Warren P. Strobel and Sahar Issa don't
seem to grasp that McClatchy signs their checks, and more. Today the US military announced:
"Contingency Operating Base Speicher, Iraq -- A Soldier, assigned to
Multi-National Division -- North, died Nov. 16 from injuries sustained
in a vehicle accident. Members of the Soldier's patrol immediately
performed medical treatment and evacuated the Soldier to a nearby U.S.
medical facility where the Soldier died of injuries. The name of the
deceased is being withheld pending notification of next of kin and
release by the Department of Defense. The names of the deceased is
being withheld pending notification of next of kin and release by the
Department of Defense. The names of service members are announced
through the U.S. Department of Defense official website
[. . .]. The announcements are made on the Web site no earlier than 24
hours after notification of the service member's primary next of kin.
The incident is under investigation." The announcement brings the
number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the war
to 4363. AFP reports
that 13 Sahwa members have been assassinated in Sadan village today.
Sahwa is also known as "Awakening Council" members and "Sons Of Iraq"
and were placed on the US payroll by the US military in an attempt to
-- according to US Gen David Petraeus and then-US Ambassador Ryan
Crocker in testimony to Congress in 2008 -- to get these Sunnis to stop
killing and wounding US military service members and to get them to
stop destroying US military equipment. Nouri al-Maliki was supposed to
have taken over payment for the Sahwa near the close of 2008. He was
also supposed to have integrated them into the Iraqi forces. Neither's
happened. Despite non-stop media hype in November and at the start of
this year and again in April, Nouri had still not taken up payment and
the bulk were not integrated into Iraqi forces. (Nouri repeatedly
stated -- as late as mid-2008 -- that he had no intention of bring
Sahwa into the Iraqi forces.) Last week, Richard Sale (Washington Times) reported,
"A [US] congressional staffer who spoke on condition that he not be
named because he was discussing sensitive intelligence said that after
the U.S. stopped paying Sunni forces directly in June, it wasn't long
before payments to the tribes 'simply stopped. You got paid if you were
a power in the government, and the tribal leaders were last on [Prime
Minister Nouri al-] Maliki's list,' the staffer said." AFP
reports that the 13 were killed "execution-style" by assailants wearing
"Iraqi army uniforms". Among those murdered was Sahwa leader Attala
Ouda al-Shuker and his three sons. Xinhua has a text and audio report here.
The attack is being blamed (by Iraqi officials) on, you know this is
coming, al Qaeda in Iraq. What was, according to Petraeus, a very small
group and, according to the now top US commander in Iraq Gen Ray
Odierno, a group that had suffered severe push back must be the most
well connected group in the world if they're doing everything they're
accused of. And the way they manage to get all these Iraqi military and
police uniforms. Simply amazing. (Alternative explanation: It's
predictable and unbelievable to blame every incident of violence on al
Qaeda in Mesopotamia.) An unnamed US "intelligence official" tells Warren P. Strobel and Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers)
that the assassinations raise concerns about Sunni vulnerability in the
near future and also the "regrouping" of al Qaeda in Mesopotamia.
Regrouping? To listen to Nouri al-Maliki, they organization is huge
and thriving and always has been. We'll come
back to Strobel and Issa in a moment (and it won't be pretty). For now
let's move over to the other reported violence today -- reported.
Because violence goes on constantly in Iraq and the bulk of it is never
reported (which is how those mass graves still pop up every few
months). Bombings? Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
a Baghdad roadside bombing which claimed the lives of 2 Iraqi service
members and left six civilians injured, a Mahmoudiyah bombing which
claimed the lives of 6 Iraqi service members and left six more injured,
a Falluja double bombing of two homes which reulsted in six people
being injured, a Falluja triple bombing of homes which left eight
people wounded and a Kirkuk car bombing which claimed 6 lives and left
eight people injured. Shootings? Hey,
for 'funs' let's see how many of the above incidents were reported on
by Reuters today in their 'factbox'? Okay? Five bombings and 1
shooting -- all today -- according to McClatchy. Reuters reports
only 2 bombings today and no shooting in Kirkuk. Wow. I guess if you
were only going to go by one outlet for your information, it wouldn't
be smart to depend on Reuters to discover how many Iraqis die each day,
huh? Wanna copy me and do exactly like I did -- yeah! yeah! Try 'cid and get f**ked up worse than my life is -- huh? My brain's dead weight I'm tryin' to get my head straight That's
the only excuse for their writing the following: "So far, November has
been the least violent month in Iraq in recent memory. According to the
Web site icasualties.org, political violence has killed one U.S.
