|
|
Nov 4, 2009
Jealousy flares up in the White House
BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE
IT HAD EVERYTHING TO DO WITH HIS DIRECT-TO-CABLE FILM.
"I CAN'T BELIEVE SHE GOT ALL THE GOOD ANGLES!" HE HISSED POINTING ACROSS THE HALL. AS NORMA SHEARER FOUND OUT IN THE WOMEN WHEN JOAN CRAWFORD UPSTAGED HER, AS OLIVIA NEWTON-JOHN FOUND OUT WHEN STOCKARD CHANNING STOLE GREASE AND AS CLINT EASTWOOD DISCOVERED WHEN JOHN MALKOVICH WALKED AWAY WITH IN THE LINE OF FIRE, AMERICA LOVES A BAD GIRL. "A BITCH!" HISSED BARRY. ACROSS THE HALL, A BEAMING MICHELLE WAS BASKING IN CONGRATULATIONS AND SIGNING AUTOGRAPHS. MUTTERED BARRY, "THIS WAS SUPPOSED TO BE MY NIGHT! MINE!" So the Iraqi Parliament drags their feet and they aren't the only ones. At yesterday's
public hearing of the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and
Afghanistan, it was learned that the Defense Department had still not
submitted all the plans for the draw-down that's supposed to be on the
verge of taking place. Not only have they not submitted all of their
own plans, they're supervision of KBR is so lax that KBR's been allowed
to skip submitting a plan. As noted in yesterday's snapshot,
Commissioner Robert Henke attempted to get an answer from the
Pentagon's Lee Hamilton to this question: "If the president announces
on February 27, 2009 the draw-down plan and we're on November 2nd, is
it possible that the contractor hasn't provided you any plan to adjust
staff accordingly?" Despite attempting to walk Hamilton through slowly
(after Hamilton rambled on with a non-answer reply) and despite asking,
"How is that possible?", Henke never got anything that would pass for
an answer to his questions. This morning Jen Dimascio (Politico -- link has text and audio) reports: KBR,
the largest contractor in Iraq, is pulling out of that country so
slowly that it could end up costing American taxpayers $193 million
more than expected, according to a new Pentagon audit.Furthermore,
during a hearing Monday by the Commission on Wartime Contracting, a
legislative body set up to study contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan,
Commissioner Charles Tiefer said the company's plodding exit from Iraq
could cost even more -- up to $300 million.As noted
in yesterday's snapshot, that's only one portion of the story. Dimascio
notes a quote from Commissioner Dov Zakheim and you can see yesterday's
snapshot for that full exchange. From last night, Kat's " Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan"
covers the hearing and she shares some impression on Commissioner Chris
Shays hearing performance. But Dimascio covers one aspect of the big
news from yesterday's hearings -- and we did consider skipping it but
fortunately didn't because the Commission actually had their act
together yesterday (we is Kat, Ava, Wally and myself) -- the other big news was the lack of completed plans. For
the Pentagon, that's especially appalling and it's either an issue of
insubordination or the White House isn't really serious about a
draw-down. For the Pentagon, the refusal to submit their own plans or
demand that KBR draw up their own is appalling. Thompson declared in
the hearing that he visited with KBR most recently on September 25th or
26th and they still had no plans -- and Thompson was neither surprised
nor worried about the lack of planning.
In the US, Noor Faleh Almaleki has died. The 20-year-old Iraqi woman was intentionally run over October 20th (see the October 21st snapshot)
while she and Amal Edan Khalaf were running errands (the latter is the
mother of Noor's boyfriend and she was left injured in the assault).
Police suspected Noor's father, Faleh Hassan Almaleki, of the assault
and stated the probable motive was that he felt Noor had become "too
westernized." As noted in the October 30th snapshot,
Faleh Hassan Almaleki was finally arrested after going on the lamb --
first to Mexico, then flying to London where British authorities
refused him entry and he was sent back to the US and arrested in
Atlanta. Karan Olson and CNN note that the judge has set the man's bail at $5 million. Philippe Naughton (Times of London) adds,
"Noor died yesterday, having failed to recover consciousness after the
attack. The other woman, Amal Khalaf, was also seriously injured but is
expected to survive. " Rachel Stockman and 12 News (link has text and video) supply this timeline: October 20th -Around 2 p.m. Police say Faleh Almaleki ran down his daughter, friend. -Around 5 p.m. Nlets Alert with Almaleki's license plate and vehicle description goes out October 23rd -U.S. Customs and Border Protection notified. Addressing
the timeline, Rachel Stockman reports, "They allowed the suspect to
cross the border into Mexico so we wanted to know where the
communication broke down. What we found? Nlets, the system Peoria
police use to notify other authorities is not something US Customs
always checks." Dustin Gardiner (Arizona Republic) quotes:
prosecutor Stephanie Low stating of the father, "By his own admission,
this was an intentional act and the reason was that his daughter had
brought shame on him and his family. This was an attempt at an honor
killing." Iraqi American Romina Korkes offered her thoughts on the so-called 'honor' killing last week in a column for the Arizona Republic.
Women
are attacked daily around the world. The attacks are dismissed. A large
number of men seem to think it's okay -- and a significant number of
women must agree since we're not in the streets marching -- and that
goes a long way towards explaining Rory O'Connor's post at Media Channel -- a site not known for its 'inclusive' view of humanity (to put it mildly). Noting Alissa J. Rubin's opinion piece from Sunday's New York Times (we noted it in Friday's snapshot),
O'Connor goes on to rip her apart. Now let's be clear, Alissa J. Rubin
being a woman doesn't mean she can't be ripped apart nor are we
concerned about tone. She's never been good with math (we've called her
"teen queen" at this site) and she's been so wack that she's even been
called "crack whore" here. But what have we done that Rory O'Connor
doesn't? We've praised her, yes. She's earned a lot of praise over the
years here. But that's not it. He doesn't have to praise her and,
indeed, he may not find anything worth praising in her writing. That is
his opinion. But where there's a problem
is that Alissa J. Rubin was never the paper's problem. On her bad days,
she jumbled the numbers and was too quick to believe things she
shouldn't have (such as the "Awakenings" being universally embraced in
areas they 'patrolled' or 'terrorized'). Her worst day never found her
as bad as John F. Burns or Dexter Filkins. I'm not seeing their names
mentioned by Rory. Those are the two worst offenders for what he's
demanding (truth). But they don't get called out. It's really strange
that so few women have worked in Baghdad for the New York Times
(others include Cara Buckley, Sabrina Tavernise, Erica Goode and, of
course, Judith Miller) but they're always the ones being ripped apart.
Not the males. The issue isn't that he called Rubin out. He's allowed
to. He can loathe her and rip her apart. The issue is that we haven't
seen that same standard applied to men. This is the Judith Miller effect, the bash the bitch craze,
we've long documented here. Judith Miller did not start a war. Judith
Miller was not responsible for the entire media landscape. She did not
twist the arms of PBS and NBC and Oprah to get air time. Those people
wanted her on their shows. She did not twist arms at the paper to land
on the front page, the paper wanted her on the front page. Judith
Miller was so WRONG about the Iraq War but she wasn't a liar -- at
least not on the big issue. She honestly believed their were WMD in
Iraq, that's why she commandeered a squadron while stationed in Iraq.
She's a lousy reporter, her 'facts' do not hold up. She needs to be
held accountable. But she often had co-writers -- such as Michael R.
Gordon who remains at the paper and who spent the second Bush term
advocating for war on Iran. Judith Miller was a reporter for one of the
top three papers in the country (at that time). If you saw her on TV,
she was invited on. If you heard her on radio, she was invited on. If
you read her in another paper, a decision was made to print her
article. It took a lot of people echoing the government (not all of
whom believed the lies the way Miller did) to start the war on Iraq, to
lie to the people. Miller was one person. Hold her accountable, no
question, but what about all the others? The
pleasing lie (pleasing to a lot of members of the press corps) is that
Judith Miller, all by herself, lied the nation into war. Judith Miller
and others like her helped the US get into Iraq but grasp that Dexter Filkins and John F. Burns
kept the US in Iraq. There are some who will kiss Dexy's butt because
of those bad, BAD, college campus appearances where he talks about (and
has done this for several years now) about how the Iraq War is lost and
how they knew it then and blah, blah, blah. That might have mattered.
If he'd done it in real time. But in real time, he was lying. In real
time, he was taking orders from the military -- as Molly Bingham
long ago explained, Dexy even cancelled a meeting with the Iraqi
resistance when US military brass frowned. In real time, Dexy let the
US military vet his copy. That's reality. His award winning 'reporting'?
Vetted by the US military. Vetted and delayed while it was vetted which
is why the paper ran it so many days after it was written. I
have no problem with Judith Miller being called out -- and I've called
her out myself. But, look through the archvies, we've called out women
and we've called out men. We haven't worried about tone but we've made
damn sure that people were treated fairly -- even if that just meant
that abuse was heaped on equally. I'm glad that someone at Media Channel remembered there is a war in Iraq and I'm glad that Rory O'Connor wrote with fire.
But I'm also aware that Alissa J. Rubin, graded on any scale, qualifies
as one of the better reporters the paper's had in Iraq. And I'm also
aware that MediaChannel is more than happy to go after Katie Couric or
any other woman but I find very little in efforts to praise women or to
link to them. (Until O'Connor's column, which I heard about from a
friend at the Times, I haven't visited MediaChannel since the efforts to distort Marcia's
writing.) And if Alissa J. Rubin was Alan J. Rubin, I have to wonder
whether or not MediaChannel would even be weighing in? Again, it's been
a long, long time since they've made it known that they're aware of the
Iraq War. This isn't a minor issue -- not
the silence on Iraq or the attacks on women. And, repeating, it's not
about tone. It's about fairness. We've ridiculed many women here and
will do so again and again and again. But we don't go to town on a
woman and refuse to on men. Todd S. Purdum is a better writer at Vanity Fair than he was at the Times -- that has to do with the differing role, the fact that he can write longer at Van Fair
and the differences between the outlets. But we went to town on Todd
(who I know offline) and did so because his work was as appalling as
Elisabeth Bumiller's columns (run in the news section but they were
columns) at that time. (Bumiller's done some strong reporting in the
last few years.) We went to town on her, we went to town on Todd. And
the fact that I knew him didn't prevent that nor did the fact that he
was a man make me think, "I shouldn't criticize." But there's a real
locker room mentality among the online critics where a man gets a pass
and another one and another one and, okay, let's make it about the
work. But a woman gets ripped apart. The ripping apart doesn't bother
me . . . if it's applied to both. We've linked to Rory before and we'll link to his post today one more time.
But it's really past time that a lot of online critics took a look what
they were doing. I'm not suggesting anyone change their style or tone
or make nice. I am suggesting that they make sure they treat people the
same -- regardless of gender. I do not believe Alissa J. Rubin was
treated the same as a male reporter would have been. I could be wrong,
I often am. But I'm saying my call on that goes to pattern:
MediaChannel's emphasis and the climate online.
Posted at 04:46 pm by cedricsbigmix
Permalink
corzine goes down for the count (mike)
rebecca here. cedric and i swap out cross-posting duties. some nights, he does it for me, some nights i do it for him. c.i. usually does it for us both on thursday nights. tonight's my night and with his permission, i'm cross-posting mike's blog post.
Tuesday! What a great day!!!!! :D I've been on the phone with C.I., Kat, Ava, Wally, Cedric and Jim doing prep on an article we're doing Sunday. On what? Hmm. The losers. See.  Yes,
Jon Corzine is not New Jersey's choice for governor. We are aware that
Bob Somerby spent today trying to do damage control insisting that the
governors races in Virginia and New Jersey didn't count. Didn't count?
Barack campaigned non-stop for Corzine. Corzine was the incumbent. He
couldn't hold on to his seat. Even with Barry O and Caroline Kennedy. Or maybe because of them. Hillary voters will not forget and Jon Corzine learned that lesson tonight. Poor washed up politician. And
most importantly, both races send a message to House and Senate Dems
afraid to buck the Great . . . Unwashed. They better start bucking
Barack. It's their asses that are on the line if they're up for
re-election in 2010, not Barack's. America's love affair with
Barack is over. He currently polls worse than Bush in his first term.
It's over and those who chose to be Barry's buds will learn that, yes,
WE DO judge you by the company you keep. In fact, let's start a new
game: Six Degrees of Barry Soreto. I can connect Robert Byrd to
domestic terrorist Bill Ayers. Watch! Robert Byrd knows Barack and
Barack was neighbor and friends with Bill Ayers and with Weather
Underground leader Bernardine Dohrn. It's a fun game to play: Six Degrees of Barry Soreto. Patent pending. All rights assigned to Mike McKinnon. :D Corzine
was a US Senator. He left the Senate to run for governor. He won that
race too. Then he ran for re-election and the voters said, "Piss off." Poor
Jon Corzine. He stood by Barry O and thought that would be enough. In
fact, it helped defeat him. If I were Barbara Boxer -- who disgraced
herself in 2008 as she played catty in the most stereotypical manner --
I wouldn't plan on running for re-election because she's really hated
right now. And the polls show that. These whores like Corzine and Boxer
who thought they could lie and attack Hillary are finding out that
Hillary is a hell of a lot more popular with voters than they are. So Boxer prepare to do what Jon Corzine's doing right now: Eat s**t. Jonathan Martin (Politico) reports,
" Chris Christie has defeated New Jersey Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine,
becoming the first Republican to win statewide in more than a decade. With
79 percent of the vote in, Christie was winning, 49 to 45, with
independent candidate Chris Daggett pulling just 5 percent. " That's
got audio if you'd prefer to listen to it instead of reading. Now
they kept saying the Republican Party was dead. Apparently idiots on my
side brought it back to life. How did they do that? By lying, by using
hypocrisy and by being the smuggest asses in the world. Most of
all by putting the Not Ready For Prime Time Barry O on the world's
stage. We could have had a real president, we could have had Hillary
who would have done a great job. But we let Republicans, Communists and
Socialists infiltrate our Democratic Party primary and give the
nomination to Barack The Unprepared. And he has single handedly made
Evil Doer George W. Bush look better just by comparison. (That's what
happens when you continue ALL of Bush's policies.) My party better wise up real quick or expect to be eating s**t the way Corzine is tonight. Here's C.I.'s " Iraq snapshot:" Tuesday,
Novemer 3, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, IOM releases a study on
internal refugees in Iraq who have returned to their former homes,
still no election law in Iraq (and the pretense that Kirkuk is the big
hold up continues), a man goes to town on a NYT reporter online so we
know the reporter must be a woman, and more.
Today the
International Organization for Migration [IOM] released their latest
report on internal Iraqi refugees [PDF format warning] entitled "Assessment of Return to Iraq:"
The report notes the low rate of return (external refugees coming back
to Iraq) and focuses on the 1.6 million estimated interal refugees and
what the desires of this vulnerable population are. The report notes
that IOM spoke with "4,061 families (24,366 individuals)" while
assessing needs.
The bulk of the internally displaced hail from Baghdad (nearly 90%). From the report:
*
The majority of identified returnees (33,521 families, or 58%) have
returned to Baghdad governorate, while a significant proportion has
also been identified in Diyala and Anbar.
* 54,451 of the
returnees identified (94%) have returned from internal displacement,
while the remaining 3,659 identified families (6%) have returned from
abroad.
* Almost 90% of IOM-assessed post-Samarra IDPs were
displaced from Baghdad, diyala, and Ninewa, and almost 79% of
identified returns are also located in these three governorates.
The report notes the top six reasons IDPs give for their displacement are:
Direct threats to life (29.1%) Left out of fear (21.7%) Generalized violence (16.5%) Forced displacement from property (7.6%) Ethnic/religious/political discrimination (5.9%) Armed conflict (5.0%)
The
report notes that those who are returning often cite "harsh conditions
in displacement" as one of the reasons they have returned (exampele
include "high rent, lack of employment opportunities, poor shelter and
lack of basic services"). The second and third categories can be
combined: "Improved security in area of origin and very difficult
conditions in displacement" and "Very difficult conditions in
displacement". If you combine the two than 45.46% of those who have
returned are citing "very difficult conditions in displacement"
regions. Those returning to Baghdad cite "former employment,
transporation assistance, repair of damaged homes and property, and
renewed access to basic services" as their reasons. 38% of those who
have returned to their former homes "reported feeling safe only some of
the time." In addition, 42.5% of returnees in Anbar, Baghdad, Diyala
and Kirkuk report that "their homes are partially or completely
destroyed. In addition, 50% of returnees in these governorates no
longer have their movable property, such as cars, due to loss or theft."
Of
those returning to their former homes across Iraq, Arab Shia Muslims
make up the largest percent (49.4%), followed by Arab Sunni Muslim
(31.0%), Turkmen Sunni Muslim (9.7%) and Christians (8.9%). (Kurd Shia
Muslim, Kurd Sunni Muslim and Other each account for less than one
percent.) Of those who remain internally displaced, the highest percent
is (again) Arab Shia (58.4%) followed by Arab Sunni Muslim (29.3%) with
Christians and Kurd Sunni Muslim next (each at 4.4%), followed by Other
(4.0%) and Kurd Shia Muslim (0.7%). IOM's report also provides a gender
breakdown for heads of household of returnees: 12% are female-headed
households and 88% of returnees are male-headed housholds (and 35% of
the 88% cannot find work). The study found, "Among assessed returnee
female-headed households, food is consistently identified as a priority
need (60% across Iraq) along with non-food itmes (NFIs) and fueld. In
Baghdad, health and sanitation are major concerns for interviewed
female-headed households. Access to legal help was also a serious
issue, particularly in Diyala and Ninewa governorates." Breaking down
employment for returnee heads of household; 69.7% of females heading
households are unable to work contrasted with 15.4% of the male heads
of household; 4.7% of female heads of household are employed contrasted
with 50.1% of male heads of household, and 25.7% of female heads of
household are able to work but unable to find employment contrasted
with 34.5% of male heads of household in the same situation.
Returnees
were asked about basic services as well (remember, the bulk live in
Baghdad). How many have electricity each day for "More than 18 hours"?
Only 2%. Most (34%) report they have only one to two hours of
electricity each day. With water, more were able to rely on basic
services: 81.8% state they receive "Municipal water/pipe grid" while
the next most common response (7.9%) was "Rivers, streams or lakes."
Returnees ranked their needs and 61% stated their most pressing need
was food.
The report finds:
While the total number of
returns in Iraq continues to slowly grow since the end of 2007, it
remains a small fraction of the total Iraqi IDP and refugee
populations. In the face of uncertain security improvements, the future
of return is also unsure. Many IDP families continue to say that they
are waiting for security to improve in order to return. IOM
returnee assessments show that 'pull' factors such as improved security
in place of origin are more encouraging of return than 'push' factors
such as difficult conditions in place of displacement. However, as
prolonged displacement makes life difficult for Iraq's internally
displaced and refugees, this could change. Returning home means
facing a new set of challenges for Iraqi families. 34% of IOM-assessed
returnee families report that they are able to work yet unemployed, 34%
returned to partially or completely destroyed property, and 75% have
less than 6 hours of electricity per day. In addition, the majority
were displaced for more than one year, meaning that they return
carrying the stress and financial debilitation of long-term
displacement.
UPI reports
Nouri al-Maliki and Oscar Fernandez-Taranco met in Baghdad today. Who
is Oscar Fernandez-Taranco? The envoy United Nations Secretary-General
Ban Ki-moon sent "to discuss Baghdad's concerns over foreign meddling
following deadly bombings in August and October." Strange that two
bombings (and Nouri stomping his feet) gets UN action when the non-stop
and ongoing assault on Christians doesn't. Deutsche Presse Agentur reports
that Iraqi MP Yonadam Kanna has "petitioned Sunni Muslim parliamentary
speaker Iyad al-Samarrai to formally request [. . .] an international
investigator to determine who was behind the killing of Iraqi
Christians that Iraqi Christians believe are designed to convince them
to leave their homes". Mohammad Alef Jamal (Gulf News) adds:
When
Iraqi Mandaeans are killed, an international committee is formed to
defend their community and when Iraqi Christians are killed or
expelled, the Pope appeals to the US President to provide protection
for them. This is because these groups follow religions that connect
them to other countries. But when Iraqi scientists and
intellectuals are killed, or when border villages are bombed by
neighbouring countries and the bodies of Iraqis are torn apart by
violent explosions, the only reaction seen is condemnation, calls for
immediate investigation, threats and random accusations -- even before
an investigation starts. This is followed by an exchange of
accusations between politicians about whose fault it is, and some
prominent figures are made scapegoats, solely for electoral reasons.
Violence has created the refugee crisis, the world's largest refugee crisis. Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
a Baghdad roadside bombing which injured two people, a Baquba roadside
bombing which claimed the lives of 2 police officers and left three
more wounded, a Mosul roadside bombing which claimed 1 life and left
two more people injured and a Mosul mortar attack which injured two
people.
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 judge was injured when he was shot not far from his Mosul home.
Ignore the violence, joy for the greedy. BBC News reports,
"Iraq's oil ministry has signed an initial agreement with a consortium
led by the Italian firm, ENI, to develop the Zubair oilfield in
southern Iraq. The deal, which needs cabinet approval, calls for the
group to extract 200,000 barrels of oil a day, rising to 1.1 million a
day within seven years." Meanwhile AP notes that the consortium of British Petroleum and China National Petroleum Company's successful bid has been finalized. Khalid a-Ansary and Jack Kimball (Reuters) report
that the Iraqi Parliament has informed Hussain al-Shahristani, the
country's Oil Minister, that he will be testifying before them November
11th on the "distribution of the nation's oil wealth" which has led to
Nouri al-Maliki to have another public fit, muttering about "evil
supporters of the past regime" and comparing the summons to "the last
bombings" (he is a drama queen).
Meanwhile the 163-year-old US
daily newspaper the Joplin Globe -- serving the south west sections of
Missouri -- offers the editorial "In our view: Time to get out of Iraq:"
In
our view, American military force no longer plays a role in Iraq other
than "peace-keeping." Someone must contain the violence over time to
allow democratic-like institutions to flourish. That should not be the
role of American military power; it must be done by Iraqi institutions
controlled solely by the Iraqi government. It is now time for a broad
and sustained military withdrawal of American military forces from
Iraq. Whatever American forces of any sort that remain should be paid
for exclusively by the Iraqi government. We can argue forever about the
wisdom of our invasion and presence in Iraq beginning in 2003. For
sure, Iraq cannot be allowed to become another Korea, where today
30,000 American troops are held hostage to a crazy North Korean regime
while "protecting" a rich and prosperous South Korea. Withdraw now the
120,000 military personnel from Iraq, Mr. President and Congress. Do it
as quickly as the safety of those troops will permit.