soldier and, before Monday, 12 members of the Iraqi security forces and
29 civilians. The site says that the civilian casualty figures are
incomplete, however, and the true numbers are undoubtedly much
higher." That's two wrongs. Let's break them up. 1)
ICCC says "political violence has killed one U.S. soldier" -- is that
what reality is? What a stupid, idiotic thing to write. Shameful.
We've already noted one death announcement from the US military
released today. It has one thing in common with every other
announcement this month? Do you know what that was? Strobel and Issa
were too busy free stylin' to notice. Here's the key phrase in every
death announcement from the US military (Iraq only) this month: Get
the picture? "The incident is under investigation." So you really
don't know how the person died. That includes, please note, the
helicopter crash last week. 2) ICCC says X number of Iraqis have died? Who the hell cares what they say? It is
offensive for anyone to use the ICCC 'count' but especially for
McClatchy. In October, I warned we would rip apart the next IDIOT who
used it. ICCC is not doing a count. It is noting Reuters. They don't
even include -- pay attent Strobel and Issa -- McClatchy in their
'count.' As Warren should know and Sahar damn well knows (as does
Laith and Jenan and everyone else who does their daily roundup of
violence), McClatchy covers a lot more violence on any given day than
does Reuters. In fact, we just proved that earlier in the snapshot. ICCC's count is 41 dead so far for the month? Well let's check. Okay? From Third November 8th: " Sunday saw 25 Iraqis reported deaths and 97 injured. Monday saw 4 reported dead and 3 reported wounded. Tuesday saw 3 reported dead and 10 reported injured. Wednesday saw 7 reported dead and 25 reported wounded. Thursday saw 5 person reported dead and 15 reported injured. Friday saw 4 people reported dead and six people reported injured. Saturday
saw 3 reported dead and 3 reported injured. Totals: 51 reported dead,
159 reported wounded -- and many more people were killed and wounded
than were reported." From Third November 15th: " Sunday were reported 8 dead and 6 were reported wounded, Monday it was 2 dead and 15 wounded, Tuesday it was 4 dead and 2 wounded, Wednesday found 3 dead and 5 wounded, Thursday it was 6 dead and 10 wounded, Friday there were reported 3 dead and on Saturday
the number killed was 3 and the number injured was 6. [Saturday's
number may be 4 -- we are going with 3, use links and you'll see why.]
For a total of 29 reported dead and 44 reported injured." Now that
leaves aside yesterday and the death total is 80 and the wounded is 203. ICCC does nothing but count Reuters (click
on their links). They ignore McClatchy, they ignore Los Angeles Times
and everyone else. They do a "Reuters" "count." Reuters which can --
and has -- gone a whole day without publishing anything from Iraq.
Reuters? You don't use ICCC for the Iraqi
death toll. ICCC does such a BAD job on the death toll of Iraqis that
even the Ministries in Iraq have a higher death toll at the end of each
month. It's a joke and you make yourself a joke when you use it. If
you are McClatchy Newspapers, you're an ASS for using ICCC's count of
Iraqis killed. Why? Because ICCC doesn't even register you. And I
happen to know what the economics at McClatchy are right now and I damn
well know that promoting a count that doesn't even acknowledge
McClatchy's reporting is going to be seriously frowned upon by the
ownership. So get your act together. And grasp that when the bad
news comes down after the holidays, you're really not going to want to
be looking around and wondering, "How responsible am I for it?"