Why the
Globe and not the New York Times? Because the Globe actually is read by
families of the enlisted, therefore, it is aware that there is an
ongoing war and it is aware that the Iraq War directly effects their
readership.
US President Barack Obama could end the Iraq War
immediately . . . if he wanted to. He's the biggest road block at
present because he is, as Bully Boy Bush once so infamously put it,
"the decider." (Especially true when an apethetic news media has
largely moved away from the issue and a public's been lulled into false
dreams of peace.) Other things that aren't helpful would include (a)
the Iraqi government or 'government' and (b) the Pentagon and KBR.
Starting with the former, Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) interviews US Lt Gen Charles H. Jacoby Jr.:Are
you concerned that the elections on which your withdrawal timetable is
based may be delayed? The Iraqi parliament is deadlocked over an
election law, even though the deadline has long since passed. This
parliamentary election is a decisive point in the history of Iraq's
democracy, and it's also very important to the United States. We have a
stake in their success. Iraq has had increasingly better elections over
time. Of course we look forward to these elections. And so we're very
concerned that we're past the date that the Iraqis wanted to have an
election law, and that every day that goes by eats into the established
date for the election. Iraq has the opportunity to demonstrate that it
has a viable and credible democracy, and can be a model for the region.
There's lots of opportunity here and we don't want to miss these
opportunities by having this election drift. Would an election delay
also delay the plan to withdraw all U.S. combat forces by August 2010?
We do not think we are at the point where we are off our plan, but of
course we are going to watch this very carefully. Any decision to vary
from the plan is a policy decision that won't take place here. It's too
soon to say whether a potential delay in the election is a potential
delay in the withdrawal. Alsumaria notes
rumors that US pressure is expected to lead various parties to accept
the United Nations' recommendations on the legislation:To that, Kurds
decried the US pressure calling them to renounce their rights in the
city and that after announcing that US Vice President Joe Biden called
Kurdistan Governor Massoud Al Barazani in order to talk over the
obstructions hindering approving elections law. MP Mahmoud Othman told
Al Hayat Newspaper that endeavors of Senior US officials are means to
pressure Kurds in order to accept the suggested solutions though they
are unfair. The US behaviors are biased, Othman added.It is no secret
that this kind of pressure is expected considering the importance USA
gives for holding the lections on time. MP Khairallah Al Basri said
that failing to reach an accordance solution regarding elections' law
will urge the USA to interfere in order to impose solutions.Alsumaria
sources had said that the Legal committee suggested a draft law that
proposes to adopt open list and determines the parliament's seats
number. The law also stipulates using multi-divisions system and
appoints the number of seats for each division without mentioning
Kirkuk. However the relevant parties did not agree on this suggestion.Ali Karim (Asia Times) reports
the recents bombings are said, by some, to have an impact on their
votes and quotes MP Mithal al-Alosi stating, "I expect a low turnout in
the elections if matters go on this way. The wounds of Bloody Wednesday
have not healed yet and the Salehiya bombs have deepened those wounds."
Mithal Alusi was noted in yesterday's snapshot, he's the head of the
Iraqi Nation Party and he appeared as a guest on Al Jazeera's latest Inside Iraq which began broadcasting last Friday.AFP reports
that Faraj al-Haidari, head of the country's Independent High Electoral
Commission, declared on Al-Sharquiay TV today, "The electoral
commission held talks with the United Nations on Tuesday to discuss the
timetable. We must receive the law in the next two days, otherwise we
will be unable to hold the election on the scheduled date of January
16. There is material relating to the election, and international
companies need time to print it. Fifteen thousand polling stations have
to be made ready for the election, as do 50,000 personnel." UPI speaks with MP Mohammad Salman who states there are currently three options.
1)
Allow the voting to be based on an open-list (where voters know which
people they are voting for and not just a party).
2) Keep the voting to a closed-list (as was done in the 2005 elections).
3)
"[P]ostpone the elections for at least one legislative term to give
lawmakers the chance to vet all of their concerns."
Salman
states that "is the most likely route" but that at least 70 MPs from
the Kurdistan Alliance object to the third option. That's an important
point because the US continues to pressure tthe KRG to agree to . . .
well to anything that will get the bill passed. And many in the press
wrongly -- WRONGLY -- continue to state that the issue of oil-rich
Kirkuk (claimed by the KRG and by Baghdad) is the road block. It is a
road block and it is not just bad reporting to leave out the issue of
the lists, it is politically ignorant.
Any legislative body --
true of the US Congress as well as Iraq's Parliament -- makes decisions
based on their own interests -- especially when it comes to
re-election. Closed lists are thought by many MPs to mean they have a
better shot at re-election. Open-lists are feared. (Nouri al-Maliki and
Ayad al-Alawi are two who have spoken out publicly for open-lists.)
When the Parliament is so fearful that open-lists may mean they aren't
re-elected, that is an issue, that is a road block and it's repeatedly
set aside or forgotten in press accounts. There are three options, UPI
is told. Find where the MP (a Sunni) is at all concerned about the
issue of Kirkuk in his statements. What is he concerned about? Open and
closed lists.
So the Iraqi Parliament drags their feet and they aren't the only ones. At yesterday's
public hearing of the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and
Afghanistan, it was learned that the Defense Department had still not
submitted all the plans for the draw-down that's supposed to be on the
verge of taking place. Not only have they not submitted all of their
own plans, they're supervision of KBR is so lax that KBR's been allowed
to skip submitting a plan. As noted in yesterday's snapshot,
Commissioner Robert Henke attempted to get an answer from the
Pentagon's Lee Hamilton to this question: "If the president announces
on February 27, 2009 the draw-down plan and we're on November 2nd, is
it possible that the contractor hasn't provided you any plan to adjust
staff accordingly?" Despite attempting to walk Hamilton through slowly
(after Hamilton rambled on with a non-answer reply) and despite asking,
"How is that possible?", Henke never got anything that would pass for
an answer to his questions.This morning Jen Dimascio (Politico -- link has text and audio) reports:KBR,
the largest contractor in Iraq, is pulling out of that country so
slowly that it could end up costing American taxpayers $193 million
more than expected, according to a new Pentagon audit.Furthermore,
during a hearing Monday by the Commission on Wartime Contracting, a
legislative body set up to study contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan,
Commissioner Charles Tiefer said the company's plodding exit from Iraq
could cost even more -- up to $300 million.As noted in yesterday's
snapshot, that's only one portion of the story. Dimascio notes a quote
from Commissioner Dov Zakheim and you can see yesterday's snapshot for
that full exchange. From last night, Kat's "Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan"
covers the hearing and she shares some impression on Commissioner Chris
Shays hearing performance. But Dimascio covers one aspect of the big
news from yesterday's hearings -- and we did consider skipping it but
fortunately didn't because the Commission actually had their act
together yesterday (we is Kat, Ava, Wally
and myself) -- the other big news was the lack of completed plans.For
the Pentagon, that's especially appalling and it's either an issue of
insubordination or the White House isn't really serious about a
draw-down. For the Pentagon, the refusal to submit their own plans or
demand that KBR draw up their own is appalling. Thompson declared in
the hearing that he visited with KBR most recently on September 25th or
26th and they still had no plans -- and Thompson was neither surprised
nor worried about the lack of planning.
In the US, Noor Faleh Almaleki has died. The 20-year-old Iraqi woman was intentionally run over October 20th (see the October 21st snapshot)
while she and Amal Edan Khalaf were running errands (the latter is the
mother of Noor's boyfriend and she was left injured in the assault).
Police suspected Noor's father, Faleh Hassan Almaleki, of the assault
and stated the probable motive was that he felt Noor had become "too
westernized." As noted in the October 30th snapshot,
Faleh Hassan Almaleki was finally arrested after going on the lamb --
first to Mexico, then flying to London where British authorities
refused him entry and he was sent back to the US and arrested in
Atlanta. Karan Olson and CNN note that the judge has set the man's bail at $5 million. Philippe Naughton (Times of London) adds,
"Noor died yesterday, having failed to recover consciousness after the
attack. The other woman, Amal Khalaf, was also seriously injured but is
expected to survive. "Rachel Stockman and 12 News (link has text and video) supply
this timeline:October 20th -Around 2 p.m. Police say Faleh Almaleki ran
down his daughter, friend. -Around 5 p.m. Nlets Alert with Almaleki's
license plate and vehicle description goes out October 23rd -U.S.
Customs and Border Protection notified. Addressing the timeline, Rachel
Stockman reports, "They allowed the suspect to cross the border into
Mexico so we wanted to know where the communication broke down. What we
found? Nlets, the system Peoria police use to notify other authorities
is not something US Customs always checks." Dustin Gardiner (Arizona Republic) quotes:
prosecutor Stephanie Low stating of the father, "By his own admission,
this was an intentional act and the reason was that his daughter had
brought shame on him and his family. This was an attempt at an honor
killing." Iraqi American Romina Korkes offered her thoughts on the so-called 'honor' killing last week in a column for the Arizona Republic.
Women
are attacked daily around the world. The attacks are dismissed. A large
number of men seem to think it's okay -- and a significant number of
women must agree since we're not in the streets marching -- and that
goes a long way towards explaining Rory O'Connor's post at Media Channel -- a site not known for its 'inclusive' view of humanity (to put it mildly). Noting Alissa J. Rubin's opinion piece from Sunday's New York Times (we noted it in Friday's snapshot),
O'Connor goes on to rip her apart. Now let's be clear, Alissa J. Rubin
being a woman doesn't mean she can't be ripped apart nor are we
concerned about tone. She's never been good with math (we've called her
"teen queen" at this site) and she's been so wack that she's even been
called "crack whore" here. But what have we done that Rory O'Connor
doesn't? We've praised her, yes. She's earned a lot of praise over the
years here. But that's not it. He doesn't have to praise her and,
indeed, he may not find anything worth praising in her writing. That is
his opinion.
But where there's a problem is that Alissa J. Rubin
was never the paper's problem. On her bad days, she jumbled the numbers
and was too quick to believe things she shouldn't have (such as the
"Awakenings" being universally embraced in areas they 'patrolled' or
'terrorized'). Her worst day never found her as bad as John F. Burns or
Dexter Filkins. I'm not seeing their names mentioned by Rory. Those are
the two worst offenders for what he's demanding (truth). But they don't
get called out. It's really strange that so few women have worked in
Baghdad for the New York Times (others include Cara Buckley, Sabrina
Tavernise, Erica Goode and, of course, Judith Miller) but they're
always the ones being ripped apart. Not the males. The issue isn't that
he called Rubin out. He's allowed to. He can loathe her and rip her
apart. The issue is that we haven't seen that same standard applied to
men.
This is the Judith Miller effect, the bash the bitch craze,
we've long documented here. Judith Miller did not start a war. Judith
Miller was not responsible for the entire media landscape. She did not
twist the arms of PBS and NBC and Oprah to get air time. Those people
wanted her on their shows. She did not twist arms at the paper to land
on the front page, the paper wanted her on the front page. Judith
Miller was so WRONG about the Iraq War but she wasn't a liar -- at
least not on the big issue. She honestly believed their were WMD in
Iraq, that's why she commandeered a squadron while stationed in Iraq.
She's a lousy reporter, her 'facts' do not hold up. She needs to be
held accountable. But she often had co-writers -- such as Michael R.
Gordon who remains at the paper and who spent the second Bush term
advocating for war on Iran. Judith Miller was a reporter for one of the
top three papers in the country (at that time). If you saw her on TV,
she was invited on. If you heard her on radio, she was invited on. If
you read her in another paper, a decision was made to print her
article. It took a lot of people echoing the government (not all of
whom believed the lies the way Miller did) to start the war on Iraq, to
lie to the people. Miller was one person. Hold her accountable, no
question, but what about all the others?
The pleasing lie
(pleasing to a lot of members of the press corps) is that Judith
Miller, all by herself, lied the nation into war. Judith Miller and
others like her helped the US get into Iraq but grasp that Dexter Filkins and John F. Burns
kept the US in Iraq. There are some who will kiss Dexy's butt because
of those bad, BAD, college campus appearances where he talks about (and
has done this for several years now) about how the Iraq War is lost and
how they knew it then and blah, blah, blah. That might have mattered.
If he'd done it in real time. But in real time, he was lying. In real
time, he was taking orders from the military -- as Molly Bingham
long ago explained, Dexy even cancelled a meeting with the Iraqi
resistance when US military brass frowned. In real time, Dexy let the
US military vet his copy. That's reality. His award winning 'reporting'?
Vetted by the US military. Vetted and delayed while it was vetted which
is why the paper ran it so many days after it was written.
I
have no problem with Judith Miller being called out -- and I've called
her out myself. But, look through the archvies, we've called out women
and we've called out men. We haven't worried about tone but we've made
damn sure that people were treated fairly -- even if that just meant
that abuse was heaped on equally.
I'm glad that someone at Media Channel remembered there is a war in Iraq and I'm glad that Rory O'Connor wrote with fire.
But I'm also aware that Alissa J. Rubin, graded on any scale, qualifies
as one of the better reporters the paper's had in Iraq. And I'm also
aware that MediaChannel is more than happy to go after Katie Couric or
any other woman but I find very little in efforts to praise women or to
link to them. (Until O'Connor's column, which I heard about from a
friend at the Times, I haven't visited MediaChannel since the efforts
to distort Marcia's
writing.) And if Alissa J. Rubin was Alan J. Rubin, I have to wonder
whether or not MediaChannel would even be weighing in? Again, it's been
a long, long time since they've made it known that they're aware of the
Iraq War.
This isn't a minor issue -- not the silence on Iraq or
the attacks on women. And, repeating, it's not about tone. It's about
fairness. We've ridiculed many women here and will do so again and
again and again. But we don't go to town on a woman and refuse to on
men. Todd S. Purdum is a better writer at Vanity Fair than he was at
the Times -- that has to do with the differing role, the fact that he
can write longer at Van Fair and the differences between the outlets.
But we went to town on Todd (who I know offline) and did so because his
work was as appalling as Elisabeth Bumiller's columns (run in the news
section but they were columns) at that time. (Bumiller's done some
strong reporting in the last few years.) We went to town on her, we
went to town on Todd. And the fact that I knew him didn't prevent that
nor did the fact that he was a man make me think, "I shouldn't
criticize." But there's a real locker room mentality among the online
critics where a man gets a pass and another one and another one and,
okay, let's make it about the work. But a woman gets ripped apart. The
ripping apart doesn't bother me . . . if it's applied to both.
We've linked to Rory before and we'll link to his post today one more time.
But it's really past time that a lot of online critics took a look what
they were doing. I'm not suggesting anyone change their style or tone
or make nice. I am suggesting that they make sure they treat people the
same -- regardless of gender. I do not believe Alissa J. Rubin was
treated the same as a male reporter would have been. I could be wrong,
I often am. But I'm saying my call on that goes to pattern:
MediaChannel's emphasis and the climate online.
Kat's "Kat's Korner: Carly Simon's warm benediction" is a review of Carly Simon's
just released Never Been Gone. Carly is one of America's most gifted
songwriter and one whose work has changed the landscape. She's also one
of the surest of singers and for the latest project, she's re-imaging
songs from her amazing canon of work. She explained to Dean Goodman (Reuters) that she was hestitant to include her classic "You're So Vain" until she heard the cover Susanna Hoffs and Matthew Sweet did earlier this year on Under The Covers Vol. II (which Kat reviewed here) "and I thought, 'Well if they can do it, I can do it!" And as Ty noted in the roundtable at Third Sunday, "Still on the subject of Carly Simon, Bill, who runs Carly Simon Conversations, recommends this Day Trotter article on Carly Simon's concert, last week at Lincoln Center, this blog post on the concert and this video of 'Touched By The Sun'." The Day Trotter article contains video clips of Carly's concert last week.
Finally, independent reporter David Bacon remains one of the few remaining labor reporters in the country. (And he can be heard on KPFA's The Morning Show each Wednesday morning -- the program begins airing at 7:00 a.m. PST and streams online.) His latest report is "San Diego -- Land of Day Laborers, Farm Workers and Guest Workers"
(21st Century Manifesto):In Oceanside, Carlsbad, Del Mar and north San
Diego County, immigrant day laborers wait by the side of the road,
hoping a contractor will stop and offer them work. Alberto Juarez
Martinez slings his jacket over his shoulder while he waits. His hands
show the effect of a lifetime of manual work, plus arthritis suffered
as a child in Zapata, Zacatecas. The hands of Beto, a migrant from
Uruachi, Chihuahua, also show the effect of a lifetime of manual work.
Juan Castillo, a migrant from Tehuacan, Puebla, waits with his friends
in the parking lot of a market they've nicknamed La Gallinita, because
of the rooster on the roof of the building. Police in north county
towns have now started cruising by day labor sites in plainclothes,
pretending to be contractors offering workers jobs, and then citing
them and turning them over to immigration agents, even those with green
cards Many community organizations are protesting this
practice.Francisco Villa operates a lunch truck that visits the areas
where migrant day laborers live on hillsides and under trees. Villa
hands out leaflets advising workers of their rights and letting them
know that they can find help from California Rural Legal Assistance.
Across the street from Villa's truck, Zaragosa Brito and Andres Roman
Diaz, two migrants from Arcelia, Guerrero, sit next to a fence where
workers look for day labor, or get rides to the fields for farm work.
The men sleep out in the open in the field behind the fence, and have
worked on a local strawberry ranch, Rancho Diablo, for many years.David Bacon's latest book is Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press) which has won the CLR James Award.iraqcnnkaran olsonphilippe naughtonthe times of londonrachel stockmanthe arizona republicdustin gardinerromina korkasmcclatchy newspaperslaith hammoudithe joplin globethe los angeles timesliz slyalsumariapoliticojen dimasciothe new york timesalissa j. rubincarly simonmatthew sweetsusanna hoffsdavid baconkpfathe morning show
Posted at 04:44 pm by cedricsbigmix
Permalink
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills)
Tuesday,
Novemer 3, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, IOM releases a study on
internal refugees in Iraq who have returned to their former homes,
still no election law in Iraq (and the pretense that Kirkuk is the big
hold up continues), a man goes to town on a NYT reporter online so we know the reporter must be a woman, and more. Today
the International Organization for Migration [IOM] released their
latest report on internal Iraqi refugees [PDF format warning] entitled " Assessment of Return to Iraq:"
The report note the low rate of return (external refugees coming back
to Iraq) and focuses on the 1.6 million estimated interal refugees and
what the desires of this vulnerable population are. The report notes
that IOM spoke with "4,061 families (24,366 individuals)" while
assessing needs. The bulk of the internally displaced hail from Baghdad (nearly 90%). From the report: *
The majority of identified returnees (33,521 families, or 58%) have
returned to Baghdad governorate, while a significant proportion has
also been identified in Diyala and Anbar. *
54,451 of the returnees identified (94%) have returned from internal
displacement, while the remaining 3,659 identified families (6%) have
returned from abroad. *
Almost 90% of IOM-assessed post-Samarra IDPs were displaced from
Baghdad, diyala, and Ninewa, and almost 79% of identified returns are
also located in these three governorates. The report notes the top six reasons IDPs give for their displacement are: Direct threats to life (29.1%) Left out of fear (21.7%) Generalized violence (16.5%) Forced displacement from property (7.6%) Ethnic/religious/political discrimination (5.9%) Armed conflict (5.0%) The
report notes that those who are returning often cite "harsh conditions
in displacement" as one of the reasons they have returned (exampele
include "high rent, lack of employment opportunities, poor shelter and
lack of basic services"). The second and third categories can be
combined: "Improved security in area of origin and very difficult
conditions in displacement" and "Very difficult conditions in
displacement". If you combine the two than 45.46% of those who have
returned are citing "very difficult conditions in displacement"
regions. Those returning to Baghdad cite "former employment,
transporation assistance, repair of damaged homes and property, and
renewed access to basic services" as their reasons. 38% of those who
have returned to their former homes "reported feeling safe only some of
the time." In addition, 42.5% of returnees in Anbar, Baghdad, Diyala
and Kirkuk report that "their homes are partially or completely
destroyed. In addition, 50% of returnees in these governorates no
longer have their movable property, such as cars, due to loss or
theft." Of those returning to
their former homes across Iraq, Arab Shia Muslims make up the largest
percent (49.4%), followed by Arab Sunni Muslim (31.0%), Turkmen Sunni
Muslim (9.7%) and Christians (8.9%). (Kurd Shia Muslim, Kurd Sunni
Muslim and Other each account for less than one percent.) Of those who
remain internally displaced, the highest percent is (again) Arab Shia
(58.4%) followed by Arab Sunni Muslim (29.3%) with Christians and Kurd
Sunni Muslim next (each at 4.4%), followed by Other (4.0%) and Kurd
Shia Muslim (0.7%). IOM's report also provides a gender breakdown for
heads of household of returnees: 12% are female-headed households and
88% of returnees are male-headed housholds (and 35% of the 88% cannot
find work). The study found, "Among assessed returnee female-headed
households, food is consistently identified as a priority need (60%
across Iraq) along with non-food itmes (NFIs) and fueld. In Baghdad,
health and sanitation are major concerns for interviewed female-headed
households. Access to legal help was also a serious issue, particularly
in Diyala and Ninewa governorates." Breaking down employment for
returnee heads of household; 69.7% of females heading households are
unable to work contrasted with 15.4% of the male heads of household;
4.7% of female heads of household are employed contrasted with 50.1% of
male heads of household, and 25.7% of female heads of household are
able to work but unable to find employment contrasted with 34.5% of
male heads of household in the same situation. Returnees
were asked about basic services as well (remember, the bulk live in
Baghdad). How many have electricity each day for "More than 18
hours"? Only 2%. Most (34%) report they have only one to two hours of
electricity each day. With water, more were able to rely on basic
services: 81.8% state they receive "Municipal water/pipe grid" while
the next most common response (7.9%) was "Rivers, streams or lakes."
Returnees ranked their needs and 61% stated their most pressing need
was food. The report finds: While
the total number of returns in Iraq continues to slowly grow since the
end of 2007, it remains a small fraction of the total Iraqi IDP and
refugee populations. In the face of uncertain security improvements,
the future of return is also unsure. Many IDP families continue to say
that they are waiting for security to improve in order to return. IOM
returnee assessments show that 'pull' factors such as improved security
in place of origin are more encouraging of return than 'push' factors
such as difficult conditions in place of displacement. However, as
prolonged displacement makes life difficult for Iraq's internally
displaced and refugees, this could change. Returning
home means facing a new set of challenges for Iraqi families. 34% of
IOM-assessed returnee families report that they are able to work yet
unemployed, 34% returned to partially or completely destroyed property,
and 75% have less than 6 hours of electricity per day. In addition, the
majority were displaced for more than one year, meaning that they
return carrying the stress and financial debilitation of long-term
displacement. UPI reports
Nouri al-Maliki and Oscar Fernandez-Taranco met in Baghdad today. Who
is Oscar Fernandez-Taranco? The envoy United Nations Secretary-General
Ban Ki-moon sent "to discuss Baghdad's concerns over foreign meddling
following deadly bombings in August and October." Strange that two
bombings (and Nouri stomping his feet) gets UN action when the non-stop
and ongoing assault on Christians doesn't. Deutsche Presse Agentur reports
that Iraqi MP Yonadam Kanna has "petitioned Sunni Muslim parliamentary
speaker Iyad al-Samarrai to formally request [. . .] an international
investigator to determine who was behind the killing of Iraqi
Christians that Iraqi Christians believe are designed to convince them
to leave their homes". Mohammad Alef Jamal (Gulf News) adds: When
Iraqi Mandaeans are killed, an international committee is formed to
defend their community and when Iraqi Christians are killed or
expelled, the Pope appeals to the US President to provide protection
for them. This is because these groups follow religions that connect
them to other countries. But
when Iraqi scientists and intellectuals are killed, or when border
villages are bombed by neighbouring countries and the bodies of Iraqis
are torn apart by violent explosions, the only reaction seen is
condemnation, calls for immediate investigation, threats and random
accusations -- even before an investigation starts. This
is followed by an exchange of accusations between politicians about
whose fault it is, and some prominent figures are made scapegoats,
solely for electoral reasons. Bombings? Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a
Baghdad roadside bombing which injured two people, a Baquba roadside
bombing which claimed the lives of 2 police officers and left three
more wounded, a Mosul roadside bombing which claimed 1 life and left
two more people injured and a Mosul mortar attack which injured two
people. Shootings? Ignore the violence, joy for the greedy. BBC News reports,
"Iraq's oil ministry has signed an initial agreement with a consortium
led by the Italian firm, ENI, to develop the Zubair oilfield in
southern Iraq. The deal, which needs cabinet approval, calls for the
group to extract 200,000 barrels of oil a day, rising to 1.1 million a
day within seven years." Meanwhile AP notes that the consortium of British Petroleum and China National Petroleum Company's successful bid has been finalized. Khalid a-Ansary and Jack Kimball (Reuters) report
that the Iraqi Parliament has informed Hussain al-Shahristani, the
country's Oil Minister, that he will be testifying before them November
11th on the "distribution of the nation's oil wealth" which has led to
Nouri al-Maliki to have another public fit, muttering about "evil
supporters of the past regime" and comparing the summons to "the last
bombings" (he is a drama queen). In
our view, American military force no longer plays a role in Iraq other
than "peace-keeping." Someone must contain the violence over time to
allow democratic-like institutions to flourish. That should not be the
role of American military power; it must be done by Iraqi institutions
controlled solely by the Iraqi
government. It
is now time for a broad and sustained military withdrawal of American
military forces from Iraq. Whatever American forces of any sort that
remain should be paid for exclusively by the Iraqi
government. We
can argue forever about the wisdom of our invasion and presence in Iraq
beginning in 2003. For sure, Iraq cannot be allowed to become another
Korea, where today 30,000 American troops are held hostage to a crazy
North Korean regime while "protecting" a rich and prosperous South
Korea. Withdraw
now the 120,000 military personnel from Iraq, Mr. President and
Congress. Do it as quickly as the safety of those troops will
permit. Why the Globe and not the New York Times?
Because the Globe actually is read by families of the enlisted,
therefore, it is aware that there is an ongoing war and it is aware
that the Iraq War directly effects their readership. US
President Barack Obama could end the Iraq War immediately . . . if he
wanted to. He's the biggest road block at present because he is, as
Bully Boy Bush once so infamously put it, "the decider." (Especially
true when an apethetic news media has largely moved away from the issue
and a public's been lulled into false dreams of peace.) Other things
that aren't helpful would include (a) the Iraqi government or
'government' and (b) the Pentagon and KBR. Starting with the former, Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) interviews US Lt Gen Charles H. Jacoby Jr.: Are
you concerned that the elections on which your withdrawal timetable is
based may be delayed? The Iraqi parliament is deadlocked over an
election law, even though the deadline has long since
passed. This
parliamentary election is a decisive point in the history of Iraq's
democracy, and it's also very important to the United States. We have a
stake in their success. Iraq has had increasingly better elections over
time. Of course we look forward to these elections. And so we're very
concerned that we're past the date that the Iraqis wanted to have an
election law, and that every day that goes by eats into the established
date for the election. Iraq has the opportunity to demonstrate that it
has a viable and credible democracy, and can be a model for the region.
There's lots of opportunity here and we don't want to miss these
opportunities by having this election drift. Would an election delay also delay the plan to withdraw all U.S. combat forces by August 2010? We
do not think we are at the point where we are off our plan, but of
course we are going to watch this very carefully. Any decision to vary
from the plan is a policy decision that won't take place here. It's too
soon to say whether a potential delay in the election is a potential
delay in the withdrawal. Alsumaria notes rumors that US pressure is expected to lead various parties to accept the United Nations' recommendations on the legislation: To
that, Kurds decried the US pressure calling them to renounce their
rights in the city and that after announcing that US Vice President Joe
Biden called Kurdistan Governor Massoud Al Barazani in order to talk
over the obstructions hindering approving elections law. MP Mahmoud
Othman told Al Hayat Newspaper that endeavors of Senior US officials
are means to pressure Kurds in order to accept the suggested solutions
though they are unfair. The US behaviors are biased, Othman added.It
is no secret that this kind of pressure is expected considering the
importance USA gives for holding the lections on time. MP Khairallah Al
Basri said that failing to reach an accordance solution regarding
elections' law will urge the USA to interfere in order to impose
solutions.Alsumaria sources
had said that the Legal committee suggested a draft law that proposes
to adopt open list and determines the parliament's seats number. The
law also stipulates using multi-divisions system and appoints the
number of seats for each division without mentioning Kirkuk. However
the relevant parties did not agree on this suggestion.Ali Karim (Asia Times) reports
the recents bombings are said, by some, to have an impact on their
votes and quotes MP Mithal al-Alosi stating, "I expect a low turnout in
the elections if matters go on this way. The wounds of Bloody Wednesday
have not healed yet and the Salehiya bombs have deepened those wounds."
Mithal Alusi was noted in yesterday's snapshot, he's the head of the
Iraqi Nation Party and he appeared as a guest on Al Jazeera's latest Inside Iraq which began broadcasting last Friday. AFP reports
that Faraj al-Haidari, head of the country's Independent High Electoral
Commission, declared on Al-Sharquiay TV today, "The electoral
commission held talks with the United Nations on Tuesday to discuss the
timetable. We must receive the law in the next two days, otherwise we
will be unable to hold the election on the scheduled date of January
16. There is material relating to the election, and international
companies need time to print it. Fifteen thousand polling stations have
to be made ready for the election, as do 50,000 personnel." UPI speaks with MP Mohammad Salman who states there are currently three options. 1) Allow the voting to be based on an open-list (where voters know which people they are voting for and not just a party). 2) Keep the voting to a closed-list (as was done in the 2005 elections). 3) "[P]ostpone the elections for at least one legislative term to give lawmakers the chance to vet all of their concerns."
Salman
states that "is the most likely route" but that at least 70 MPs from
the Kurdistan Alliance object to the third option. That's an important
point because the US continues to pressure tthe KRG to agree to . . .
well to anything that will get the bill passed. And many in the press
wrongly -- WRONGLY -- continue to state that the issue of oil-rich
Kirkuk (claimed by the KRG and by Baghdad) is the road block. It is a
road block and it is not just bad reporting to leave out the issue of
the lists, it is politically ignorant. Any
legislative body -- true of the US Congress as well as Iraq's
Parliament -- makes decisions based on their own interests --
especially when it comes to re-election. Closed lists are thought by
many MPs to mean they have a better shot at re-election. Open-lists
are feared. (Nouri al-Maliki and Ayad al-Alawi are two who have spoken
out publicly for open-lists.) When the Parliament is so fearful that
open-lists may mean they aren't re-elected, that is an issue, that is a
road block and it's repeatedly set aside or forgotten in press
accounts. There are three options, UPI is told. Find where
the MP (a Sunni) is at all concerned about the issue of Kirkuk in his
statements. What is he concerned about? Open and closed lists. So the Iraqi Parliament drags their feet and they aren't the only ones. At yesterday's
public hearing of the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and
Afghanistan, it was learned that the Defense Department had still not
submitted all the plans for the draw-down that's supposed to be on the
verge of taking place. Not only have they not submitted all of their
own plans, they're supervision of KBR is so lax that KBR's been allowed
to skip submitting a plan. As noted in yesterday's snapshot,
Commissioner Robert Henke attempted to get an answer from the
Pentagon's Lee Hamilton to this question: "If the president announces
on February 27, 2009 the draw-down plan and we're on November 2nd, is
it possible that the contractor hasn't provided you any plan to adjust
staff accordingly?" Despite attempting to walk Hamilton through slowly
(after Hamilton rambled on with a non-answer reply) and despite asking,
"How is that possible?", Henke never got anything that would pass for
an answer to his questions. This morning Jen Dimascio (Politico -- link has text and audio) reports: KBR,
the largest contractor in Iraq, is pulling out of that country so
slowly that it could end up costing American taxpayers $193 million
more than expected, according to a new Pentagon audit.Furthermore,
during a hearing Monday by the Commission on Wartime Contracting, a
legislative body set up to study contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan,
Commissioner Charles Tiefer said the company's plodding exit from Iraq
could cost even more -- up to $300 million.As noted in
yesterday's snapshot, that's only one portion of the story. Dimascio
notes a quote from Commissioner Dov Zakheim and you can see yesterday's
snapshot for that full exchange. From last night, Kat's " Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan"
covers the hearing and she shares some impression on Commissioner Chris
Shays hearing performance. But Dimascio covers one aspect of the big
news from yesterday's hearings -- and we did consider skipping it but
fortunately didn't because the Commission actually had their act
together yesterday (we is Kat, Ava, Wally and myself) -- the other big news was the lack of completed plans. For
the Pentagon, that's especially appalling and it's either an issue of
insubordination or the White House isn't really serious about a
draw-down. For the Pentagon, the refusal to submit their own plans or
demand that KBR draw up their own is appalling. Thompson declared in
the hearing that he visited with KBR most recently on September 25th or
26th and they still had no plans -- and Thompson was neither surprised
nor worried about the lack of planning. In the US, Noor Faleh Almaleki has died. The 20-year-old Iraqi woman was intentionally run over October 20th (see the October 21st snapshot)
while she and Amal Edan Khalaf were running errands (the latter is the
mother of Noor's boyfriend and she was left injured in the assault).
Police suspected Noor's father, Faleh Hassan Almaleki, of the assault
and stated the probable motive was that he felt Noor had become "too
westernized." As noted in the October 30th snapshot,
Faleh Hassan Almaleki was finally arrested after going on the lamb --
first to Mexico, then flying to London where British authorities
refused him entry and he was sent back to the US and arrested in
Atlanta. Karan Olson and CNN note that the judge has set the man's bail at $5 million. Philippe Naughton (Times of London) adds,
"Noor died yesterday, having failed to recover consciousness after the
attack. The other woman, Amal Khalaf, was also seriously injured but is
expected to survive. " Rachel Stockman and 12 News (link has text and video) supply this timeline: October 20th -Around 2 p.m. Police say Faleh Almaleki ran down his daughter, friend. -Around 5 p.m. Nlets Alert with Almaleki's license plate and vehicle description goes out October 23rd -U.S. Customs and Border Protection notified. Addressing
the timeline, Rachel Stockman reports, "They allowed the suspect to
cross the border into Mexico so we wanted to know where the
communication broke down. What we found? Nlets, the system Peoria
police use to notify other authorities is not something US Customs
always checks." Dustin Gardiner (Arizona Republic) quotes:
prosecutor Stephanie Low stating of the father, "By his own admission,
this was an intentional act and the reason was that his daughter had
brought shame on him and his family. This was an attempt at an honor
killing." Iraqi American Romina Korkes offered her thoughts on the so-called 'honor' killing last week in a column for the Arizona Republic. Women
are attacked daily around the world. The attacks are dismissed. A
large number of men seem to think it's okay -- and a significant number
of women must agree since we're not in the streets marching -- and that
goes a long way towards explaining Rory O'Connor's post at Media Channel -- a site not known for its 'inclusive' view of humanity (to put it mildly). Noting Alissa J. Rubin's opinion piece from Sunday's New York Times (we noted it in Friday's snapshot),
O'Connor goes on to rip her apart. Now let's be clear, Alissa J. Rubin
being a woman doesn't mean she can't be ripped apart nor are we
concerned about tone. She's never been good with math (we've called
her "teen queen" at this site) and she's been so wack that she's even
been called "crack whore" here. But what have we done that Rory
O'Connor doesn't? We've praised her, yes. She's earned a lot of
praise over the years here. But that's not it. He doesn't have to
praise her and, indeed, he may not find anything worth praising in her
writing. That is his opinion. But where
there's a problem is that Alissa J. Rubin was never the paper's
problem. On her bad days, she jumbled the numbers and was too quick to
believe things she shouldn't have (such as the "Awakenings" being
universally embraced in areas they 'patrolled' or 'terrorized'). Her
worst day never found her as bad as John F. Burns or Dexter Filkins.
I'm not seeing their names mentioned by Rory. Those are the two worst
offenders for what he's demanding (truth). But they don't get called
out. It's really strange that so few women have worked in Baghdad for
the New York Times (others include Cara Buckley, Sabrina
Tavernise, Erica Goode and, of course, Judith Miller) but they're
always the ones being ripped apart. Not the males. The issue isn't
that he called Rubin out. He's allowed to. He can loathe her and rip
her apart. The issue is that we haven't seen that same standard
applied to men. This is the Judith Miller
effect, the bash the bitch craze, we've long documented here. Judith
Miller did not start a war. Judith Miller was not responsible for the
entire media landscape. She did not twist the arms of PBS and NBC and
Oprah to get air time. Those people wanted her on their shows. She
did not twist arms at the paper to land on the front page, the paper
wanted her on the front page. Judith Miller was so WRONG about the
Iraq War but she wasn't a liar -- at least not on the big issue. She
honestly believed their were WMD in Iraq, that's why she commandeered a
squadron while stationed in Iraq. She's a lousy reporter, her 'facts'
do not hold up. She needs to be held accountable. But she often had
co-writers -- such as Michael R. Gordon who remains at the paper and
who spent the second Bush term advocating for war on Iran. Judith
Miller was a reporter for one of the top three papers in the country
(at that time). If you saw her on TV, she was invited on. If you
heard her on radio, she was invited on. If you read her in another
paper, a decision was made to print her article. It took a lot of
people echoing the government (not all of whom believed the lies the
way Miller did) to start the war on Iraq, to lie to the people. Miller
was one person. Hold her accountable, no question, but what about all
the others? The pleasing lie (pleasing to a
lot of members of the press corps) is that Judith Miller, all by
herself, lied the nation into war. Judith Miller and others like her
helped the US get into Iraq but grasp that Dexter Filkins and John F. Burns
kept the US in Iraq. There are some who will kiss Dexy's butt because
of those bad, BAD, college campus appearances where he talks about (and
has done this for several years now) about how the Iraq War is lost and
how they knew it then and blah, blah, blah. That might have mattered.
If he'd done it in real time. But in real time, he was lying. In real
time, he was taking orders from the military -- as Molly Bingham
long ago explained, Dexy even cancelled a meeting with the Iraqi
resistance when US military brass frowned. In real time, Dexy let the
US military vet his copy. That's reality. His award winning 'reporting'?
Vetted by the US military. Vetted and delayed while it was vetted which
is why the paper ran it so many days after it was written. I
have no problem with Judith Miller being called out -- and I've called
her out myself. But, look through the archvies, we've called out women
and we've called out men. We haven't worried about tone but we've made
damn sure that people were treated fairly -- even if that just meant
that abuse was heaped on equally. I'm glad that someone at Media Channel remembered there is a war in Iraq and I'm glad that Rory O'Connor wrote with fire.
But I'm also aware that Alissa J. Rubin, graded on any scale, qualifies
as one of the better reporters the paper's had in Iraq. And I'm also
aware that MediaChannel is more than happy to go after Katie Couric or
any other woman but I find very little in efforts to praise women or to
link to them. (Until O'Connor's column, which I heard about from a
friend at the Times, I haven't visited MediaChannel since the efforts to distort Marcia's
writing.) And if Alissa J. Rubin was Alan J. Rubin, I have to wonder
whether or not MediaChannel would even be weighing in? Again, it's
been a long, long time since they've made it known that they're aware
of the Iraq War. This isn't a minor issue --
not the silence on Iraq or the attacks on women. And, repeating, it's
not about tone. It's about fairness. We've ridiculed many women here
and will do so again and again and again. But we don't go to town on a
woman and refuse to on men. Todd S. Purdum is a better writer at Vanity Fair than he was at the Times -- that has to do with the differing role, the fact that he can write longer at Van Fair
and the differences between the outlets. But we went to town on Todd
(who I know offline) and did so because his work was as appalling as
Elisabeth Bumiller's columns (run in the news section but they were
columns) at that time. (Bumiller's done some strong reporting in the
last few years.) We went to town on her, we went to town on Todd. And
the fact that I knew him didn't prevent that nor did the fact that he
was a man make me think, "I shouldn't criticize." But there's a real
locker room mentality among the online critics where a man gets a pass
and another one and another one and, okay, let's make it about the
work. But a woman gets ripped apart. The ripping apart doesn't bother
me . . . if it's applied to both. We've linked to Rory before and we'll link to his post today one more time.
But it's really past time that a lot of online critics took a look what
they were doing. I'm not suggesting anyone change their style or tone
or make nice. I am suggesting that they make sure they treat people the
same -- regardless of gender. I do not believe Alissa J. Rubin was
treated the same as a male reporter would have been. I could be wrong,
I often am. But I'm saying my call on that goes to pattern:
MediaChannel's emphasis and the climate online. Finally, independent reporter David Bacon remains one of the few remaining labor reporters in the country. (And he can be heard on KPFA's The Morning Show each Wednesday morning -- the program begins airing at 7:00 a.m. PST and streams online.) His latest report is " San Diego -- Land of Day Laborers, Farm Workers and Guest Workers" ( 21st Century Manifesto): In
Oceanside, Carlsbad, Del Mar and north San Diego County, immigrant day
laborers wait by the side of the road, hoping a contractor will stop
and offer them work. Alberto Juarez Martinez slings his jacket over his
shoulder while he waits. His hands show the effect of a lifetime of
manual work, plus arthritis suffered as a child in Zapata, Zacatecas.
The hands of Beto, a migrant from Uruachi, Chihuahua, also show the
effect of a lifetime of manual work. Juan Castillo, a migrant from
Tehuacan, Puebla, waits with his friends in the parking lot of a market
they've nicknamed La Gallinita, because of the rooster on the roof of
the building. Police in
north county towns have now started cruising by day labor sites in
plainclothes, pretending to be contractors offering workers jobs, and
then citing them and turning them over to immigration agents, even
those with green cards Many community organizations are protesting this
practice.Francisco Villa
operates a lunch truck that visits the areas where migrant day laborers
live on hillsides and under trees. Villa hands out leaflets advising
workers of their rights and letting them know that they can find help
from California Rural Legal Assistance. Across the street from Villa's
truck, Zaragosa Brito and Andres Roman Diaz, two migrants from Arcelia,
Guerrero, sit next to a fence where workers look for day labor, or get
rides to the fields for farm work. The men sleep out in the open in the
field behind the fence, and have worked on a local strawberry ranch,
Rancho Diablo, for many years.David Bacon's latest book is Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press) which has won the CLR James Award.
Posted at 10:57 am by cedricsbigmix
Permalink
Nov 3, 2009
BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLELIKE MANY A FAILED STARLET, BARRY O HAS HAD TO DOWNGRADE HIS AMBITIONS. TOMORROW NIGHT, HIS LATEST SOFT CORE PORN DEBUTS ON HBO OR, AS THEY LIKE TO CALL IT, HUSSEIN BARACK OBAMA. TO MAKE A DIRECT TO CABLE OFFERING, HE NEEDED ANOTHER DOWN ON THEIR LUCK CELEB: ENTER EDWARD NORTON.
HE HASN'T DRIVEN A BOX OFFICE HIT SINCE 2003 WITH THE ITALIAN JOB ($106
MILLION). EVER SINCE, NOTHING BUT FLOPS AND 11TH BILLED (KINGDOM OF
HEAVEN) OR SPECIAL EFFECTS UPSTAGING ANY POTENTIAL AT ACTING (THE
INCREDIBLE HULK). TOMORROW NIGHT, THE TWO OF THEM FIND OUT IF THEIR NEXT STOP IS HOME SHOPPING NETWORK OR BROADCAST TV. FROM THE TCI WIRE:The first (partial) week of October saw 5 people reported dead and 24 reported wounded, the second week (October 4th through 10th) saw 46 reported dead and 131 injured, the third week (October 11th through 17th) saw 89 reported dead and 336 reported wounded, the fourth week (October 18th through 24th) saw 53 reported dead and 107 reported wounded, and the fifth week (October 25th through October 31st) saw 191 reported dead and 580 reported injured. Totals? 384 reported dead and 1106 reported wounded. At least. Michael Christie and Michael Roddy (Reuters) cite "security sources" for the toll of 343 people killed. Barbara Surk (AP) reports that AP's count for October is 364 killed. John Leland (New York Times) reports,
"In October, 453 Iraqi civilians and security personnel were killed, an
increase from a monthly low this year of 279 in September but
considerably below the high of 677 in April, according to the Interior
Ministry. The statistics do not count deaths in the northern Kurdish
region." 8 US service members were announced dead in Iraq during the month of October. Today the US military announced
another death: "FORWARD OPERATING BASE KALSU, Iraq -- A Multi-National
Corps -- Iraq Soldier died Nov. 2 of non-combat related injuries.