Translation, you shouldn't be promoting Reuters or anyone else's
count. You do a daily roundup of violence, you should be keeping track
of that and have your own monthly count. It's not difficult. When
Nancy A. Youssef was in charge of Baghdad, she was able to see that
McClatchy kept their own count. When McClatchy has the capability
right now to do their own count, they really shouldn't be promoting
some other outlet's count. That's bad business. And no one can afford
it in this economy. In England there is an ongoing inquiry into Baha Mosua's death -- Baha is an Iraqi who died while in British custody. The November 9th snpashot
noted that day's developments: British soldiers Gareth Aspinall and
Garry Reader testified that Baha was abused repeatedly while in British
custody, that he was beaten to death and that they were ordered to keep
quiet about what took place. This morning, Robert Verkaik (Independent of London) reported
that Donald Payne, already convicted for his role in Baha's death (and
kicked out of the military) will testify today. Verkaik notes that
Reader and Cooper identified Payne and Aaron Cooper as being
responsible for the death of Baha -- to clarify that, they did not see
him killed. They saw Payne and Cooper enter the room, they heard the
cries and shreiks of Baha while the two were in the room and they saw
Baha died after the two men left the room. The Daily Mail reports
that Payne has testified today that he saw "every member of the unit
commanded by Lt [Craig] Rogers, known by the call sign G10A,
'forcefully kick and/or punch' the group of Iraqi prisoners that
included Mr Mousa." Payne also asserted that abuses covered up by him
were done due to "misguided loyalty." Under
questioning from Gerald Elias, Payne stated that the purpose of the
hooding was to "disorient" the prisoner. Elias then went through
various documents before picking back up on this thread. Gerald Elias: You were told, you say, about the shock of capture. What do you remember being said about the shock of capture? Donald Payne: Keep it going. Gerald Elias: Were you told why? Donald Payne: No. Gerald Elias: Your statement goes on: ". . . lack of sleep and to keep prisoners confused as much as we could." Donald Payne: Yes. Gerald Elias: Was anything said as to what the purpose of that was: shock of capture, lack of sleep? Donald Payne: It was to aid the tactical questioner, or the interrogator. Gerald
Elias: How did you understand it aided the interrogator to maintain the
shock of capture, lack of sleep and keep them confused? Donald Payne: So that they were disoriented when they was questioned. Gerald Elias: That was your understanding, was it? Donald Payne: Yes. Gerald Elias: You go on in this statement to say: "We were to keep this up until tactical questioning was completed." Donald Payne: Yes. Gerald Elias: Was that what you were told? Donald Payne: Yes. Gerald Elias: What did you understand then would happen when tactical questioning was completed? Donald Payne: They could go to sleep. Payne
referred to receiving orders from a superior doing a handover but he
stated he could not remember who it was or what he looked like. This
was when, according to Payne, they were informed to keep the prisoners
hooded and in stress positions until questioning ended. Not noted in
the exchange but worth noting here is that questioning was not a few
hours. For example, Baha's questioning went on Sunday, Monday and
Tuesday and might have continued was he not murdered Tuesday. While he
was alive and in British custody, his questioning never ended. The
Chair of the inquiry, the Right Honourable William Gage, asked for a
clarification regarding when the stress positioning and other things
ended and Payne established that it ended not when they were done
questioning the prisoner but when they were done questioning everyone
brought in with that prisoner. Gerald
Elias: Did you find this instruction from the TQer contrary to what you
believed to be your orders for humane treatment of detainees? Donald Payne: Yes. Gerald Elias: Did you raise that question with anybody? Donald Payne: No. Gerald Elias: Why not? Donald Payne: Never did. Gerald Elias: Why not? Donald Payne: Just didn't. The
"misquided loyalty" was a prepared statement he submitted to the
inquiry today before questioning began. Gerald Elias asked him about
that and about his admission that, despite what he stated previously
(including in his court-martial), he did use "greater" force with each
visit to the prisoners brought in with Baha. Gerald Elias: Did your conduct in fact include kicking and punching -- Donald Payne: Yes. Gerald Elias: -- routinely to detainees? Donald Payne: Yes. Gerald
Elias: And in relation to these detainees, what I have called the Baha
Mousa detainees, why did you involve yourself in kicking and punching
them? Donald Payne: No reason. Did
others do that as well? Yes, Payne stated, the whole multitude.