Release of the Soldier's identity is being with held pending
notification of the next of kin. The name of the deceased service
member will be announced through the U.S. Department of Defense Official Web site
[. . .] 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 currently under investigation." Maloy Moore (Los Angeles Times) reports
that the fallen was 20-year-old Lukas C. Hopper of Merced, California
who "is survived by his mother and father, Robin and Yancy Hopper, both
of Merced." The announcement brings to 4356 the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war. [ . . .] Appearing October 21st before the US House Armed Services Committee,
the Pentagon's Michele Flournoy was asked of the delays in Iraq passing
an election law.Michele Flournoy: Uh, let me start by saying, you know,
the draw-down plan that we have, is conditions based and it creates
multiple decision points for re-evaluating and, if necessary, changing
our plans based on developments on the ground. Although the government
of Iraq's self-imposed deadline of October 15th for passing the
elections law has passed, we judge that the COR [Council Of
Representatives] still has another week or two to come to some kind of
an agreement on the elections law before it will put the January date
-- the early January date -- in jeopardy in terms of the election
commission's ability to actually physically execute the, uh, the
election. If a new law with open lists is not passed, the fall back
solution for them is to return to the 2005 election law which is based
on a closed list system. But that could be used for upcoming elections,
the COR would simply have to vote on an election date. If that law is
not passed in the next two weeks, they will be looking at slipping the
date to later in January which would still be compliant with the
[Iraqi] Constitution but would be later than originally planned. In
that instance, M-NF-I [Multi-National Forces Iraq] would need to engage
with the government of Iraq to do some contingency planning on how to
secure the elections at a later date and that might well have-have
implications. Though she maintained Iraq could fall back on the 2005
election law, other bodies begged to differ. As Rod Nordland (New York Times) reported,
"Iraq's existing election law was declared unconstitutional by its
highest court, which said it needs to be replaced or amended."
Yesterday Gabriel Gatehouse (BBC News) reported,
"Iraqi MPs have until Sunday to pass controversial legislation or face
postponing parliamentary elections set for 16 January. The poll is seen
as crucial to the stability of the country, and any delay would likely
impact on the US plan for withdrawal." There was no passage and AFP reports
today that KRG President Massud Barzani and US Vice President Joe Biden
"pressed the need for a key election law to be passed". BBC News reports
the United Nations "had warned that it could not guarantee to endorse
the polls if the bill was not approved on Sunday" -- that was yesterday
and the bill was not approved. BBC points out that the 'sticky points'
are Kirkuk and the issue of open or closed lists. The latter will
determine whether voters vote for individual candidates and this is
something that many in Parliament are opposed to. Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) reports
this afternoon that things remain at a standstill and quotes Iraqi MP
Hunain al-Qaddo stating, "If we don't manage to make any progress on
the electoral law, that will have a negative impact on the political
process and it will send a very bad signal to Iraq's enemies that the
political system isn't working. [. . .] I still have hopes but I think
if we don't manage to do something this week or next week, we really
have to look at postponing the election." Meanwhile Mohammed Jamjoom and Jormana Karadsheh (CNN) report
Kurdish MP Mahmoud Othman states that the US is pushing the "highest
levels of the Kurdish leadership" to go along with a plan for January
elections that would yet again set aside the issue of Kirkuk. In an
offensive statement issued last week, Chris Hill (US Ambassador to
Iraq) and Gen Ray Odierno (top US commander in Iraq) insisted that the
election law should be a 'one-time only' type deal and not apply to or
consider Article 140 of Iraq's Constitution. Article 140 is the one
that mandates the Kirkuk issue be resolved (via a referendum). That was
supposed to have taken place 2 years ago. It did not. Now let's get
back to offensive: In 2000, the US election was decided not by the
voters nor by the means outlined in the US Constitution. Instead the US
Supreme Court injected itself into the dispute and issued a laughable
ruling that was so perverted the Court insisted it was a 'one-time
only' ruling and couldn't be cited as precedent in future cases. That's
what Hill and Odierno are now proposing. Regardless of who gets or
doesn't get Kirkuk, it's amazing how the US continues to kick the can
down the road over and over. This issue was supposed to have been
addressed no later than 2007. The US is again pushing for it to be
postponed. And the only time the KRG can get people to the table on
this issue is when they have the pressure of an upcoming election which
needs to be addressed. Today the Commission on Wartime
Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan met in DC and heard from a number
of witnesses including someone on the second panel who mentioned
Flournoy's October 21st testimony, Rear Adm Thomas Traaen who declared,
"As I'm sure you know, the testimony given by Secretary [Michele]
Flournoy, Mr. [Alan] Estevez, Vice Adm [James] Winnefeld and, my boss,
Lt Gen [Kathleen] Gainey on 21 October was well received by the House
Armed Services Committee. My testimony here will draw heavily from
their insightful remarks." Those remarks included establishing that
decisions on draw-down and going back in would be made by events on the
ground in Iraq. Yes, that is a clear contradiction of the position
Barack Obama presented as a candidate when he was fond of saying the US
military did everything they had been tasked to do and did it well.
And, yes, he was stealing from Hillary Clinton back then and, yes,
Hillary was attacked by CODESTINK and others for those comments but
they apparently sounded so much better out of Barack's mouth thereby
explaining the refusal to call him out. So Barack's plan as outlined in
that hearing was the same plan he outlined to the New York Times, the
one that left Michael Gordon flabbergasted because Barack was saying
that he was 'withdrawing' and at the same time saying he was going back
in if anything went wrong and playing definition games regarding the
military ("trainers," etc.). Also appearing on the second panel
was the GAO's William Solis who declared that the Pentagon hasn't
completed the plans for a draw-down. He stated that the Defense Dept
"has not fully defined or identified the contracted services it will
need to successfully complete the draw-down and support the remaining
US forces in Iraq." Solis explained that 128,700 US service members
were in Iraq as of the end of August "spread among 295 bases throughout
the country." Solis' opening, prepared remarks, can be found [PDF
format warning] here.
While the GAO was able to count the number of US service members in
Iraq, there was no count on the number of contractors leading Co-Chair
of the Commission, Michael Thibault to declare, "It is both peculiar
and troubling that eight years after the overthrow of the Taliban
regime in Afghanistan, and more than six years since the overthrow of
the Ba'athist regime in Iraq, we still don't know how many contractor
employees are working in the region. [. . .] How can contractors be
properly managed if we aren't sure how many there are, where they are
and what they are doing?" Commissioner Dov Zakheim: Yes, uh,
first, Adm Traaen, I noticed on page three of your testimony, uh, you
said that there will be a proportionally larger contractor presence.
Now GAO has said that you haven't -- DoD, rather, hasn't fully
determined its need for contracted services so how are you planning to
oversee this? You're going to have more contractors, you already have
fewer CORs than you need right now, the proportions going to go up.
Could you walk me through your current plans and your timetables and
how you plan to address this issue? Rear Adm Thomas Traaen: Yes,
sir. First of all, I think the proportionality is prudent as we close
forward operating bases and operating sites and as the military either
resets or re-postures in Afghanistan. The proportionality issue is not
surprising to me. Uh, I think that the number of contractors -- in
terms of measuring that to the plan -- is moving down significantly
faster than CENTCOM had originally planned and so I think that getting
out in front of it is the first part of the plan. It's to make sure
that we're removing capability where we don't need it. Certainly, I
think the CENTCOM plan is to be conditions based and I think that there
is a protocol that we would continue to move forward in terms of making
sure that there are some outliers -- for example, the elections that
are coming up in the January time frame, counter-insurgency efforts
that -- if we draw down too quickly -- we could put that combatant
commander in harms way of not being able to produce his mission. I do
believe that there is proper planning in terms of the MNFI fusion cell
that is tasked with fusing, synchronizing and integrating this effort.
And as the third point, I think having MNFI and that fusion cell also
combined with the Joint Logistics Procurement Support Board that is the
JCCIA and an MNFI established board that will properly prioritize and
coordinate those efforts as the fourth point of light making sure that
drawing down in accordance with those priorities is the proper way to
go, sir. Commissioner Dov Zakheim: Uhm, let me turn now to Mr.
Thompson. Uhm, we know that the target is a 32% contractor draw-down. I
believe that's the number that Adm Traaen has in his testimony. But
looking at that chart, I guess I'm thrown a little bit. Contractors
have already declined by seven -- nearly eighteen percent but not KBR.
In fact, KBR has declined by roughly half of that 18% number. In the
previous panel, and you may have been here when we discussed this, I
noted that if a service wasn't completely closed down, then any
contractor -- well, not any -- some contractors, and I guess I should
emphazise that, not all would act this way. But some contractors would
drag their feet because service hasn't closed down, you don't pull the
people out, you keep charging. Could you explain to me why it is that
KBR which has been under so much scrutiny from GAO, from the IG, even
from this commission, is pulling it's people back at half the rate --
half the rate -- of all other contractors. Lee Thompson: Number
one, when we talk about consolidation, draw-down, consolidation of
bases, drawdown, those services that we provide under LOGCAP [Logistics
Civilian Augmentation Program] are still being performed. There's a
common mistake of rolling up all bases as a single base. There's
different sizes of bases. So you had the small contingency operation
locations and that which is a lower brigade size which would be a
contingency operation site. They move into our services, the services
we contracted for are still being provided. There has been a reduction
as that [chart] says, from when we started. In fact, the number's
around 50,000 today. So we've put a freeze on them. They -- KBR --
cannot hire above a certain limit based on the basis of the estimate
that was negotiated this past August and September. As we get the
guidance from CI MNFI on what bases will close, we'll descope and we'll
start moving out contractors. We are in fact doing those, we're looking
at those critical skills. But remember the major draw-down starts after
the [Iraqi] elections. So we are watching that and I'm depending upon
our DCA[A -- Defense Contract Audit Agency] folks that are doing the
floor checks for us. Commissioner Dov Zakheim: So can you state
with absolute certainty that KBR has moved expiditiously and, for
instance, has not moved people from one location to another? Are you
certain of that? Do you have that degree of oversight and visibility?
Given some of the things we heard earlier from one of our Co-Chairman,
Co-Chariman [Michael] Thibault about issues arising with dining halls
and certain things, are you absolutely certain that KBR's getting
people out as they should? Lee Thompson: I'm not going to sit
here and say I'm absolutely certain but I will tell you that we'll
provide the oversight and look at those places where we are closing to
make sure that there's not excess personnel there. And we will -- they
have to get a blessing from us as we move and we descope, we descope
the property, if we close a base, we look at the personnel where
they're reallocating or realinging them to so we're looking and we're
scrutinizing that. And I depend on my folks forward, the same two
officers -- if you will -- that said they're against or-or whatever
Chairman Thibault had to say about what they said overseas. Commissioner
Dov Zakheim: Mr. Solis, could you comment on both of these points? One,
the adequacy of planning and, second, the degree of oversight of KBR
and the seeming discrephancy between KBR LOGCAP 3 and other draw-downs. Willaim
Solis: Well I think in terms of the planning, I mentioned before in my
opening statement that there is -- there's a lot of things that are
going on with regards to the retrograde of equipment. One thing that we
haven't seen a whole lot of is planning, as I mentioned, for
determining the requirements, the oversight for the contracts that are
going to be coming onboard. And we still have a concern about that, we
still have seen exact plans. As I mentioned to you the GMASS [Global
Maintenance and Supply Services] contract in Kuwait ,which is a major
maintenance contract, which is necessary to move equipment out, look at
it, and get -- and then repair it and move it out to Kuwait or whever
it's going to go -- back to a unit, over to Afghanistan or whatever --
they expect a major increase, as I mentioned, doubling the size of
their contract force to about 6,000 people. We have not seen what kinds
of plans are going to be put in place to increase the contractor
oversight there -- and that's not just there, I think it's other
contracts that we have seen as well. I think in terms of the LOGCAP, we
haven't really looked in terms of the numbers so I can't really contra
-- comment on that. But I think that these numbers are going to
flucuate, whether it's LOGCAP or some of these other major contracts in
terms as the draw-down proceeds and that's why it's important to really
understand what you're contract requirements are going to be during
this period. The first panel included April Stephenson who
stated KBR's ineffective managing of their workforce is costing tax
payers "at least $193 million". Stevenson was testifying on behalf of
the Defense Contract Audit Agency. She explained KBR had not done the
staff reductions and, as a result and barring no major action on KBR's
part, there staff ratio in Iraq would, by August 2010, be 1 KBR
employee for every 3.6 US service members. That will probably be a
detail noted by any who note the hearing. But another detail -- the
reason for the excerpt above -- is equally important: No plans. The
GAO -- like the House Armed Services Committee -- is not seeing plans.
Do they exist? What's being discussed isn't 2011 or post-2011. What's
being discussed above is the draw-down that's supposedly going to begin
taking place as soon as Iraq holds national elections. Where are the
plans? The inability to move foward on the election bill
(passing legislation) by the Iraqi government or 'government' is
rightly being noted. What about the inability of the Pentagon to
provide plans for events that are supposed to be right around the
corner? And what's up with allowing KBR to drag it's feet
there? Commission Charles Tiefer asked if KBR had a written, detailed
plan for their part in the draw-down. Thompson declared, "I was over
there a few weeks ago, a month ago, and they provided me with a
briefing. I think it was 25th, 26th of September." He continued, "Was
there a written plan? We have a normal, operational, 'how do I close a
base' kind of plan that they have signed up to early on." Who is
providing oversight and how will there be a draw-down starting
supposedly in a few months if there are no plans in writing? (No, a
general "how do I close a base" is not a written plan.) Commissioner
Robert Henke attempted to get a "short, succinct answer" on the KBR
issue: "If the president announces on February 27, 2009 the draw-down
plan and we're on November 2nd, is it possible that the contractor
hasn't provided you any plan to adjust staff accordingly?" What he
received was a babble from Thompson that contradicted and spun. Henke
then attempted to get answers by going bit by bit through a timeline
and asking "How is that posssible?" In Thompson's most honest response
in the entire hearing he included "I don't know" as part of his
long-winded, run-the-clock-down response. RECOMMENDED: " Iraq snapshot" " The 'intended' January elections" " The Iraq inquiry" Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Photo-Op This!" " And the war drags on . . ." " Kat's Korner: Carly Simon's warm benediction" " The violence allegory or who's Brando?" " PTSD, plastic surgery" Truest statement of the weekTruest statement of the week IIA note to our readersEditorial: No, it's not journalism.TV: The ForgettableRoundtableSexism And The Stupid Guy (Ava and C.I.)Iraq10 thoughts of Carly Simon's Never Been GoneIdiot of the WeekHighlights
Posted at 03:29 pm by cedricsbigmix
Permalink
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills)
Monday,
November 2, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the US military
announces another death, no movement on passing an election law in
Iraq, KBR is costing US tax payer $193 as a result of their inability
to manage their workforce, the Pentagon isn't providing all the plans
for the draw-down to the GAO, and more. 8 US service members were announced dead in Iraq during the month of October. Today the US military announced
another death: "FORWARD OPERATING BASE KALSU, Iraq -- A Multi-National
Corps -- Iraq Soldier died Nov. 2 of non-combat related injuries.
Release of the Soldier's identity is being with held pending
notification of the next of kin. The name of the deceased service
member will be announced through the U.S. Department of Defense Official Web site
[. . .] 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 currently under investigation." Maloy Moore (Los Angeles Times) reports
that the fallen was 20-year-old Lukas C. Hopper of Merced, California
who "is survived by his mother and father, Robin and Yancy Hopper, both
of Merced." The announcement brings to 4356 the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war. In other reported violence . . . Bombings? Shootings? Violence
continues, actually increases, and Nouri al-Maliki maintains he is the
new strongman, the new Saddam to be trusted and should continue as
prime minister of Iraq. On Al Jazeera's latest Inside Iraq
(which began broadcasting Friday), the topic was Nouri al-Maliki and
the guests joining host Jasim Azzawi included head of Iraqi Nation
Party Mithal al-Alsui and US Dept Assistant Secretary of State for
Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs Michael Corbin. Jasim
Azzawi: This murderous double explosion that happened in Iraq is quite
sophisticated. It has all the marks, perhaps, of foreign power and yet
it is domestically carried out. Today the Iraqi government arrested 60
security officers -- perhaps they were either in cahoot or negligent in
their duty how do you look at this double bombings? Mithal
al-Alsui: Well, first of all, I have to say that when we talk about
total sections we talk about so complicated cases. This is one side but
of the other side we didn't feel that the government they do have any
kind of a platform or a vision how to deal with the terrorists or the
security in Iraq. More than that they just react and such news as you
are hearing, the government they are arresting or they are trying to
start an investigation of some officers. My opinion, this is just a
reaction, trying to cover the need of the new election in Iraq. Jasim
Azzawi: Indeed you are right. Perhaps the arrest or the questioning of
the 60 officers might be a face saving formula. Mr. Corbin, today I was
struck by what the Iraqi Foreign Minister, Hoshyar Zebari, said. He
said, "The US cannot wash its hand of the situation in Iraq. We expect
more engagement from the American forces. What does that mean in light
of the fact that SOFA stipulates American forces should go back to
their barracks by June 30th. Is the Iraqi government speaking with two
voices? al-Maliki says we don't want them and his foreign minister says
we need them back. Michael
Corbin: First of all, I can't comment on what Hoshyar Zebari, the
Foreign Minister, said, Jasim. But what I can say first is that we
strongly condemn these horrific bombings conducted by people with no
respect for human life. The victims in this latest bombing were
children, were passerby on the street. We see no benefit that anyone
could claim by trying to claim victory by trying to conduct these kind
of attacks. We are in partnership with the government of Iraq. We are
working closely with the security forces, we're working closely with
Prime Minister Maliki to try and prevent this kind of attack. The
Iraqis have control of their cities since June 30. They have made
enormous strides. What you see here is terrorists who have tried every
means to cause havoc and destruction moving from first targeting
mosques and churches and minorities, then targeting innocent people in
market places to now targeting uh government buildings where normal
Iraqis work, where passersby are being targeted. We don't see any
strategy here by the insurgents, we see only bloody killing and we find
it despicable that anyone would seek to rush to claim credit for this
type of attack. What a load of crap.
First off, if you'd done what Michael Corbin did in Syria, you might
shut your damn mouth and keep your head down real low. That's
(A). (B) He served under George W. Bush and now he wants to develop a
sense of righteous indignation? NOW? The bombings were part of the
ongoing Iraq War. The US government has attempted to label the Iraqis
taking part in this war as "terrorist" which is a bunch of crap, they
are people who feel they are defending their country. Micheal Corbin
-- of all people -- wants to lecture on innocents being killed. The
US military killed innocents and the US government knew it was going to
happen because (a) they ordered it and (b) the whole damn world knew it
was going to happen. Which is how we get Elizabeth Piper (Reuters) reporting (March 2005)
on Jawdat Abd al-Kadhum whose 'crime' was driving and for that 'crime'
"he lost his leg to an American bullet." The US military likes to call
it "collateral damage." In March 2007, they were even bragging about new ammo which, they stated, would be helpful in "reducing collateral damage" in Iraq. There's the Palestine Hotel in Baghdad was attacked April 8, 2003 by . . . the US military
claiming the lives of journalists Taras Protsyuk and Jose Couso and
wounding three other journalists. On the same day -- on the same day
-- that the US military attacked the Baghdad bureau of Al Jazeera
killing journalist Tareq Ayyoub. Now we can go on and on -- as the
illegal war has -- but the point should have been made: Michael Corbin
needs to check that righteous indignation that he has oh-so recently
sprouted. But spewing mock outrage allowed
him to avoid answering a direct question, didn't it? And wasn't that
the point? "I can't comment on what Hoshyar Zebari, the Foreign
Minister, said." Then why the hell are you on the show? For your
beauty? Don't make me laugh. Jasim
Azzawi: But then again, Mr. Corbin, they are a symbol of the Iraqi
government and those terrorist attacks are meant to strike at the very
heart of the Iraqi symbol. We'll get to that point later on, but let me
get to Mithal. There are two theories, Mithal Alusi, the reasons behind
these suicide bombings. One is: To create chaos and embarrass the
Iraqi government. The other one is, which I would like you to comment
on, is that: It is meant to embarrass al-Maliki himself for abandoning
his erstwhile allies -- primarily the Iraqi National Alliance. Mithal
al-Alsui: Well I must come back to the -- to the main point which I
really believe that even the United States of America with all of the
institutions they got, the terrorists, they succeed to attack America,
they succeed to attack many European states. But in general, what we
need here in Iraq, we need to start to build the Iraqi institution.
What we need here to start, to go out of the propaganda issues, what we
need here is to start to believe in our citizens and our nation and to
serve the people. We still action -- we still reaction in very naive
and simple ways and this is not the way to stop terrorists this is not
the way to stop -- Jasim
Azzawi: Are you saying the Iraqi government is failing to do the proper
things? Are you casting doubt on the -- on the whole structure of the
Iraqi government and its vision for the future? Mithal
al-Alsui: For sure, Mr. Maliki government, it didn't succeed to provide
service. They didn't succeed to push the economy. They didn't succeed
to help in the oil industry. They didn't succeed to find any platform
or vision for the education, for the health sectors. They didn't
succeed in different ways so the security is part of the result of this
government and we are so sorry to hear it repeatedly from the American
side, "We are helping the Iraqi government and we are supporting the
Iraqi government." We are asking our American friends: You need to
support the Iraqi political process and the democratic process. We need
to support the Iraqi economy -- Jasim
Azzawi: Let me give a chance to Mr. Corbin to answer that. Go ahead,
your aid and your help is going in the wrong direction, that's what
he's saying. Michael
Corbin: I agree with Mithal that we have to build institutions. I agree
that we have to help with education and health. But what we see is an
Iraqi government that is capable now of making decision. We're in
partnership with the Iraqi government. When the UN mandate ended at the
end of 2008, it was a significant step forward for Iraqi institutions.
Iraq now can deal with its neighbors. Iraq is in a position now where
we have a partnership on economic issues. Oil. We've had one bid round
for international oil companies to come into Iraq. We're preparing for
another. We see many elements where the Iraqi government and Iraqi
institutions such as the very Ministry of Justice which was targeted -- Despite Michael Corbin's inane mutterings, no 'progress' in Iraq. John Leland (New York Times) reported
in this morning's paper, "Meanwhile, Iraqi legislators again failed to
agree on laws governing the January elections, despite warnings that
further delay could prevent the vote from taking place on time.
Discussions in Parliament on Sunday instead focused on other
matters." To recap, prior to Barack Obama being elected US President,
Iraq 'intended' to hold national elections in December 2009. They then
pushed the elections back to January 2010 which Barack used to break
his campaign promise re: troop draw-down in Iraq (he called it
withdrawal and, in his speeches, rarely included "combat" which is a
meaningless qualifier anyway). All this year, they've anticipated the
elections being held in January 2010 and the deadline for passing
legislation was October 15th.
The day before that deadline, they decided to kick decisions back to
October 19th. And so it has gone, over and over. It is now November 2nd
and they have no election law. Appearing October 21st before the US House Armed Services Committee, the Pentagon's Michele Flournoy was asked of the delays in Iraq passing an election law. Michele
Flournoy: Uh, let me start by saying, you know, the draw-down plan that
we have, is conditions based and it creates multiple decision points
for re-evaluating and, if necessary, changing our plans based on
developments on the ground. Although the government of Iraq's
self-imposed deadline of October 15th for passing the elections law has
passed, we judge that the COR [Council Of Representatives] still has
another week or two to come to some kind of an agreement on the
elections law before it will put the January date -- the early January
date -- in jeopardy in terms of the election commission's ability to
actually physically execute the, uh, the election. If a new law with
open lists is not passed, the fall back solution for them is to return
to the 2005 election law which is based on a closed list system. But
that could be used for upcoming elections, the COR would simply have to
vote on an election date. If that law is not passed in the next two
weeks, they will be looking at slipping the date to later in January
which would still be compliant with the [Iraqi] Constitution but would
be later than originally planned. In that instance, M-NF-I
[Multi-National Forces Iraq] would need to engage with the government
of Iraq to do some contingency planning on how to secure the elections
at a later date and that might well have-have implications. Though she maintained Iraq could fall back on the 2005 election law, other bodies begged to differ. As Rod Nordland (New York Times) reported,
"Iraq's existing election law was declared unconstitutional by its
highest court, which said it needs to be replaced or amended."
Yesterday Gabriel Gatehouse (BBC News) reported,
"Iraqi MPs have until Sunday to pass controversial legislation or face
postponing parliamentary elections set for 16 January. The poll is seen
as crucial to the stability of the country, and any delay would likely
impact on the US plan for withdrawal." There was no passage and AFP reports
today that KRG President Massud Barzani and US Vice President Joe Biden
"pressed the need for a key election law to be passed". BBC News reports
the United Nations "had warned that it could not guarantee to endorse
the polls if the bill was not approved on Sunday" -- that was yesterday
and the bill was not approved. BBC points out that the 'sticky points'
are Kirkuk and the issue of open or closed lists. The latter will
determine whether voters vote for individual candidates and this is
something that many in Parliament are opposed to. Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) reports
this afternoon that things remain at a standstill and quotes Iraqi MP
Hunain al-Qaddo stating, "If we don't manage to make any progress on
the electoral law, that will have a negative impact on the political
process and it will send a very bad signal to Iraq's enemies that the
political system isn't working. [. . .] I still have hopes but I think
if we don't manage to do something this week or next week, we really
have to look at postponing the election." Meanwhile Mohammed Jamjoom and Jormana Karadsheh (CNN) report
Kurdish MP Mahmoud Othman states that the US is pushing the "highest
levels of the Kurdish leadership" to go along with a plan for January
elections that would yet again set aside the issue of Kirkuk. In an
offensive statement issued last week, Chris Hill (US Ambassador to
Iraq) and Gen Ray Odierno (top US commander in Iraq) insisted that the
election law should be a 'one-time only' type deal and not apply to or
consider Article 140 of Iraq's Constitution. Article 140 is the one
that mandates the Kirkuk issue be resolved (via a referendum). That
was supposed to have taken place 2 years ago. It did not. Now let's
get back to offensive: In 2000, the US election was decided not by the
voters nor by the means outlined in the US Constitution. Instead the
US Supreme Court injected itself into the dispute and issued a
laughable ruling that was so perverted the Court insisted it was a
'one-time only' ruling and couldn't be cited as precedent in future
cases. That's what Hill and Odierno are now proposing. Regardless of
who gets or doesn't get Kirkuk, it's amazing how the US continues to
kick the can down the road over and over. This issue was supposed to
have been addressed no later than 2007. The US is again pushing for it
to be postponed. And the only time the KRG can get people to the table
on this issue is when they have the pressure of an upcoming election
which needs to be addressed. Today
the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan met in DC
and heard from a number of witnesses including someone on the second
panel who mentioned Flournoy's October 21st testimony, Rear Adm Thomas
Traaen who declared, "As I'm sure you know, the testimony given by
Secretary [Michele] Flournoy, Mr. [Alan] Estevez, Vice Adm [James]
Winnefeld and, my boss, Lt Gen [Kathleen] Gainey on 21 October was well
received by the House Armed Services Committee. My testimony here will
draw heavily from their insightful remarks." Those remarks included
establishing that decisions on draw-down and going back in would be
made by events on the ground in Iraq. Yes, that is a clear
contradiction of the position Barack Obama presented as a candidate
when he was fond of saying the US military did everything they had been
tasked to do and did it well. And, yes, he was stealing from Hillary
Clinton back then and, yes, Hillary was attacked by CODESTINK and
others for those comments but they apparently sounded so much better
out of Barack's mouth thereby explaining the refusal to call him out.
So Barack's plan as outlined in that hearing was the same plan he
outlined to the New York Times, the one that left Michael
Gordon flabbergasted because Barack was saying that he was
'withdrawing' and at the same time saying he was going back in if
anything went wrong and playing definition games regarding the military
("trainers," etc.). Also appearing on the
second panel was the GAO's William Solis who declared that the Pentagon
hasn't completed the plans for a draw-down. He stated that the Defense
Dept "has not fully defined or identified the contracted services it
will need to successfully complete the draw-down and support the
remaining US forces in Iraq." Solis explained that 128,700 US service
members were in Iraq as of the end of August "spread among 295 bases
throughout the country." Solis' opening, prepared remarks, can be found
[PDF format warning] here.
While the GAO was able to count the number of US service members in
Iraq, there was no count on the number of contractors leading Co-Chair
of the Commission, Michael Thibault to declare, "It is both peculiar
and troubling that eight years after the overthrow of the Taliban
regime in Afghanistan, and more than six years since the overthrow of
the Ba'athist regime in Iraq, we still don't know how many contractor
employees are working in the region. [. . .] How can contractors be
properly managed if we aren't sure how many there are, where they are
and what they are doing?" Commissioner
Dov Zakheim: Yes, uh, first, Adm Traaen, I noticed on page three of
your testimony, uh, you said that there will be a proportionally larger
contractor presence. Now GAO has said that you haven't -- DoD, rather,
hasn't fully determined its need for contracted services so how are you
planning to oversee this? You're going to have more contractors, you
already have fewer CORs than you need right now, the proportions going
to go up. Could you walk me through your current plans and your
timetables and how you plan to address this issue? Rear
Adm Thomas Traaen: Yes, sir. First of all, I think the proportionality
is prudent as we close forward operating bases and operating sites and
as the military either resets or re-postures in Afghanistan. The
proportionality issue is not surprising to me. Uh, I think that the
number of contractors -- in terms of measuring that to the plan -- is
moving down significantly faster than CENTCOM had originally planned
and so I think that getting out in front of it is the first part of the
plan. It's to make sure that we're removing capability where we don't
need it. Certainly, I think the CENTCOM plan is to be conditions based
and I think that there is a protocol that we would continue to move
forward in terms of making sure that there are some outliers -- for
example, the elections that are coming up in the January time frame,
counter-insurgency efforts that -- if we draw down too quickly -- we
could put that combatant commander in harms way of not being able to
produce his mission. I do believe that there is proper planning in
terms of the MNFI fusion cell that is tasked with fusing, synchronizing
and integrating this effort. And as the third point, I think having
MNFI and that fusion cell also combined with the Joint Logistics
Procurement Support Board that is the JCCIA and an MNFI established
board that will properly prioritize and coordinate those efforts as the
fourth point of light making sure that drawing down in accordance with
those priorities is the proper way to go, sir. Commissioner
Dov Zakheim: Uhm, let me turn now to Mr. Thompson. Uhm, we know that
the target is a 32% contractor draw-down. I believe that's the number
that Adm Traaen has in his testimony. But looking at that
chart, I guess I'm thrown a little bit. Contractors have already
declined by seven -- nearly eighteen percent but not KBR. In fact, KBR
has declined by roughly half of that 18% number. In the previous
panel, and you may have been here when we discussed this, I noted that
if a service wasn't completely closed down, then any contractor --
well, not any -- some contractors, and I guess I should emphazise that,
not all would act this way. But some contractors would drag their feet
because service hasn't closed down, you don't pull the people out, you
keep charging. Could you explain to me why it is that KBR which has
been under so much scrutiny from GAO, from the IG, even from this
commission, is pulling it's people back at half the rate -- half the
rate -- of all other contractors. Lee
Thompson: Number one, when we talk about consolidation, draw-down,
consolidation of bases, drawdown, those services that we provide under
LOGCAP [Logistics Civilian Augmentation Program] are still being
performed. There's a common mistake of rolling up all bases as a
single base. There's different sizes of bases. So you had the small
contingency operation locations and that which is a lower brigade size
which would be a contingency operation site. They move into our
services, the services we contracted for are still being provided.
There has been a reduction as that [chart] says, from when we started.
In fact, the number's around 50,000 today. So we've put a freeze on
them. They -- KBR -- cannot hire above a certain limit based on the
basis of the estimate that was negotiated this past August and
September. As we get the guidance from CI MNFI on what bases will
close, we'll descope and we'll start moving out contractors. We are
in fact doing those, we're looking at those critical skills. But
remember the major draw-down starts after the [Iraqi] elections. So we
are watching that and I'm depending upon our DCA[A -- Defense Contract
Audit Agency] folks that are doing the floor checks for us. Commissioner
Dov Zakheim: So can you state with absolute certainty that KBR has
moved expiditiously and, for instance, has not moved people from one
location to another? Are you certain of that? Do you have that degree
of oversight and visibility? Given some of the things we heard earlier
from one of our Co-Chairman, Co-Chariman [Michael] Thibault about
issues arising with dining halls and certain things, are you absolutely
certain that KBR's getting people out as they should? Lee
Thompson: I'm not going to sit here and say I'm absolutely certain but
I will tell you that we'll provide the oversight and look at those
places where we are closing to make sure that there's not excess
personnel there. And we will -- they have to get a blessing from us as
we move and we descope, we descope the property, if we close a base, we
look at the personnel where they're reallocating or realinging them to
so we're looking and we're scrutinizing that. And I depend on my folks
forward, the same two officers -- if you will -- that said they're
against or-or whatever Chairman Thibault had to say about what they
said overseas. Commissioner
Dov Zakheim: Mr. Solis, could you comment on both of these points? One,
the adequacy of planning and, second, the degree of oversight of KBR
and the seeming discrephancy between KBR LOGCAP 3 and other draw-downs.
Willaim
Solis: Well I think in terms of the planning, I mentioned before in my
opening statement that there is -- there's a lot of things that are
going on with regards to the retrograde of equipment. One thing that we
haven't seen a whole lot of is planning, as I mentioned, for
determining the requirements, the oversight for the contracts that are
going to be coming onboard. And we still have a concern about that, we
still have seen exact plans. As I mentioned to you the GMASS [Global
Maintenance and Supply Services] contract in Kuwait ,which is a
major maintenance contract, which is necessary to move equipment out,
look at it, and get -- and then repair it and move it out to Kuwait or
whever it's going to go -- back to a unit, over to Afghanistan or
whatever -- they expect a major increase, as I mentioned, doubling the
size of their contract force to about 6,000 people. We have not seen
what kinds of plans are going to be put in place to increase the
contractor oversight there -- and that's not just there, I think it's
other contracts that we have seen as well. I think in terms of the
LOGCAP, we haven't really looked in terms of the numbers so I can't
really contra -- comment on that. But I think that these numbers are
going to flucuate, whether it's LOGCAP or some of these other major
contracts in terms as the draw-down proceeds and that's why
it's important to really understand what you're contract requirements
are going to be during this period. The
first panel included April Stephenson who stated KBR's ineffective
managing of their workforce is costing tax payers "at least $193
million". Stevenson was testifying on behalf of the Defense Contract
Audit Agency. She explained KBR had not done the staff reductions and,
as a result and barring no major action on KBR's part, there staff
ratio in Iraq would, by August 2010, be 1 KBR employee for every 3.6 US
service members. That will probably be a detail noted by any who note
the hearing. But another detail -- the reason for the excerpt above --
is equally important: No plans. The GAO -- like
the House Armed Services Committee -- is not seeing plans. Do they
exist? What's being discussed isn't 2011 or post-2011. What's being
discussed above is the draw-down that's supposedly going to begin
taking place as soon as Iraq holds national elections. Where are the
plans? The inability to move foward on the
election bill (passing legislation) by the Iraqi government or
'government' is rightly being noted. What about the inability of the
Pentagon to provide plans for events that are supposed to be right
around the corner? And what's up with
allowing KBR to drag it's feet there? Commission Charles Tiefer asked
if KBR had a written, detailed plan for their part in the
draw-down. Thompson declared, "I was over there a few weeks ago, a
month ago, and they provided me with a briefing. I think it was 25th,
26th of September." He continued, "Was there a written plan? We have
a normal, operational, 'how do I close a base' kind of plan that they
have signed up to early on." Who is providing oversight and how will
there be a draw-down starting supposedly in a few months if there are
no plans in writing? (No, a general "how do I close a base" is not a
written plan.) Commissioner Robert Henke attempted to get a "short,
succinct answer" on the KBR issue: "If the president announces on
February 27, 2009 the draw-down plan and we're on November 2nd, is it
possible that the contractor hasn't provided you any plan to adjust
staff accordingly?" What he received was a babble from Thompson that
contradicted and spun. Henke then attempted to get answers by going
bit by bit through a timeline and asking "How is that posssible?" In
Thompson's most honest response in the entire hearing he included "I
don't know" as part of his long-winded, run-the-clock-down response. Friday's snapshot
had an error -- thank you to a Congressional staffer who informed me of
it. Duncan Hunter cited a project which was Task Force Odin not "Odum"
-- ODIN stands for Observe, Detect, Identify and Neutralize. It is not
and was not named after General William Odum as I wrongly stated. My
error and my apologies. Today Iran's Press TV reports: The
US military has finished erecting an advanced radar system in Iraq to
monitor the border with Iran, Syria and Turkey, a report
says. The radar
system will monitor aircraft and anti-air targets approaching from the
borders, several Arabic language news websites reported on Monday,
citing comments by unnamed Isareli sources. The
report posted on the Palestinian Maannews website said that the system
would transmit information to the Iraqi air force and some of its radar
would be connected to the control tower at the Baghdad International
Airport. Which gives us a chance to relive
one of those 'great moments' in illegal war history. For those who've
forgotten or never knew about the US spying (the governments of England
and Australia joined in the spying as well) on the UN, refer to Martin
Bright, Ed Vulliamy and Peter Beaumont's " Revealed: US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war" ( Observer, March 2, 2003): The
United States is conducting a secret 'dirty tricks' campaign against UN
Security Council delegations in New York as part of its battle to win
votes in favour of war against Iraq. Details
of the aggressive surveillance operation, which involves interception
of the home and office telephones and the emails of UN delegates in New
York, are revealed in a document leaked to The Observer. The
disclosures were made in a memorandum written by a top official at the
National Security Agency - the US body which intercepts communications
around the world - and circulated to both senior agents in his
organisation and to a friendly foreign intelligence agency asking for
its input. The
memo describes orders to staff at the agency, whose work is clouded in
secrecy, to step up its surveillance operations 'particularly directed
at... UN Security Council Members (minus US and GBR, of course)' to
provide up-to-the-minute intelligence for Bush officials on the voting
intentions of UN members regarding the issue of Iraq.
Posted at 12:10 pm by cedricsbigmix
Permalink
Nov 1, 2009
CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O HAD 2 REVELATIONS TO INJECT HIMSELF INTO THE NEWS CYCLE TODAY. FIRST HE ANNOUNCED HE WOULD DRESS AS GEORGE W. BUSH FOR HALLOWEEN. "SCARY,"
HE SAID DRAWING OUT EVERY LETTER OF THE WORD. "BUT ALSO MY WAY OF
ACKNOWLEDGING THAT I AM JUST LIKE MY PREDECESSOR. I NEVER KNEW MY
DADDY, HE DIDN'T WANT A FAMILY OR AT LEAST NOT ME, SO I USED TO PRETEND
THAT GEORGE H.W. BUSH WAS MY DADDY. I'VE INVITED HIM TO THE WHITE HOUSE
AND INTEND TO HOP INTO HIS LAP BEFORE THE NIGHT'S OVER AND ASK HIM TO
TUCK ME IN." POOKIE'S
EXACT DETAILS AND GENDER -- JUST LIKE BARRY'S -- ARE IN DISPUTE. BUT HE
WANTS IT OUT THERE THAT HE "KILLED COUSIN POOKIE BECAUSE I THINK IT
WILL GET ME SOME RESPECT. I DON'T GET NO RESPECT. I'M LIKE RODNEY
DANGERFIELD TRYING TO ACT SOULFUL." On the second hour of today's The Diane Rehm Show, Iraq was addressed by guest host Frank Senso, NPR's Tom Gjelten, CNN's Elise Labott and McClatchy Newspapers' Jonathan Landay. Frank
Senso: To Iraq now, and in a few minutes, to our phone calls, to bring
our audience into this and any other conversation that they may want to
have with respect to what's going on in the world. But in Iraq
discussions amidst ongoing, violence, intensifying violence in some
cases, about trying to fix the national election law because that is
what is looming large. Jonathan Landay, what's the landscape look like
right now? Jonathan
S. Landay: Well they've tried for a third time to pass an election law
in time for the January elections and they've failed again. The issue
-- there are a number of issues, but the main issue has to do with the
city of Kirkuk in northern Iraq and uh a city that sits atop billions
of gallons of untapped oil. Uh, the issue has to do with the -- what
census is going to be used to register voters there. Now this is a city
that the Kurds -- now this is right now a predominately Kurdish city.
It was, the Kurds say, a predominately Kurdish city before the reign of
Saddam Hussein who ethically [ethnically] cleansed Kurds out of the
city and brought in Arabs. The issue is, do you -- since the fall of
Saddam Hussein, the Kurds have been restoring their majority in that
city and, indeed, other ethnic groups claim over uh restoring their
majority, bringing in more Kurds than there had been before. The Kurds
want voter registration to be based on the most recent census, I think
it was in fact, done this year. The Sunni Arabs and other ethnic groups
there -- the Turkomen for instance -- want the voter registration based
on the 2004 census and they have not been able to come to an agreement
on this and this has hung up the passage of this law and what it really
-- and what it really comes down to it appears is contol over that
massive amount of untapped petroleum. Frank
Senso: And yet this-this-this dispute, this stand off over the election
law comes just after this Sunday terrible bombing in Baghdad, the worst
in two years killing more than 150, wounding hundreds more, severely
damaging three major government buildings now there's been an arrest of
some 50 odd security and there was some suggestion that this
intensifying violence might drive the politicians to nail down this
election law and drive those to some kind of political, if not
resolution, progress. Tom? Tom
Gjelten: Well it seems, Frank, that the Iranians, I mean the Iraqis,
have become so inured to this kind of violence that just sort of
everything proceeds normally and that's true I think in both a good
sense and a bad sense. In a good sense, there has been this move
towards stability and peace in Iraq and Iraq's been filling more
confident about their future and they seem amazingly enough to have
taken this bombing in stride in a sense. I mean there have been other
bombings -- Frank Sesno: It's almost unimaginable, isn't it? Tom
Gjelten: It's almost unaimaginable. But they have -- this is six years
that they've been through this and they seem to be able to cope with
these great tragedies. On the other hand, the negative side is that, as
you say, you know, you would -- you would hope that this would jolt
them into sort of some reality but, again, they become so used to this
that they just proceed with the same stalemate.
Frank Sesno: What's behind the uptick in violence, Elise? Elise
Labott: Well, we saw -- first we saw an uptick in violence in August
and there were also some massive bombings at the Foreign Ministry, at
the Finance Ministry and this seemed to be kind of a way to sew
sectarian tensions once again and they thought that maybe this would
lead Iraq down the path it was in 2006, 2007 with major sectarian
tensions. Now what officials says is they think that these foreign
fighters are [or?] the real hard core al Qaeda in Iraq are trying just
at anything, they tried at religious targets, now they're just trying
at softer targets to kill a lot of people. They think maybe it can
effect the election in January. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has been
running as the security candidate. He's the one that's bringing
stability to Iraq, he's the one that got US forces out of the city. The
question is now is this going to effect his standing as the security
candidate. Jonathan
S. Landay: There may be also something else going on here. The more
instability, I think perhaps the insurgen -- whoever is behind these
bombings create, in their mind, it delays perhaps the departure of
American forces and what do you get from that? Well you get a delay or
perhaps problems coming up with additional American forces to send to
Afghanistan and there may very well be that thinking going on on the
part of those who are responsible for these massive bombings. On the above. Jonathan S. Landay used the term census. That is incorrect. There has been no census. The issue, which McClatchy's Sarah Issa and Hannah Allem and which the New York Times' Timothy Williams
have outlines, is where the voting rolls for 2009 or the voting rolls
for 2004 will be used. There has been no census. "Census" is a concrete
term. And, in fact, a census in Kirkuk is mandated -- as is a
referendum -- by Iraq's 2005 Constitution. No census has been
conducted. This is not a minor issue and it goes to the dispute over
Kirkuk. "Census" was the wrong term to use. There is NO census thus
far. That's (A). (B) Tom Gjelten.
What the ___ was that? I'm reminded of when Goodtime Gals Linda
Robinson and Gwen Ifill decided to discuss Blackwater's September 17,
2007 slaughter ( see the October 8, 2007 snapshot)
-- a discussion noteable for its appalling ignorance and gross lack of
concern for human life. Gjelten can argue that some of his remarks were
intended to be about officials. But he can only argue that about some
of his remarks. And what exactly does he want Iraqis to do? They're
shell shocked and just because he hasn't reported on the multitude of
studies, THE MULTITUDE OF STUDIES, on the effects this illegal war has
had on Iraqi children doesn't mean the damage isn't real and doesn't
exist. So his happy talk bulls**t was embarrassing. That was really a
shameful moment for NPR. The 'good' and the 'bad' of the bombings? How
appalling. What made it worse for NPR was that it wasn't a guest from,
for example, NBC News. It was an NPR reporter. That's shameful. The
good and the bad of bombings? Pay attention, Tommy. Our
children are surrounded by violnce. Most of them are traumatized. I
call them the silent victims. Our Iraqi childeren are the silent vctims. From
January to March of last year, the World Health Organization worked
with Iraqi psychiatrists on a series of studies on the mental health of
children in the cities of Baghdad, Mosul and Dohuk. (Watch the effects of war on children ) One
of the studies on primary-school-age children in Baghdad found that
nearly half of the 600 children surveyed had experienced a major
traumatic event since the war began. Just over one in every 10 suffered
from post-traumatic stress disorder, the study found. Another
of the studies found that older children in Mosul suffered even worse.