Everyone but, under questioning, the drivers, he declared. But he
could not give specifics, he stated he just knew that everyone was
involved at one time or another because he saw them. As
Elias brought in Payne's past statements -- now agreed to by Elias and
Payne to have been lies -- Payne yet again did a turn around. From the
"misguided loyalty" excuse for his silence in the prepared statement he
submitted to . . . Gerald Elias: Can you help about this, Mr Payne: why were you lying about orders that you had received? Donald Payne: Self-preservation. Payne
took issue with Gerald Elias suggestion that the prisoners were given
"a regular beating" by the Payne and those serving with him, "I
wouldn't say a regular beating, no. [. . .] They were given a beating,
yes, but not constant." Under questioning from Elias, it was
established that Baha and those in his group were being beaten for 48
straight hours. It might have continued after that, Payne didn't
know. He stated that he left after Baha died. Gerald
Elias: From that time of assaulting the detainees on the Sunday evening
through until the death of Baha Mousa, should the Inquiry understand --
tell me this is wrong if it is -- from your evidence that more or less
whenever you went back to the TDF you would involve yourself in more
violence of this kind? Donald Payne: Yes. We'll
stop there. I don't believe Payne's account of his last treatment of
Baha and don't see how anyone reading the transcript could believe it.
It was all the more embarrassing when you grasped that Payne had
already been convicted -- meaning there was no reason to continue
lying, especially when he kept insisting that 'this time' he was
'finally' going to tell the truth. Stephen Bates (Guardian) observes,
"Other members of the unit told the inquiry they covered up a violent
assault by Payne on Mousa shortly before he died. Former private Aaron
Cooper told the inquiry in a statement: 'He seemed to completely lose
his self-control. He started to lash out wildly, punching and kicking
Baha Mousa's ribs. Corporal Payne also certainly kicked Baha Mousa's
head, which rebounded off the wall'." Michael Evans (Times of London) reports, "Colonel Daoud Musa, Mr Musa's father, who attended the hearing today, emerged tearful from the morning session." Meanwhile news out of Iraq is the possible blocking of the election law Parliament passed last Sunday. Waleed Ibrahim, Michael Christie and Micheal Roddy (Reuters) reports
Iraq's Sunni vice president, Tariq al-Hashimi, has stated the law needs
to be changed to allow external Iraqi refugees to participate and to be
represented. If the law is not changed (by Tuesday afternoon), he
states he will veto it. (The Presidency Council is made up of Iraq's
President and two vice presidents. After Parliament passes a law, it
goes to the council which decides whether to implement it or not.) Jasim
Azzawi: So finally the Iraqi Parliament has passed this long delayed
law. Many people, they called it a great achievement. Firyad
Rawandouzi, this law stipulates we are going to use the open list in
comparison with the closed list that was used in 2005. It is going to
separate religion from politics by removing the religious symbols. So
is it really a good law in comparison with the old law that belongs to
the old regime? Firyad
Rawandouzi: Actually the demand of the Great Ayatollah Sistani was
there. Therefore the most political blocs in the Parliament go for open
list. And I think that this open list will create a little bit of
change in the political map of Iraqi Parliament in the next
election. But it not going to be a great change. Jasim
Azzawi: But all yardsticks, Orhan Kettene, Iraq is far from democracy.