Thirty percent of the 1,090 children surveyed showed signs of
post-traumatic stress disorder. Nearly all of those with PTSD symptoms,
92 percent, had not received any treatment, according to the study. In
fact, the doctors aren't immune to the dangers of the conflict. Fifty
percent of Iraq's psychiatrists have fled the country or been killed
since the war began, said Dr. Naeema Al-Gasseer, the WHO's
representative for Iraq. A month after CNN filed that report, NPR's Linda Wertheimer spoke with Dr. Mohammed al-Aboudi about the mental stress Iraqi children were under.
Now we can go through various reports and studies. We can enlarge and
look at other segments of the country's population. But the above alone
demonstrates how offensive Tom's statements are. The population is
shell shocked and the illegal war has caused that trauma. The bombings
that he thinks have good and bad are the same violence responsible for
creating the world's largest refugee crisis. And the UN has already
advised that Sunday's bombings will most likely results in Syria and
Jordan receiving some additional Iraqi refugees. I'm not seeing any
"good and bad" to the bombings. And Tom's statements were inarticulate
and offensive. Frank Senso did a fine job this week filling in for
Diane but had Diane been present, she probably would have said
something. She generally does when gas baggery replaces discussion --
when human beings are removed from the issue, she generally brings them
back into the picture even if it means she has to disagree with a
guest. (She did that most recently with a guest gas bagging -- and
glorifying -- the drone strikes in Pakistan when she made a point to
note the civilian deaths the man was dismissing.) Tom's statements were
offensive and it's only more so because he works for NPR. He declared
that "you would hope that this would jolt them into sort of some
reality" -- Tom, we'd hope the reality of the violence in Iraq and the
fact that it is an inhabited country would jolt you into some sort of
reality but there's no evidence, as yet, that it has. [. . .] Violence
was kind-of, sort-of an issue yesterday in the US House Armed Services
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. The hearing was about
IEDs and the money spent on studying them. The Pentagon's James Schear
and Lt Gen Thomas Metz as well as the GAO's William Solis were the
witnesses, Vic Snyder is the Subcomittee Chair. Subcommittee
Chair Vic Snyder: IEDs remain the number one cause of casulities to
coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Although IEDs are not a new
threat, they have been used with unprecedented frequency in Iraq and
Afghanistan. While the decrease in successful attacks in Iraq is
encouraging, that success has not been replicated in Afghanistan which
has seen an increase in success in fatality attacks with our increase
in forces there. Since former CENTCOM commander General [John] Abizaid
called for a Manhattan Project like effort 5 years ago to defeat IEDs,
Congress has provided nearly $17 billion to DoD's efforts. This effort
has grown from a twelve-man army task force to the Jointed IED Defeat
Organization, or JIEDDO, which currently employs a staff of about 3600
dedicated government, military and contract personnel. Lt
Gen Thomas F. Metz declared, "What's really different in the two
theaters is that over time in Iraq, as we were experiencing 1500, 2500
IEDs a month -- and finding and clearing half of them, we were gaining
an enormous amount of forensics and biometrics information. We use that
in the COIC [Counter-IED Operations Integration Center] to our
advantage It is our asymetric advantage." US House Rep Duncan Hunter noted a lack of mobilization. He referred to NPR's report
on IEDs this week and how, despite all the money being spent, it was
human beings noting, for example, "that corpse wasn't there yesterday"
and guessing that it appeared to hide an IED. He noted that Marines in
Afghanistan report they have only rarely seen predator drones and that
instead they rely on "hand held mine sweepers -- a version of which
people use on the beach to find coins." He also showed a child's
innocence or foolilshness as he lived in a world where only the
'guilty' were killed. US
House Rep Duncan Hunter: This doesn't make me feel comfortable that we
are truly doing everything that we can right now. Once-once more, if
Secretary Gates said, "No more IEDs to be buried" -- I understand that
there are tons in Afghanistan and they can be turned on like that at
any point in time. But we could do that. We could stop IEDs from being
buried if we mobilize to do it. And -- and if we want to politically
about this war too -- it would fall off the map if nobody was dying.
Iraq's not in the paper anymore because nobody's dying. One reason is
we've knocked off IEDs, huge in 2007 and 2008, with [Gen William] Odum
by killing over 3,000 IED placers. Project Odom with IEDS killed more
people than every single other person in Iraq put together -- with all
the offensive operations, Odom killed more and they were all bad guys
-- not one single civilian, they were all inputting IEDs. "Not
one single civilian." Just "bad guys." Because a drone is judge and
jury. So if a drone says it's "bad guys" that's all the proof Duncan
Hunter needs. (And, to clarify, this is Duncan Hunter the younger, the
32-year-old elected to his father's seat. Still wet behind the ears and
with a child's wide-eyes, he needs correcting, not the blanket approval
Snyder gave him when Snyder followed Hunter. And someone might have
bothered to inform Hunter that, despite his claims that "nobody's
dying" in Iraq, Iraq saw at least 155 people die on Sunday alone.
"Nobody's dying"? That didn't require a correction? Did he mean no US
service members? If so, even that's wrong because there are 8 announced
dead in Iraq so far this month -- granted 2 of them were announced
today so, at the time of the hearing, only 6 had been announced. And
it's a good thing to Duncan Hunter that the news media walked away from
Iraq? Really? (Hunter is a veteran of both the Iraq and Afghanistan
Wars, FYI.) Congress had time for that nonsense yesterday. Not for
anything important, but they had time for that.
Posted at 02:32 pm by cedricsbigmix
Permalink
Oct 31, 2009
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills)
Friday,
October 30, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the US military
announces more deaths, no movement on an election law, a new attack on
press freedoms in Iraq, nepotisim is an ugly thing, and more. Today the US military announced:
"BAGHDAD -- A Multi-National Division-Baghdad Soldier died, Oct. 30, of
non-combat related injuries sustained in a vehicle accident. 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 service
members are announced through the U.S. Department of Defense Official Website
[. . .] The announcements are made on the Website no earlier than 24
hours after notification of the service member's primary next of kin.
The incident is under investigation." And they announced:
"CONTINGENCY OPERATING BASE, Iraq -- A Soldier assigned to
Multi-National Division - South died of non-combat related injury
October 30. [. . .] The incident is under investigation." The
announcements bring the total number of US service members killed in
Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4355. On the second hour of today's The Diane Rehm Show, Iraq was addressed by guest host Frank Senso, NPR's Tom Gjelten, CNN's Elise Labott and McClatchy Newspapers' Jonathan Landay. Frank
Senso: To Iraq now, and in a few minutes, to our phone calls, to bring
our audience into this and any other conversation that they may want to
have with respect to what's going on in the world. But in Iraq
discussions amidst ongoing, violence, intensifying violence in some
cases, about trying to fix the national election law because that is
what is looming large. Jonathan Landay, what's the landscape look like
right now? Jonathan
S. Landay: Well they've tried for a third time to pass an election law
in time for the January elections and they've failed again. The issue
-- there are a number of issues, but the main issue has to do with the
city of Kirkuk in northern Iraq and uh a city that sits atop billions
of gallons of untapped oil. Uh, the issue has to do with the -- what
census is going to be used to register voters there. Now this is a city
that the Kurds -- now this is right now a predominately Kurdish city.
It was, the Kurds say, a predominately Kurdish city before the reign of
Saddam Hussein who ethically [ethnically] cleansed Kurds out of the
city and brought in Arabs. The issue is, do you -- since the fall of
Saddam Hussein, the Kurds have been restoring their majority in that
city and, indeed, other ethnic groups claim over uh restoring their
majority, bringing in more Kurds than there had been before. The Kurds
want voter registration to be based on the most recent census, I think
it was in fact, done this year. The Sunni Arabs and other ethnic groups
there -- the Turkomen for instance -- want the voter registration based
on the 2004 census and they have not been able to come to an agreement
on this and this has hung up the passage of this law and what it really
-- and what it really comes down to it appears is contol over that
massive amount of untapped petroleum. Frank
Senso: And yet this-this-this dispute, this stand off over the election
law comes just after this Sunday terrible bombing in Baghdad, the worst
in two years killing more than 150, wounding hundreds more, severely
damaging three major government buildings now there's been an arrest
of some 50 odd security and there was some suggestion that this
intensifying violence might drive the politicians to nail down this
election law and drive those to some kind of political, if not
resolution, progress. Tom? Tom
Gjelten: Well it seems, Frank, that the Iranians, I mean the Iraqis,
have become so inured to this kind of violence that just sort of
everything proceeds normally and that's true I think in both a good
sense and a bad sense. In a good sense, there has been this move
towards stability and peace in Iraq and Iraq's been filling more
confident about their future and they seem amazingly enough to have
taken this bombing in stride in a sense. I mean there have been other
bombings -- Frank Sesno: It's almost unimaginable, isn't it? Tom
Gjelten: It's almost unaimaginable. But they have -- this is six years
that they've been through this and they seem to be able to cope with
these great tragedies. On the other hand, the negative side is that,
as you say, you know, you would -- you would hope that this would jolt
them into sort of some reality but, again, they become so used to this
that they just proceed with the same stalemate. Frank Sesno: What's behind the uptick in violence, Elise? Elise
Labott: Well, we saw -- first we saw an uptick in violence in August
and there were also some massive bombings at the Foreign Ministry, at
the Finance Ministry and this seemed to be kind of a way to sew
sectarian tensions once again and they thought that maybe this would
lead Iraq down the path it was in 2006, 2007 with major sectarian
tensions. Now what officials says is they think that these foreign
fighters are [or?] the real hard core al Qaeda in Iraq are trying just
at anything, they tried at religious targets, now they're just trying
at softer targets to kill a lot of people. They think maybe it can
effect the election in January. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has been
running as the security candidate. He's the one that's bringing
stability to Iraq, he's the one that got US forces out of the city. The
question is now is this going to effect his standing as the security
candidate. Jonathan
S. Landay: There may be also something else going on here. The more
instability, I think perhaps the insurgen -- whoever is behind these
bombings create, in their mind, it delays perhaps the departure of
American forces and what do you get from that? Well you get a delay or
perhaps problems coming up with additional American forces to send to
Afghanistan and there may very well be that thinking going on on the
part of those who are responsible for these massive bombings. On the above. Jonathan S. Landay used the term census. That is incorrect. There has been no census. The issue, which McClatchy's Sarah Issa and Hannah Allem and which the New York Times' Timothy Williams
have outlines, is where the voting rolls for 2009 or the voting rolls
for 2004 will be used. There has been no census. "Census" is a
concrete term. And, in fact, a census in Kirkuk is mandated -- as is a
referendum -- by Iraq's 2005 Constitution. No census has been
conducted. This is not a minor issue and it goes to the dispute over
Kirkuk. "Census" was the wrong term to use. There is NO census thus
far. That's (A). (B) Tom Gjelten. What the
___ was that? I'm reminded of when Goodtime Gals Linda Robinson and
Gwen Ifill decided to discuss Blackwater's September 17, 2007 slaughter
( see the October 8, 2007 snapshot)
-- a discussion noteable for its appalling ignorance and gross lack of
concern for human life. Gjelten can argue that some of his remarks
were intended to be about officials. But he can only argue that about
some of his remarks. And what exactly does he want Iraqis to do?
They're shell shocked and just because he hasn't reported on the
multitude of studies, THE MULTITUDE OF STUDIES, on the effects this
illegal war has had on Iraqi children doesn't mean the damage isn't
real and doesn't exist. So his happy talk bulls**t was embarrassing.
That was really a shameful moment for NPR. The 'good' and the 'bad' of
the bombings? How appalling. What made it worse for NPR was that it
wasn't a guest from, for example, NBC News. It was an NPR reporter.
That's shameful. The good and the bad of bombings? Pay attention,
Tommy. Our children are surrounded by
violnce. Most of them are traumatized. I call them the silent victims.
Our Iraqi childeren are the silent vctims. From
January to March of last year, the World Health Organization worked
with Iraqi psychiatrists on a series of studies on the mental health of
children in the cities of Baghdad, Mosul and Dohuk. (Watch the effects of war on children ) One
of the studies on primary-school-age children in Baghdad found that
nearly half of the 600 children surveyed had experienced a major
traumatic event since the war began. Just over one in every 10 suffered
from post-traumatic stress disorder, the study found. Another
of the studies found that older children in Mosul suffered even worse.
Thirty percent of the 1,090 children surveyed showed signs of
post-traumatic stress disorder. Nearly all of those with PTSD symptoms,
92 percent, had not received any treatment, according to the study. In
fact, the doctors aren't immune to the dangers of the conflict. Fifty
percent of Iraq's psychiatrists have fled the country or been killed
since the war began, said Dr. Naeema Al-Gasseer, the WHO's
representative for Iraq. A month after CNN filed that report, NPR's Linda Wertheimer spoke with Dr. Mohammed al-Aboudi about the mental stress Iraqi children were under.
Now we can go through various reports and studies. We can enlarge and
look at other segments of the country's population. But the above
alone demonstrates how offensive Tom's statements are. The population
is shell shocked and the illegal war has caused that trauma. The
bombings that he thinks have good and bad are the same violence
responsible for creating the world's largest refugee crisis. And the
UN has already advised that Sunday's bombings will most likely results
in Syria and Jordan receiving some additional Iraqi refugees. I'm not
seeing any "good and bad" to the bombings. And Tom's statements were
inarticulate and offensive. Frank Senso did a fine job this week
filling in for Diane but had Diane been present, she probably would
have said something. She generally does when gas baggery replaces
discussion -- when human beings are removed from the issue, she
generally brings them back into the picture even if it means she has to
disagree with a guest. (She did that most recently with a guest gas
bagging -- and glorifying -- the drone strikes in Pakistan when she
made a point to note the civilian deaths the man was dismissing.)
Tom's statements were offensive and it's only more so because he works
for NPR. He declared that "you would hope that this would jolt them
into sort of some reality" -- Tom, we'd hope the reality of the
violence in Iraq and the fact that it is an inhabited country would
jolt you into some sort of reality but there's no evidence, as yet,
that it has. Let's break that up for a moment to note this: What
are the lessons of Iraq that I carry with me? The cultures are as
different as mountains and desert, and for outsiders, there is a
familiar struggle to see the place as it truly is, not as we might wish
it would be. Back in 2003, the Americans wanted to believe that an age
of brotherhood and integration, loosed by American military might, had
come to Iraq. Many Iraqis wanted to believe it, too. Thinking too much
about the depth of distrust, long latent between sects and ethnicities,
would mean acknowledging that a frenzy of violence waited in the wings.
They swept into the desert sands the centuries-long struggle of Sunnis
and Shiites for dominance in the fertile river basin between the Tigris
and Euphrates Rivers. It was as if officials thought that perhaps by
saying they were brothers, they would become them. Back
to NPR, (C) Jonathan S. Landay and Elise Labott's speculation --
presented as such with Labott making clear she was referring to what
officials were stating. It's a shame that more time wasn't spent on
that. No one knows why the bombings are taking place (other than due
to the ongoing, illegal war). Could they be to influence the
elections? Possibly. Could they be to harm Nouri al-Maliki?
Possibly. But it's equally true that the message can be sent
throughout Iraq. The August 9th bombing just outside Mosul,
for example, was deadly (at least 35 dead) and it received huge
attention within Iraq and outside of it. Why target only Baghdad if
the issue is just the elections? It's not as if only residents of
Baghdad will be voting. Equally true is that there are other areas
that should be easier to attack than the region targeted on Sunday. So
why those targets? Puppet
government police forces arrested three people claimed to be wanted in
al Hadbaa area of eastern Mosul. In
al Furat area of Baghdad, continous arrest and raid campaigns
perpetrated by government army forces led indiscriminate arrests of
dozens. Eyewitnesses said that aforementioned forces used sectarian and
irritating slogans beating civilians. During the arrest campaigns the
area was monitored by American occupation forces. On
the other hand, government police and army forces arrested eight
civilians in various areas of Diyala Province. In Basra, government police forces arrested 20 people in raid and search campaign alleged to be wanted. In
Tuzkharmotu of Saladin Province, government police forces arrested
three civilians who were beaten, insulted and
irritated. In
Latifiya of southern Baghdad, sectarian government army forces arrested
seven civilians in raid and search attacks. Today Deng Shasha (Xinhua) reports
that Iraq's Sunni vice president (Iraq has two vice presidents -- one
Sunni, one Shia) Tariq al-Hashimi has "called on an evaluation of
running the security dossier after Sunday's bloody suicide bombings
that claimed the lives of 155 Iraqis." Meanwhile Prashant Rao (AFP) reports
that today saw many clerics using the sermons to call out "Iraqi
authorities" and quotes Sheikh Abdul Mahdi al-Karbalai stating, "With
insurgents having repeated the same bombings, with the same style and
in the same secure area, we have to review the security plan that has
been implemented in Baghdad" while Grand Ayatollah al-Sistani declared,
"I demand immediate and urgent checks for the reasons that led to teh
bombings." Nouri's government rsponse has been to attack Syria
(naturally) and to attack the press (ibid). On the latter, Azzaman reports
he has "banned movement by press vehicles with equipment to broadcast
live. [. . . ] The order has been issued by the military command of
Baghdad operations which specificially denies television broadcasters
the right of live coverage." Turning to some of today's reported violence . . . Bombings? Shootings? Corpses? Reuters notes
1 corpse discovered in Mosul while 1 police officer -- who may or may
not have been part of the investigation into Sunday's bombings -- was
discovered dead (from a shooting) in his Baghdad office. Violence
was kind-of, sort-of an issue yesterday in the US House Armed Services
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. The hearing was about
IEDs and the money spent on studying them. The Pentagon's James Schear
and Lt Gen Thomas Metz as well as the GAO's William Solis were the
witnesses, Vic Snyder is the Subcomittee Chair. Subcommittee
Chair Vic Snyder: IEDs remain the number one cause of casulities to
coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Although IEDs are not a new
threat, they have been used with unprecedented frequency in Iraq and
Afghanistan. While the decrease in successful attacks in Iraq is
encouraging, that success has not been replicated in Afghanistan which
has seen an increase in success in fatality attacks with our increase
in forces there. Since former CENTCOM commander General [John]
Abizaid called for a Manhattan Project like effort 5 years ago to
defeat IEDs, Congress has provided nearly $17 billion to DoD's efforts.
This effort has grown from a twelve-man army task force to the Jointed
IED Defeat Organization, or JIEDDO, which currently employs a staff of
about 3600 dedicated government, military and contract personnel. Lt
Gen Thomas F. Metz declared, "What's really different in the two
theaters is that over time in Iraq, as we were experiencing 1500, 2500
IEDs a month -- and finding and clearing half of them, we were gaining
an enormous amount of forensics and biometrics information. We use that
in the COIC [Counter-IED Operations Integration Center] to our
advantage It is our asymetric advantage." US House Rep Duncan Hunter noted a lack of mobilization. He referred to NPR's report
on IEDs this week and how, despite all the money being spent, it was
human beings noting, for example, "that corpse wasn't there yesterday"
and guessing that it appeared to hide an IED. He noted that Marines in
Afghanistan report they have only rarely seen predator drones and that
instead they rely on "hand held mine sweepers -- a version of which
people use on the beach to find coins." He also showed a child's
innocence or foolilshness as he lived in a world where only the
'guilty' were killed. US House Rep
Duncan Hunter: This doesn't make me feel comfortable that we are truly
doing everything that we can right now. Once-once more, if Secretary
Gates said, "No more IEDs to be buried" -- I understand that there are
tons in Afghanistan and they can be turned on like that at any point in
time. But we could do that. We could stop IEDs from being buried if we
mobilize to do it. And -- and if we want to politically about this war
too -- it would fall off the map if nobody was dying. Iraq's not in the
paper anymore because nobody's dying. One reason is we've knocked off
IEDs, huge in 2007 and 2008, with [Gen William] Odum by killing over
3,000 IED placers. Project Odom with IEDS killed more people than every
single other person in Iraq put together -- with all the offensive
operations, Odom killed more and they were all bad guys -- not one
single civilian, they were all inputting IEDs. "Not
one single civilian." Just "bad guys." Because a drone is judge and
jury. So if a drone says it's "bad guys" that's all the proof Duncan
Hunter needs. (And, to clarify, this is Duncan Hunter the younger, the
32-year-old elected to his father's seat. Still wet behind the ears
and with a child's wide-eyes, he needs correcting, not the blanket
approval Snyder gave him when Snyder followed Hunter. And someone
might have bothered to inform Hunter that, despite his claims that
"nobody's dying" in Iraq, Iraq saw at least 155 people die on Sunday
alone. "Nobody's dying"? That didn't require a correction? Did he
mean no US service members? If so, even that's wrong because there are
8 announced dead in Iraq so far this month -- granted 2 of them were
announced today so, at the time of the hearing, only 6 had been
announced. And it's a good thing to Duncan Hunter that the news media
walked away from Iraq? Really? (Hunter is a veteran of both the Iraq
and Afghanistan Wars, FYI.) Congress had time for that nonsense
yesterday. Not for anything important, but they had time for that. Politicians
always clamor that we have to "support our troops" and take care of our
veterans first. The White House Web site quotes Obama's proclamation
that "we...owe our veterans the care they were promised and the
benefits that they have earned." But
the VA's latest failure to deliver on educational benefits--coming just
a few years after the scandal of VA health care negligence at Walter
Reed Army Medical Center in Washington D.C.--leaves these lofty
assertions sounding like just another example of the politicians' empty
rhetoric. And given
Obama's increasingly clear record of impressive speeches followed by
little action, some veterans are calling his administration "the
audacity of nope." While the veterans at
the VA office in Chicago expressed relief at finally receiving their
first check, the bitterness persists. Bureaucratic red tape and
mismanagement always holds up money and benefits for veterans, but
there always seems to be an abundant supply of cash for bank bailouts,
the "cash for clunkers" program to help U.S. automakers, a failed
Olympic bid for the city of Chicago, or a bloated Pentagon
budget. How is that
related? One damn hearing. That's all the Congress is going to hold on
that scandal? Really? One damn hearing. They fawned over VA
Secretary Eric Shinseki October 14th
-- even when he admitted that the VA knew before he became the
Secretary (and that he found out as soon as he became the Secretary)
that they wouldn't be able to implement the benefit checks in a timely
manner. They acted like smiling zombies. October 15th,
when he was present, they were suddenly concerned for their one and
only hearing thus far into the scandal. That's disgusting. That
effected so many veterans and it got so little attention from
Congress. Most importantly, it's still not 'fixed.' Read Martin
Smith's report. But Congress has other things to do and, point of
fact, the Senate held no hearings on the issue. Want to explain how
that happened? Meanwhile Lauren DeFranco (WABC -- link has text and video) reports
Christal Wagenhauser gave birth to a two month premature daughter and
she and the family want Cpl [Keith] Wagenhouser -- currently stationed
in Iraq -- home to see the baby: "If the baby's condition deteriorates,
it would take Wagenhauser a week to get home. At that point, it would
be too late."Jennifer Logan (CBS) reports
that Keith Wagenhauser was finally given time to visit his family and
arrived in New York yesterday and explains: "In an incubator adorned
with her father's military photo, Madison, born by life-saving
caesarean section, weighing just 2-pounds 11-ounces is being treated in
the neonatal intensive care unit of Stony Brook University Medical
Center. Initially, marine brass explained that emergency leave is
granted only in cases of imminent or actual death in their immediate
family and that Madison's condition was not sufficiently life
threatening enough to grant an exception." So while the military brass
did the right thing, what's the hold up with the US Congress when it
comes to the latest (known) threat to deport the spouse of a veteran? Iraq War veteran Jack Barrios would probably love some downtime with his family but the government keeps creating problems as LA's KABC reports (link has text and video): Subha
Ravindhran: [. . .] Frances Barrios considers herself an American. She
grew up and went to high school here in Van Nuys but for the past 17
years, she's been living in this country illegally. Now she and her
husband, an Iraq War veteran, must deal with the consequences.
26-year-old Army Specialist Jack Barrios can barely talk about the time
he served in Iraq. Jack Barrios: I'll skip that. Subha Ravindhran: You don't want to talk about that. Jack Barrios: Yeah. Subha
Ravindhran: But what he can speak about is the battle his family is
going through now. His wife, 23-year-old Frances, is facing deporation
back to Guatemala -- a country she left when she was just
six-years-old. Jack Barrios: I'm pretty sad and angry that we will get separated. Subha
Ravindhran: Not only will three-year-old Matthew and one-year-old
Allanna be separated from their mother, but Jack will also lose his
main caretaker. Since he returned from Iraq in 2007, he's been
suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
Frances Barrios: He was
an outgoing person, you could say. He used to like being outside with
his friends and just, you know, having a good time. When he came back,
like I said, he shut down. It wasn't him. Subha Ravindhran: Their attorney Jessica Dominguez says the chances of keeping Frances here are slim. Jessica
Dominguez: It's just mind boggling to try to understand that in a
situation like this, Mr. Barrios cannot be assured that his family is
going to stay together because immigration laws do not protect the
sanctity of his family at this point. The
US government wants to deport her. (She's from Guatemala originally,
entered the US with her mother when she was just six-years-old.) As
offensive as that is -- and it's really offensive -- it's also
economically stupid because Jack suffers from PTSD. The US government
is going to provide him a caretaker who will do all that Frances
currently does? Really? Teresa Watanabe (Los Angeles Times) reported earlier this week: But
as he undergoes counseling and swallows anti-depressants, the soldier
is fighting an even bigger battle: to keep his family from collapsing
as his wife, an undocumented immigrant from Guatemala, faces
deportation. His
wife, 23-year-old Frances, was illegally brought to the United States
by her mother at age 6, learned of her status in high school and
discovered just last year that removal proceedings have been started.
Her possible deportation has left Barrios in panic as he contemplates
life without her. The
Army reservist says his wife is the family's anchor, caring for their
year-old daughter and 3-year-old son and helping him battle his
post-traumatic stress."She's
my everything," Barrios said as he sat glumly in the family's sparsely
furnished but tidy Van Nuys apartment. "Without her, I can't function.
It would be like taking away a part of my soul." Hundreds
of U.S. soldiers are facing the same trouble as they fight to legalize
their spouses' status, a difficult process that has affected their
military readiness, according to Margaret Stock, a lieutenant colonel
in the Army Reserves and an immigration attorney specializing in
military cases. Dropping back to the October 21st snapshot, "In the US yesterday, a twenty-year-old Iraqi woman was run over along with her 43-year-old friend. James King (Phoenix News) reports
that police are looking for the twenty-year-old's father, Faleh Hassan
Almaleki, whom they supsect of running the two women down and that the
alleged motive is that the daughter was 'becoming too westernized.' Katie Fisher (ABC 15 -- link has text and video) reports
the 20-year-old woman is Noor Faleh Almaleki and her 43-year-old friend
is Amal Edan Khalaf and the friend is also the mother of the
twenty-year-old's boyfriend." CNN reports
he was arrested yesterday in Atlanta -- after he had gone to Mexico,
flown to London where British officials refuse him admittance in
England, and returned to the US. CNN states his daughter is still in
the hospital and "unresponsive" to treatment thus far. Sarah Netter (ABC News -- link has text and video) reports on the apparent attempted honor killing and notes that Noor's status as "life-threatening condition". TV notes. NOW on PBS begins
airing on many PBS stations tonight (check local listings for times and
for other dates if it doesn't air on your PBS station tonight): Home
to a worldwide summit on climate change in early December, Denmark is
setting a global example in creating clean power, storing it, and using
it responsibly. Their reliance on wind power to produce electricity
without contributing to global warming is well known, but now they're
looking to drive the point home with electric cars. To do this, they've
partnered with social entrepreneur Shai Agassi and his company Better
Place.This week, NOW
investigates how the Danish government and Better Place are working
together to put electric cars into the hands of as many Danish families
as possible. The idea is still having trouble getting out of the garage
here in America, but Denmark could be an inspiration.Will so much green enthusiasm bring about a "Copenhagen Protocol"?Washington Week
also begins airing tonight on many PBS stations and sitting around the
table with Gwen this week are Ceci Connolly (Washington Post), John
Dickerson (Slate and CBS News), Marilyn Serafini (National Journal) and
Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers). Meanwhile Bonnie Erbe
will sit down with Karen Czarnecki, Melinda Henneberger, Eleanor Holmes
Norton and Genevieve Wood 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: H1N1 Vaccine Scott Pelley reports on the manufacture, distribution and safety of the H1N1 flu vaccine. | Watch Video Yakuza How
does a foreigner jump the line in America for a life-saving liver
transplant? It might be because he is a high-ranking member of Japan's
mafia, known as the Yakuza, whose criminal influence is worldwide. Lara
Logan reports. The Movie Pirates They
are the bane of Hollywood: criminals who copy films - sometimes before
the movies even reach the theater - and distribute them illegally on
the Internet, costing Hollywood billions in lost revenue. Lesley Stahl
reports. 60 Minutes, this Sunday, Nov. 1, at 7 p.m. ET/PT. |
Posted at 10:23 am by cedricsbigmix
Permalink
Oct 30, 2009
BULLY BOY
PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG
MIX -- THE KOOL-AID
TABLECONFRONTED
WITH THE ALLEGATIONS THAT MONEY IS BUYING ACCESS AND POSSIBLY INFLUENCE AT THE
WHITE HOUSE, CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O DECLARED THAT WAS NOT WHAT WAS
HAPPENING. "WHAT'S GOING ON," HE EXPLAINED, "IS THAT I JUST HAVE A
LITTLE FAN CLUB AND THEY PAY DUES AND IF THEY PAY SAY X, THEY GET TO HAVE LUNCH
WITH ME. AND IF THEY PAY Y, THEY GET A CALL FROM ME. HEY, IF THEY PAY Z, I'LL
EVEN GIVE THEM A WAKE UP KISS AND FIX PANCAKES AND BACON." "THEY'RE
FANS," BARRY INSISTED. "FANS. THEY'LL DO ANYTHING. THEY'LL PAY ANYTHING. IT'S A
MUTUALLY REWARDING RELATIONSHIP." FROM
THE TCI WIRE:
Today the US military
announced: "JOINT BASE BALAD, Iraq – A Soldier who was currently
assigned to the 13th Sustainment Command (Expeditionary) died Wednesday of a
non-combat related injury at Camp Adder, Iraq. The name 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 at http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/. 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 total number of US service members
killed in Iraq to 4353.
Meanwhile Sunday's Baghdad bombings have pretty much erased the August
Baghdad bombings ("Bloody Wednesday," "Black Wednesday," "Gory Wednesday,"
"Iraq's 9-11," etc.). Press TV
reports, "Iraq has arrested some 60 security forces over the weekend
twin bombings which targeted government buildings in Baghdad, killing up to 153
people." The Sentinel states the 60 were compoes
of "11 army officers and 50 security officials". Xinhua adds, " The
arrested were in charge of providing security for a downtown Baghdad district
which was hit by the deadly suicide attacks that targeted government buildings,
Major General Qassim Atta said." BBC News notes, "The BBC's
Gabriel Gatehouse in Baghdad says it is not clear whether those arrested are
accused of negligence or collusion. However, he added, it seems to confirm what
many people have suspected - that the security forces are susceptible to
infiltration by insurgents or are just not up to the job." Reuters reports Qassim al-Moussawi,
spokesperson for Baghdad security, "said that officers, foot soldiers and police
in areas where attacks happen would be arrested in the future and placed under
investigation." Jomana Karadsheh (CNN)
adds, Baghdad Governor "Abdul Razzaq said security forces made
mistakes and were negligent in their work, and he demanded a court-martial for
those who allowed explosive-laden vehicles to get through checkpoints."
Karadsheh also notes the number arrested is 61. Timothy Williams and
Mohammed Hussein (New York Times) explain, "The statement
Thursday that announced the arrest order came from Baghad Operations Command,
which is responsible for security in the capital and reports directly to Prime
Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki. The statement did not offer any further details,
so it remained unclear whether the 61 security force members were suspected of
having adied those who carried out the attacks."
The death toll for the Sunday bombings is at least 155 and does include
children. Mohammed Jamjoom (CNN)
reports: The force of the
blast threw Rawnaq against the wall of her office at the Ministry of Justice.
She instantly thought of her two children in the day care center just two floors
below."I rushed downstairs and found
all the children under the rubble," says Rawnaq, "My daughter Tabarak was
standing near the stairs. My son Hamoodi outside. Me and a colleague took them
out, running. A police car drove us to the hospital."Both children were injured, 3-year-old Tabarak much
more so than her 2-year-old brother. Severe head and back injuries have left the
little girl needing extensive surgery and unable to sleep due to unceasing pain.
She is also deeply afraid.
Back in August, the day before Bloody Wednesday, Iraqi Thug and Prime
Minister Nouri al-Maliki was in Syria where he was demanding that nearly 200
Iraqis be handed over to Iraq. It was all like a bad acid flashback since Nouri
spent years in Syria and the Syrians refused to turn him over at the whims of
Saddam Hussein. Nouri was grateful back then, now he's just a raging drama
queen. Bloody Wednesday came the next day and Nouri immediately blamed the
bombings on Syria. He and his spokespeople and cabinet would sometimes say that
it was former Ba'athists in Syria. Sometimes. Mainly they would rail against
Syria. That hasn't ceased all this time later. Phil Sands (Le Monde)
offers today that "Syria is perhaps the only country in the Arab
middle east that can truly claim to be independent from the US, and Damascus
remains a thorn in the side of American regional ambitions. [. . .] In the
post-Saddam Hussein world, the Iraqi government is jealous of its sovereignty,
an independence that goes only as deep as the presence of more than 100,000
American soldiers on Iraqi soil allows. There is little sign a planned pull-out
will be complete." Syria has a huge number of Iraqi refugees and we'll turn now
to the topic of Iraqi refugees. Joseph A. Kechichian
(Gulf News) explains:
According to the International Organisation on Migration, there are
still 1.6 million internally displaced Iraqis who cannot "return home". Many are
trying to survive "without work, their own home, schooling for children, access
to water, electricity and health care". These refugees are Iraqi citizens who
are not represented in government but whose fates will probably determine
whether the pool from which opposition forces can recruit bombers will shrink.
As it is widely recognised, remnants of the Baath party or any number of the
security services created by the old regime are still active, even if Baghdad
and its allies continue to hearken to Al Qaida.
The United Nations' World Food Program has
launched "a pilot project in Damascus" in which food vouchers are
distributed "in the form of mobile phone text messages to Iraqi refugees. [. .
.] Around one thousand families are involved in the four-month pilot phase,
which will be extended if it is successful. The project has been developed in
cooperation with the Syrian government, enabling the refugees to redeem their
vouches in state-run stores in the Jaramana and Sayeda Zeinab neighourhoods of
Damascus. The mobile phone service provider MTN has donated SIM cards for the
project." Cassandra Vinograd
(Wall St. Journal) reported Tuesday, "In the WFP program,
each family will receive one $22 voucher per person every two months. After each
transaction, families will receive an updated balance, also sent by SMS to their
mobile numbers -- free of charge. There are more than 1.2 million displaced
Iraqis in Syria, according to government figures. To date, about 130,000
regularly receive food assistance from WFP with complimentary food and non-food
assistance from the U.N.'s refugee agency." Though some have criticized the WFP
for targeting people with cell phones (under the mistaken belief that refugees
wouldn't have them), Richard Spencer
(Telegraph of London) reports, "The discovery that most of
the 130,000 people to whom the organisation provided food vouchers had mobile
phones gave officials the idea for the pilot scheme, to be targeted at 1,000
families in the first instance." Laura MacInnis
(Reuters) quotes Emilia Casella, WFP spokesperson, stating,
"They will be able to exchange their electronic vouchers for rice, wheat, flour,
lentils, chickpeas, oil and canned fish, as well as cheese and eggs -- items
that cannot usually be included in conventional aid baskets." Saeed Ahmed (CNN) quotes
Casella stating, "It infuses some contribution to the communities, because we're
not giving food away. They have to go to the local shops to buy it." Staying
with Syria, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees expects more Iraqi
refugees to flee to Syria as a result of Sunday's bombings. EU News Network
states UNHCR spokesperson Andrej Mahecic "told a delegation in Geneva
earlier this month that the United Nations recommended the resettlement of more
than 80,000 Iraqi refugees to other countries." Meanwhile UNHCR is building homes in Taza, Iraq following bombings
there this sumemr which ledft many people homeless, "Immediately
after the blast, UNHCR field staff visited Taza to assess the damage and to
distribute emergency aid to the survivors. The team found that about 160 houses,
mostly made from mud bricks, had been totally destroyed and some 400 damaged. As
a result, around 3,500 people were left without shelter. The refugee agency
immediately swung into action, funding the reconstruction of 150 collapsed homes
and the renovation of 73 shops and two other buildings in Shorja Market. The
work was carried out by an Iraqi implementing partner as part of UNHCR's
emergency shelter programme which has helped rehabilitate some 10,000
conflict-damaged buildings for refugees and internally displaced Iraqis and aims
to double this figure in 2010." But in Syria, IRIN reports, a
significant number of Iraqis are attempting to win asylum "across the Middle
East to Europe and North America" and they note, "A year after its launch,
strikingly few Iraqis have taken up the UN's Voluntary
Repatriation Programme. Less than 300 families from Syria have
returned to Iraq under the programme, though the number claiming resettlement
has grown rapidly."
The Chicago Tribune did a multi-article series at the start of the
week on Iraqi refugees in the US. The paper noted of one
group: "Back home, they worked for the Americans, as translators,
project specialists and office managers. For that, they received death threats
from militants opposed to the U.S., and they ask to remain anonymous, fearing
retribution against relatives in Iraq." Then there's Layla
Mousa whose husband is in Jordan while she and their three children
are in Chicago where she struggles to make ends meet, find work (she's a hair
dresser) and rebuffs offers of payment for sex and states, "Now I want to go
back to Iraq, not even Jordan. America is just a lie." Layla Mousa is among the
Iraqi refugees who Ahlam Mahmoud attempts
to asist even though she herself is a refugee: "She didn't have it
easy herself. When she and her two children arrived in Chicago in 2008, she had
only the clothes she was wearing when she left Syria, where, she says, she was
imprisoned for refusing to spy on foreigners. The apartment they got in Chicago
had three beds, one plate, a fork, a spoon and two knives." In Syria, Ahlam
Mahmoud was also someone refugees turned to. Using her own resourceful nature,
she quickly began developing a network of assistance and advice. Due to her
connections, the Syrian government attempted to force her to spy on other Iraqi
refugees. She refused and was thrown into prison. When the outcry and attention
became too much, the Syrian govenment ordered her released from prison and she
was quickly transported to the US. Also attempting to assist other refugees is
Fatima Hindi who became
an Iraqi government official, was then kidnapped and sought Egypt and
then the US for safety along with her three-year-old daughter Takwa. She states,
"They kidnapped me because of America. America couldn't protect me. When I first
got here, I cried on the street."
Today Nancy Eshelman
(Patriot-News) reports on Iraqi refugee Zina Alkubaisy who
ended up in the United States with her husband and their children following her
husband's kidnapping: "Alkubaisy began working the phones. She contacted people
who knew people and eventually learned what militant group had snatched her
husband. Her connections arranged to have him released the next day. But a
chilling phone call warned the couple they would not be so lucky the next time.
It would be in their best interest to leave the country."
UNHCR is concerned about the fact that some European states have
begun forcibly returning Iraqi originating from the region of Central Iraq over
the last few months. In our guidelines issued last April, we noted that in view
of the serious human rights violations and continuing security incidents
throughout Iraq, most predominantly in the central governorates, asylum-seekers
from these governorates should be considered to be in need of international
protection. UNHCR therefore advises against involuntary returns to Iraq of
persons originating from Central Iraq until there is a substantial improvement
in the security and human rights situation in the country.
This reminder comes after the UK attempted to forcibly return 44
Iraqi men to Baghdad earlier this month. They were reportedly unsuccessful
asylum claimants held in immigration removal centres in the UK. Iraq only
accepted 10 who were allowed to leave the chartered aircraft in Baghdad, and the
remaining 34 were returned to the UK and placed in immigration centres.
Other European states have signed readmission agreements with Iraq
for voluntary and forced return. Denmark has forcibly returned 38 people
originating mainly from Central and Southern Iraq since signing its agreement in
May 2009. Sweden has undertaken some 250 forced returns with an unspecified
number of returnees originating from the five central governorates of Iraq since
signing an agreement in February 2008. UNHCR has also concerns about the safety
and dignity of these returns.
Concerning asylum-seekers from the three northern governorates, as
well as those from the southern governorates and Al Anbar, UNHCR recommends that
their protection needs are assessed on an individual basis.
RECOMMENDED: " Iraq
snapshot" " Arrests in Iraq, election
bill still waits" " US military announces a
death" " Carly Simon on Today
today" " Carly Simon invites you into her
dreams" " Kucinich, computer issues" " carly
coming around again" " Equality, Russ Feingold, Carly
Simon" " Carly, Tweets, Never Been Gone" " The smell of it!!!" " Carly Simon, Dennis
Kucinich" " Pay for Play" " Barack steps in it
again" " Does he ever not talk about
himself?" " THIS JUST IN! SELF-OBSESSED
MUCH!"
Posted at 04:21 pm by cedricsbigmix
Permalink
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills)
Thursday,
October 29, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the US military
announces another death, the Iraqi refugee crisis continues, problems
with the public inquiry into the Iraq War the UK government plans to
hold, no election law passed by the Iraqi Parliament, and more. Today the US military announced:
"JOINT BASE BALAD, Iraq – A Soldier who was currently assigned to the
13th Sustainment Command (Expeditionary) died Wednesday of a non-combat
related injury at Camp Adder, Iraq. The name 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 at http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/.
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 total
number of US service members killed in Iraq to 4353. Meanwhile
Sunday's Baghdad bombings have pretty much erased the August Baghdad
bombings ("Bloody Wednesday," "Black Wednesday," "Gory Wednesday,"
"Iraq's 9-11," etc.). Press TV reports,
"Iraq has arrested some 60 security forces over the weekend twin
bombings which targeted government buildings in Baghdad, killing up to
153 people." The Sentinel states the 60 were compoes of "11 army officers and 50 security officials". Xinhua adds, " The
arrested were in charge of providing security for a downtown Baghdad
district which was hit by the deadly suicide attacks that targeted
government buildings, Major General Qassim Atta said." BBC News notes,
"The BBC's Gabriel Gatehouse in Baghdad says it is not clear whether
those arrested are accused of negligence or collusion. However, he
added, it seems to confirm what many people have suspected - that the
security forces are susceptible to infiltration by insurgents or are
just not up to the job." Reuters reports
Qassim al-Moussawi, spokesperson for Baghdad security, "said that
officers, foot soldiers and police in areas where attacks happen would
be arrested in the future and placed under investigation." Jomana Karadsheh (CNN) adds,
Baghdad Governor "Abdul Razzaq said security forces made mistakes and
were negligent in their work, and he demanded a court-martial for those
who allowed explosive-laden vehicles to get through checkpoints."
Karadsheh also notes the number arrested is 61. Timothy Williams and Mohammed Hussein (New York Times) explain,
"The statement Thursday that announced the arrest order came from
Baghad Operations Command, which is responsible for security in the
capital and reports directly to Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki.
The statement did not offer any further details, so it remained unclear
whether the 61 security force members were suspected of having adied
those who carried out the attacks." The death toll for the Sunday bombings is at least 155 and does include children. Mohammed Jamjoom (CNN) reports: The
force of the blast threw Rawnaq against the wall of her office at the
Ministry of Justice. She instantly thought of her two children in the
day care center just two floors below."I
rushed downstairs and found all the children under the rubble," says
Rawnaq, "My daughter Tabarak was standing near the stairs. My son
Hamoodi outside. Me and a colleague took them out, running. A police
car drove us to the hospital."Both
children were injured, 3-year-old Tabarak much more so than her
2-year-old brother. Severe head and back injuries have left the little
girl needing extensive surgery and unable to sleep due to unceasing
pain. She is also deeply afraid. Back
in August, the day before Bloody Wednesday, Iraqi Thug and Prime
Minister Nouri al-Maliki was in Syria where he was demanding that
nearly 200 Iraqis be handed over to Iraq. It was all like a bad acid
flashback since Nouri spent years in Syria and the Syrians refused to
turn him over at the whims of Saddam Hussein. Nouri was grateful back
then, now he's just a raging drama queen. Bloody Wednesday came the
next day and Nouri immediately blamed the bombings on Syria. He and
his spokespeople and cabinet would sometimes say that it was former
Ba'athists in Syria. Sometimes. Mainly they would rail against
Syria. That hasn't ceased all this time later. Phil Sands (Le Monde) offers
today that "Syria is perhaps the only country in the Arab middle east
that can truly claim to be independent from the US, and Damascus
remains a thorn in the side of American regional ambitions. [. . .] In
the post-Saddam Hussein world, the Iraqi government is jealous of its
sovereignty, an independence that goes only as deep as the presence of
more than 100,000 American soldiers on Iraqi soil allows. There is
little sign a planned pull-out will be complete." Syria has a huge
number of Iraqi refugees and we'll turn now to the topic of Iraqi
refugees. Joseph A. Kechichian (Gulf News) explains: According
to the International Organisation on Migration, there are still 1.6
million internally displaced Iraqis who cannot "return home". Many are
trying to survive "without work, their own home, schooling for
children, access to water, electricity and health care". These refugees
are Iraqi citizens who are not represented in government but whose
fates will probably determine whether the pool from which opposition
forces can recruit bombers will shrink. As it is widely recognised,
remnants of the Baath party or any number of the security services
created by the old regime are still active, even if Baghdad and its
allies continue to hearken to Al Qaida. The United Nations' World Food Program has launched "a
pilot project in Damascus" in which food vouchers are distributed "in
the form of mobile phone text messages to Iraqi refugees. [. . .]