The fact that elections are day in, day out that does not make Iraq a
democracy, far from it. There is, has to be, a culture before that. But
since you are an activist representing the Turkmen and their interests
and perhaps, people say, their plight, how do you look at this
election in light of the fact that some Turkmen, they accuse the
Kurdish authorities in Kirkuk, they have resettled by force hundreds
and thousands of Kurdish Iraqis either from the north or even from
other parts of Iraq -- from Salahuddin, for instance. Orhan
Kettene: Well we don't see it as a democracy with full meaning of the
word because in 2003, when the invasion removed the old regime, the
Turkmens had very high hopes that the justice, democracy, equality,
equal participation will show itself finally and they will have a voice
finally in Iraqi politics after being deprived from that right for over
nine years. But the fact is they were surprised with a flood of
Kurdish people from other parts of Iraq, especially from the north. And
they filled the city. There is no space left in the city. And it was
claimed that they were refugees from Kirkuk. And we know in Kirkuk
where -- which areas were demolished, which people were removed. So the
people were surprised by this influx. And now we are faced with
doubling the number of constituents. Kirkuk used to be 369,000 in 2004
and now it's 800,000 and Turkmens regard Kirkuk as the cultural center
of Turkmens in Iraq. And the whole Iraqi people know Kirkuk as a
Turkmen city. But over the years, by the Ba'ahtists' racist pressure
lots of Arab people were forced to be -- Jasim Azzawi: Orhan, let me give a chance to Firyad to answer that before I go to Mundher. Make it very short, Firyad. Firyad
Rawandouzi: I don't think that this accusation is right because since
2003, we hearing from various people in Kirkuk and other areas that
Kurdish people fled to Kirkuk and occupied the city. And the fact is
that many thousands of Kurdish people were displaced by Saddam
Hussein's regime since 1997 to 2003. And those people now have
opportunity to return back to this city, to their home, and get their
property too. Therefore, we, everytime hearing this accusation but -- Jasim
Azzawi: Except for the fact, Firyad Rawandouzi, and that is the United
Nations, the envoy, has cast a great doubt about the numbers that
currently live in the city, trying to find out their origin. More
importantly, in 2003, in May, in the Attaakhi newspaper which
is a Kurdish newspaper, mentioned in an article published at the time
that the number of people expelled out of Kirkuk by Saddam Hussein
exceeded 16,000 while the extra influx Orhan Kettene referred to now --
Firyad Rawandouzi: No. Jasim Azzawi: -- runs in the Firyad Rawandouzi: No. Jasim
Azzawi: -- hundreds of thousands. We'll come to that in just a few
moments. Mundher Adhami, in 2005 a great segment of Iraqi socieity
opted willingly not to vote in that controversial election and now, in
2009, most probably, all of them, they will be voting. Will they be
voting willingly or will they be voting for other considerations? Mundher
Adhami: There is two level in this. One related to the political groups
in the Green Zone and outside the Green Zone -- the so-called Red
Zone. And the other one is in the public, in the streets. In the
political groups, the United States is making huge efforts in order to
cajole and invite everybody including the people who were part of the
resistance or insurgency or anything to participate. And they're trying
to give them guarantees. But there is a great doubt about these
guarantees because a lot of the guarantees which were given before
about the Constitution, about other things in the political process did
not materialize. But on the street this is complication that there are
people who actually participated in the 2004, 2005 and the local
elections and they are very disappointed. There is an
improvement gradually in the provincial elections but even then they
were not happy with the -- with the manuevering of the electoral
commission. On the other hand, the areas which did not vote a great
deal in 2005 and not vote at all in 2004, they are thinking that they
have been marginalized by not voting and they are willing to give it a
go regardless because they have nothing to lose. They have been
marginalized -- Jasim
Azzawi: So there is a fear that they might receive the short end of the
stick by not participating in the political process and, consequently,
they might have a lot to lose. Orhan Kettene, why would you be worried,
especially that this political deal that was struck between the various
political parties that stipulates that if the results of the election
in January -- especially for Kirkuk -- is exceeded by 15% than the last
election there might be going back to the drawing board and finding
some sort of a compromise. Orhan
Kettene: Well we don't have great faith in reviewing election results
because, back in 2005, we had lots of complaints and we gave it to the
High Commission. They said they reviewed it and nothing happened. And
all these violations, these frauds, these horrible acts done against
this people, no results came out. And now they are talking about
postponing this problem without solving it -- let's do the elections
and, after that, we'll form a commission and then we'll review all the
issues. The experience tells us that once things are done deal in
Iraq, there is no way to go back. So if we have these elections -- Jasim
Azzawi: So you're extremely cynical and you don't have faith, in the
words of the Iraqi politicians? How about that, Firyad Rawandouzi? And
before you answer, let us just take a recent example. For instance, in
the provincial elections that happened just a few months ago, when in
Mosul the elections actually reversed the results of the 2005 and it
gave the Arabs the majority in the governorate as well as in other
parts of the city. And yet, to this day, they cannot exercise their
political powers. So why should Turkmens and the Arabs in Kirkuk trust
in this deal knowing full well there is no honor among the Iraqi
politicians to adhere to this, the outcome? Firyad
Rawandouzi: I don't know. You might ask them. But in my point of view,
they should go forward with the election because it is a good chance to
exercise their rights. And I think that Kirkuk is a little bit
different from other provinces and Arab, Turkmen, Kurds and Christians
should exist in Kirkuk and make a compromise even in running the
country. But in the general election something is different because the
general election and the result of these elections will not left an
impact on the future -- political future in Kirkuk. For example, we are
now in the Parliament five member. We have five member representing
Kirkuk and others have four. But this -- we exercise the majority but
that does [not] mean that we impose any kind of a solution. Orhan
Kettaneh: Let me ask who is rulling the street? Who is holding the
security? Who's touring the streets and letting the people do what they
want? It's the Kurdish Asayish which is security force, it's the
Kurdish militia, armed militia, called Peshmerga. They are in every
street, every corner. They are the ones who command the city. So
during elections, we had hundreds of examples that they took away the
boxes, the ballot boxes, and they changed it. And next day, all we can
see is these completely Turkmen quarters, the votes come completely in
the favor of the Kurdish parties. Firyad
Rawandouzi: No, that is not right because -- this is not right because
Turkmen divided among themselves and they could get -- couldn't get
seats in the Parliament so they put the accusation on the others. I
think that the law this time and even the voter registers are
completely different and they should go forward with the election not
put accusations on the other. I think it is very important for Turkemn
to cooperate with Arab with other persons to make everything succeed,
this election in Kirkuk. As I said this election and the results -- Orhan
Kettaneh: Well it is, sorry, excuse me, the Turkmens are not divided.
The Turkmens are united but they don't have chance, they don't have
chance -- Firyad Rawandouzi: This is not right. Orhan Kettaneh: No, they don't have Firyad
Rawandouzi: This is not right. There is a huge, there is a huge
difference between East Turkmens and even East Turkmens and those
linked to Turkey and those linked to Iran and those to others. You're
saying something is not -- you can't find it on the ground Orhan
Kettaneh: No, that's not true. I find the Shi'ite Turkmens and the
Sunni Turkmens are one people and they don't see any difference betwen
the other. What you say about Shi'ites -- Firyad Rawandouzi: I don't say that they are the same people but they are different political parties, they -- Jasim Azzawi: Let me bring Mundher Adhami who has [loud cross-talk] Let me bring Mundher Adhami who has the following Munher Adhami: Could I say? Could I just say? Jasim
Azzawi: Munher Adhami, hold on just a second. Let me ask you something.
Somehow you cannot help but be sympathetic to the people who were
bitten once and they don't want to be bitten twice. What happened in
Mosul and what happens to the Constitution if you remember very well.
Article 141 states that before 2007 is out, Iraqi Parliament will
convene again and will review the entire Constitution and amend it
according to political deal. So as we speak right now, politically and
Constitutionally, Iraq is run without a Constitution, isn't it? Munher
Adhami: Yes. That's right. That's exactly right. I mean the whole
process if faulty on various steps. This election is being run on a
Constitution which should not be there because it should have been
revised. So that's the first fault. The whole Constitution and the
whole election laws so far has been done according to [former US
Adminstrator of Iraq L. Paul] Bremer's laws which came after illegal
occupation. So that whole process is illegal. But the problems is that
Iraqis are practical people and they have to feed their children and
these roadblocks which the Americans are putting in their ways, they
have to go through them. They are impelled to go through them and they
do the best they can. They -- I think it is to the credit of Iraqis,
rather in Kirkuk oand Mosul so far, that they have refused the
enticement to fight each other on ethnic grounds. I think this is to
the credit of some wise people.
Posted at 10:13 am by cedricsbigmix
Permalink
|
|
|