Around one thousand families are involved in the four-month pilot
phase, which will be extended if it is successful. The project has been
developed in cooperation with the Syrian government, enabling the
refugees to redeem their vouches in state-run stores in the Jaramana
and Sayeda Zeinab neighourhoods of Damascus. The mobile phone service
provider MTN has donated SIM cards for the project." Cassandra Vinograd (Wall St. Journal) reported
Tuesday, "In the WFP program, each family will receive one $22 voucher
per person every two months. After each transaction, families will
receive an updated balance, also sent by SMS to their mobile numbers --
free of charge. There are more than 1.2 million displaced Iraqis in
Syria, according to government figures. To date, about 130,000
regularly receive food assistance from WFP with complimentary food and
non-food assistance from the U.N.'s refugee agency." Though some have
criticized the WFP for targeting people with cell phones (under the
mistaken belief that refugees wouldn't have them), Richard Spencer (Telegraph of London) reports,
"The discovery that most of the 130,000 people to whom the organisation
provided food vouchers had mobile phones gave officials the idea for
the pilot scheme, to be targeted at 1,000 families in the first
instance." Laura MacInnis (Reuters) quotes
Emilia Casella, WFP spokesperson, stating, "They will be able to
exchange their electronic vouchers for rice, wheat, flour, lentils,
chickpeas, oil and canned fish, as well as cheese and eggs -- items
that cannot usually be included in conventional aid baskets." Saeed Ahmed (CNN) quotes
Casella stating, "It infuses some contribution to the communities,
because we're not giving food away. They have to go to the local shops
to buy it." Staying with Syria, the United Nations High Commissioner
for Refugees expects more Iraqi refugees to flee to Syria as a result
of Sunday's bombings. EU News Network states
UNHCR spokesperson Andrej Mahecic "told a delegation in Geneva earlier
this month that the United Nations recommended the resettlement of more
than 80,000 Iraqi refugees to other countries." Meanwhile UNHCR is building homes in Taza, Iraq following bombings there this sumemr which ledft many people homeless,
"Immediately after the blast, UNHCR field staff visited Taza to assess
the damage and to distribute emergency aid to the survivors. The team
found that about 160 houses, mostly made from mud bricks, had been
totally destroyed and some 400 damaged. As a result, around 3,500
people were left without shelter. The refugee agency immediately swung
into action, funding the reconstruction of 150 collapsed homes and the
renovation of 73 shops and two other buildings in Shorja Market. The
work was carried out by an Iraqi implementing partner as part of
UNHCR's emergency shelter programme which has helped rehabilitate some
10,000 conflict-damaged buildings for refugees and internally displaced
Iraqis and aims to double this figure in 2010." But in Syria, IRIN reports,
a significant number of Iraqis are attempting to win asylum "across the
Middle East to Europe and North America" and they note, "A year after
its launch, strikingly few Iraqis have taken up the UN's Voluntary Repatriation Programme.
Less than 300 families from Syria have returned to Iraq under the
programme, though the number claiming resettlement has grown rapidly." The Chicago Tribune did a multi-article series at the start of the week on Iraqi refugees in the US. The paper noted of one group:
"Back home, they worked for the Americans, as translators, project
specialists and office managers. For that, they received death threats
from militants opposed to the U.S., and they ask to remain anonymous,
fearing retribution against relatives in Iraq." Then there's Layla Mousa
whose husband is in Jordan while she and their three children are in
Chicago where she struggles to make ends meet, find work (she's a hair
dresser) and rebuffs offers of payment for sex and states, "Now I want
to go back to Iraq, not even Jordan. America is just a lie." Layla
Mousa is among the Iraqi refugees who Ahlam Mahmoud attempts to asist
even though she herself is a refugee: "She didn't have it easy herself.
When she and her two children arrived in Chicago in 2008, she had only
the clothes she was wearing when she left Syria, where, she says, she
was imprisoned for refusing to spy on foreigners. The apartment they
got in Chicago had three beds, one plate, a fork, a spoon and two
knives." In Syria, Ahlam Mahmoud was also someone refugees turned to.
Using her own resourceful nature, she quickly began developing a
network of assistance and advice. Due to her connections, the Syrian
government attempted to force her to spy on other Iraqi refugees. She
refused and was thrown into prison. When the outcry and attention
became too much, the Syrian govenment ordered her released from prison
and she was quickly transported to the US. Also attempting to assist
other refugees is Fatima Hindi who became an Iraqi government official,
was then kidnapped and sought Egypt and then the US for safety along
with her three-year-old daughter Takwa. She states, "They kidnapped me
because of America. America couldn't protect me. When I first got here,
I cried on the street." Today Nancy Eshelman (Patriot-News) reports
on Iraqi refugee Zina Alkubaisy who ended up in the United States with
her husband and their children following her husband's kidnapping:
"Alkubaisy began working the phones. She contacted people who knew
people and eventually learned what militant group had snatched her
husband. Her connections arranged to have him released the next day.
But a chilling phone call warned the couple they would not be so lucky
the next time. It would be in their best interest to leave the
country." UNHCR
is concerned about the fact that some European states have begun
forcibly returning Iraqi originating from the region of Central Iraq
over the last few months. In our guidelines issued last April, we noted
that in view of the serious human rights violations and continuing
security incidents throughout Iraq, most predominantly in the central
governorates, asylum-seekers from these governorates should be
considered to be in need of international protection. UNHCR therefore
advises against involuntary returns to Iraq of persons originating from
Central Iraq until there is a substantial improvement in the security
and human rights situation in the country. This
reminder comes after the UK attempted to forcibly return 44 Iraqi men
to Baghdad earlier this month. They were reportedly unsuccessful asylum
claimants held in immigration removal centres in the UK. Iraq only
accepted 10 who were allowed to leave the chartered aircraft in
Baghdad, and the remaining 34 were returned to the UK and placed in
immigration centres. Other
European states have signed readmission agreements with Iraq for
voluntary and forced return. Denmark has forcibly returned 38 people
originating mainly from Central and Southern Iraq since signing its
agreement in May 2009. Sweden has undertaken some 250 forced returns
with an unspecified number of returnees originating from the five
central governorates of Iraq since signing an agreement in February
2008. UNHCR has also concerns about the safety and dignity of these
returns. Concerning asylum-seekers
from the three northern governorates, as well as those from the
southern governorates and Al Anbar, UNHCR recommends that their
protection needs are assessed on an individual basis. The second problem is a profound lack of understanding or respect for the rule of law at all levels of UKBA. Six Iraqis
were taken off the removals flight because they had managed to get in
touch with good lawyers. A high court judge was persuaded that the
flight might be unlawful because the route and destination were unknown
and Iraq is a highly unstable country, as the appalling recent bomb
attacks and interviews
with those who did return to Iraq vividly demonstrate. The flight was
no less unlawful for the other Iraqis yet UKBA went on regardless,
simply because the other Iraqis did not manage to get a lawyer. Some
may disagree with the refugee convention and human rights law, but they
are the law of the land and while they remain so they must be
respected. But
like an unruly toddler, the Home Office believes that what matters is
whether they are caught, not what the rules are. Time and time again
the Home Office is found to be acting unlawfully: on prolonged unlawful
detention, secret policies, misleading the courts and failure to
respect court judgments in the last fortnight alone. Substantial
compensation is paid to some of the victims as a result. What UKBA
fails to appreciate is that there are many, many more victims whose
rights are violated but who never manage to secure the protection of
the rule of law. Friday's snapshot noted that Christians in northern Iraq were under attack again and weighing whether or not to leave Kirkuk. Richard Spencer (Telegraph of London) noted
"Baghdad's dwindling Christian population. Even in the darkest days of
Saddam Hussein's rule, it was a thriving community. Now it is half
gone,d riven out by the casual lawlessness of the streets." Iraqi
Christians make up a significant number of external refugees. (It
should also be noted that Baghdad's Jewish community has been decimated
since the start of the illegal war.) While much attention was given to
the government buildings damaged and destroyed in Sunday's bombings, Adirenne S. Gaines (Charisma Magazine) reports that St. George's Church in Baghdad was also badly damaged. Though the issue wasn't important enough for the New York Times to put it in print, they did post a blog by Rod Nordland:
"Built in 1936 by the British military during their occupation of Iraq,
the church loast some of its famous stained-glass windows when the
United States military bombed a nearby building in 1992, and more were
destroyed during the invasion in 2003, leaving only three examples
remaining. They were mementos of British regiments stationed there.
Sunday the last three stained glass windows were blown out by suicide
bomb blasts that destroyed three Iraqi government buildings nearby,
according to the church's lay pastor, Faiz Georges." Episcopal Life notes the church has approximately 2,000 members. On the issue of Iraq's religous minorities, Senator Carl Levin's office released the following statement Monday: WASHINGTON
-- Calling the plight of religious minorities in Iraq "a tragic
consequence" of the war there, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., today
introduced a Senate resolution calling on the U.S. government, Iraqi
government and United Nations Mission in Iraq to take steps to
alleviate the dangers facing these minority groups. Sens. Sam
Brownback, R-Kan., and Dick Durbin, D-Ill., joined Levin in sponsoring
the sense of the Senate resolution."While
violence has declined in Iraq overall, religious minorities continue to
be the targets of violence and intimidation," Levin said. "Members of
many minority groups who have fled other parts of the country have
settled in the north, only to find themselves living in some of the
most unstable and violent regions of Iraq. We strongly urge the Iraqi
government, the United Nations and the U.S. government to address this
crisis without delay."Of
approximately 1.4 million Christians of various denominations living in
Iraq in 2003, only 500,000 to 700,000 remain. Another minority group,
the Sabean Mandeans, has seen its population decline by more than 90
percent. Iraq's Jewish community, once one of the largest in the Arab
world, has almost ceased to exist.According
to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, members of
religious minorities "have experienced targeted intimidation and
violence, including killings, beatings, abductions, and rapes, forced
conversions, forced marriages, forced displacement from their homes and
businesses, and violent attacks on their houses of worship and
religious leaders." The U.N. High Commissioner on Refugees reported
that in 2008, there were an estimated 2.8 million internally displaced
persons living in Iraq. Of that 2.8 million, nearly two out of three
reported fleeing their home because of a direct threat to their lives,
and, of that number, almost nine out of ten said they were targeted
because of their ethnic or religious identity.The
resolution introduced by the senators addresses the tragedy in several
ways. It states the sense of the Senate that the fate of Iraqi
religious minorities is a matter of grave concern and calls on the U.S.
government and the United Nations to urge Iraq's government to increase
security at places of worship, particularly where members of religious
minorities are known to face risks. The resolution calls for the
integration of regional and religious minorities into the Iraqi
security forces, and for those minority members to be stationed within
their own communities. The resolution calls on the Iraqi government to
ensure that minority citizens can participate in upcoming elections,
and to enforce its constitution, which guarantees "the administrative,
political, cultural, and educational rights" of minorities. Finally, it
urges a series of steps to ensure that development aid and other forms
of support flow to minority communities in Iraq. Iraq
is the source of more external refugees than any other country
currently; however, Iraq does have refugees in its own country
including the Palestinians who are trapped on borders and largely
ignored by the global community as they live lives as prisoners, unable
to leave Iraq and unable to leave the tented, border communities
they've been exiled to since the start of the illegal war. In addition
to the Palestinians, there are the Iranian refugees of the MEK.
Welcomed into Iraq by Saddam Hussein decades ago, they've called Iraq
home for some time. The Iranian government doesn't care for them so
you know Nouri's going to jump when that government snaps. Until 2009,
the US was protecting the MEK who reside in Camp Ashraf. Nouri gave
the US government repeated assurances that he would respect the
refugees. Then, on July 28th, he launched an assault on Camp Ashraf. The
situation came to a head July 28, when some 2,000 Iraqi forces stormed
Ashraf, and to add insult to injury, used American Humvees and weapons
to do so, while the Americans stood by and watched. The attack left 11
dead and 500 injured - and the Iraqis took 36 Ashraf residents as
hostages. I was one of them. At
first, we were held outside Ashraf. During the first days of captivity
we were severely beaten, and went through physical and psychological
torture. Some of us who were run over by Humvees and hit by bullets
were in excruciating pain. Then,
we were transferred to the local prison in the city of Khalis. From
there, they took us to an Iraqi military intelligence detention center
and finally to the prison at al-Muthana airfield.The goal was to break
us down. But we refused to give in. In
protestof the raid and being taken hostage, we went to a hunger strike
and refused food for weeks, and we prayed for deliverance. We had no
idea what was happening or why we were being held. And we had no idea
of the support we were getting around the world. The government
or 'government' out of Baghdad can't help the refugees or their own
people. They can't even pass an election law apparently. "If it
doesn't make a deal before this weekend, Iraq will run out of time to
organize an election before Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's term
expires," Renee Montagne observed on today's Morning Edition (NPR). Renee Montagne: What, Quil, is at stake with the delay of this election law?Quil
Lawrence: Well, as you say, the Iraqi prime minister and his
government's term run out on January 31st so the election commission
here has said they need 90 days to organize a legitimate poll and
Parliament is deadlocked on over a dozen or so complicated issues
regarding the election. They may vote on it today. If the elections are
delayed or if they are rushed, there's a risk that Iraq's government
could be deemed illegitimate and then a whole Pandora's Box of problems
can open up -- issues of legitimacy of the government, maybe even a
crisis like we've seen in Afghanistan. One big question is whether the
US has done enough to push it through, especially since their plan to
pull out 70,000 troops by August can't really start until the elections
are done.Renee
Montagne: Well six years on the ground in Baghdad, hasn't the American
embassy there worked up a fair amount of what you might call
institutional knowledge regarding Iraqi politics?Quil
Lawrence: Well the problem is it took the Obama administration four
months to get an ambassador confirmed and out here and that's taken
that ambassador another couple of months to assemble a new political
team. So he's got a good number of people with expertise in the region
-- a good number of Arabic speakers -- but they've never been to Iraq
before, many of them. So before they can have much influence, they need
to learn who the players are and build these personal relationships
with them and that could take months and years. Renee Montagne: Although haven't American diplomats been, in a sense, pressing the flesh at the Parliament.Quil
Lawrence: There's been as many as six of them at a time over at the
Parliament but it's sometimes curious who they're meeting with or not
meeting with on the Iraqi side. And like I said, they're just getting
up to speed so it's possible they could walk right past a very
important Iraqi politician in the halls of Parliament and not even know
him by face.Okay, on the above. On pulling out
troops (which is the draw-down, not the "withdrawal" as so many outlets
keep insisting -- confusing the two in a way that even the White House
doesn't) and how it can't start until after the election? Yesterday,
the KRG swore in their prime minister's cabinet. Yesterday. Elections
were held in July. In December 2005, Iraq last held the national
elections. Nouri comes along in April as the US-installed prime
minister (after the US rejected the Iraqis first choice). In May, he
announces his cabinet. Point? The counting of the votes, the verifying
and assorted other issues mean the elections are not 'over' in January
even if held then. As for a vote happening as early as today, CNN reports
that as well but notes, "The Kurdish bloc in the Iraqi parliament
intends to boycott the vote on a proposed election law if the oil-rich
province of Kirkuk is banned from voting in next year's national
elections, two Kurdish lawmakers say." Mu Xuequan (Xinhua) reports
that "the Iraqi parliamentary legal committee again failed to reach a
compromise over Kirkuk issue, and decided to delay Thursday's
parliament session to Sunday, an official in the parliament told
Xinhua." This, Xuequan reports, despite efforts today by US Ambassador
to Iraq Chris Hill and the top US commander in Iraq Gen Ray Odierno to
"urge" Iraqi politicians to pass a law. No law was passed but violence continued . . . Bombings? Shootings? As
the Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq war announces its first public
hearings, serious concerns about censorship and secrecy are beginning
to arise. Some of those who are thinking about giving evidence are
wondering how free they will be to do so and whether the evidence they
present will ever see the light of day. Tony
Blair's upcoming appearance at the Inquiry has taken centre stage, with
his actions on Iraq threatening his bid to become the first EU
president. While Blair won't face prosecution in this Inquiry for
launching the war, witnesses fear they might be prosecuted for talking
about it. Other political
factors also play a role in the timing of the hearings, which will open
on 24 November. Sir John Chilcot said that the Inquiry intends to stop
these hearings during the general election campaign, expected in the
spring. It appears that the move is intended to limit the possibility
for highly charged appearances or new disclosures to influence voters.
This should not be a consideration for the Inquiry, which is supposedly
independent of government. Chilcot
has also suggested that the Inquiry's report, which is not expected
until at least the end of next year, might not be published in full but
might include a secret annexe dealing with intelligence matters. Meanwhile in Malaysia tomorrow and Saturday, Meena L. Ramadas (Sun Daily) reports,
a tribunal, the War Criminal Conference and Exhibition, will be held
which will hear from "a Sudanese reporter and a Briton who were
detained without trial in Guantanamo Bay" "in an effort to bring Iraq
war perpetrators to justice." Tun Mahathir bin Mohamad (Malaysia's
prime minister from 1981 to 2003) will be the keynote speaker and he
states, "International institutions and the courts established by the
United Nations charter have done nothing in dealing with war crimes.
Even the powerful nations like the United States and the United Kingdom
have done nothing." War is big business. Tom Fowler (Houston Chronicle) reports
that with KBR getting less work in Iraq, it "reported a 14 percent drop
in third-quarter profit". KBR insists it did professional work. Few
not currently working for KBR who've seen their work in Iraq make the
same assertions. KBR's shoddy work may be responsible for multiple
deaths of US citizens -- death by shower. On the topic of death by
shower, Jeremy Scahill's " Pentagon Investigation Iraq Electrocution Death" ( The Nation) reports: The
Department of Defense has confirmed that the US Army Criminal
Investigation Command has launched a formal investigation into the electrocution death of 25-year-old Adam Hermanson,
a US Air Force veteran-turned private security contractor who died in a
shower at the compound of his employer, Triple Canopy, at Camp Olympia
inside Baghdad's Green Zone on September 1, 2009. The State
Department's Regional Security Office is also
investigating. The
DoD appears to be placing responsibility for the deadly incident
squarely on Triple Canopy. "As part of the terms and conditions of the
JCC-I/A contract, Triple Canopy is solely responsible for providing
billeting, showers, latrines and other life support activities to its
employees at Camp Olympia," according to Under Secretary of Defense
Ashton B. Carter. Hermanson is the nineteenth US soldier or contractor
to die from electrocution in Iraq since 2003. KBR
denies having anything to do with the wiring which, if true, would mean
they weren't responsible for the above shock . . . just approximately
230 other ones. The heartbeat went out of our house The rhythm went out of our romance But in life that happens and you just have to remember to breathe . . .
That's from Carly Simon's "Coming Around Again" as redone on her latest album, Never Been Gone. Today she was on NPR's Talk Of The Nation and
discussed a variety of topics including singing with Lucy Simon in the
Simon Sisters and recently on the phone. In terms of revisiting ten of
her classic songs for the new album, Carly observes, "Yes, it was a
very interesting kind of synergy between the old and the new." To hear her segment with host Neal Conan click here and note NPR online has paired it up with her 2008 concert which you can also stream. Click here to watch Carly on Monday's Good Morning America (ABC). Carly Simon appeared on NBC's Today Show yesterday and performed "You Belong To Me." |
Posted at 10:44 am by cedricsbigmix
Permalink
Oct 29, 2009
Does he ever not talk about himself?
BULLY BOY
PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG
MIX -- THE KOOL-AID
TABLECELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O IS BACK TO
WHINING AGAIN -- DID HE EVER STOP? BARRY
O IS NOW WHINING THAT HIS 'FIRST DATE' WAS MADE POLITICAL. WITH 2
WARS GOING ON, THE ECONOMY IN THE TANK, GUANTANAMO STILL 'OPEN FOR BUSINESS' AND
SO MUCH MORE, YOU MIGHT THINK CANDY ASS WOULD HAVE SOMETHING TO TALK ABOUT
BESIDES HIMSELF. BUT HE FIRMLY BELIEVES HE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT
THING IN ALL OUR LIVES -- NOT THE WORK HE MIGHT DO, GOODNESS KNOWS HE DOES NO
WORK -- BUT HE, HIMSELF. THE CELEBRITY IN CHIEF, THE OVER EXPOSED
CELEBRITY IN CHIEF. $10 TO THE FIRST REPORTER BRAVE ENOUGH TO VISIBLY
YAWN THE NEXT TIME BARRY O OFFERS ANOTHER "I" OR "ME" STORY. FROM
THE TCI WIRE:
The US military announced
yesterda: "CAMP VICTORY, Iraq – A Multi-National Corps-Iraq Soldier
died today of a non-combat related injury at Camp Victory. The name 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 at http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/. 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." DoD identifes
the fallen as Maj David L. Audo from Saint Joseph, Illinois who was
35-years-old. The announcement brings the total number of US service members
killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4352.
"How stable is Iraq?" asked Riz Khan last night on
his self-titled Al Jazeera program. "Stable enough for national
elections in January?" He was joined by a panel consisting of Iraqi Laith Kubba,
the New America Foundation's Steven Clemmons and one-time director of the US
Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq J. Scott Carpenter.
Riz Khan: Let me ask a question that came from our Facebook page,
and I'll put this to Steven Clemmons here, this came from Ninveh Albazi in
California, Steven, here in the US. And Ninveh says, "The longer the US military
stays, the more terrorists will come in Iraq to fight. If they leave, more
bombings over power will occur. Either way the Iraqi people will suffer." How do
you feel about that -- the presence of -- US presence actually being a trigger
for these kind of attacks?
Steven Clemmons: Well I think that there are some people in society
-- and we've seen it throughout the Middle East -- that react very viscerally
and negatively to the sense that they're being occupied by foreign troops. In
Afghanistan, it's one of the things that's driving Pashtun resistance beyond the
question of, uh, the Taliban. And-and so, I think it would be wrong to-to-to
argue that in fact the American troop presence doesn't drive some violent
minorities. I think on the whole, Iraqi society has felt as if the United States
has done more beneficial things recently and so those feelings are not as
widespread. But-but certainly there are people like Robert Pape at the
University of Chicago among others that have shown that foreign troop
deployments do drive a kind of -- drive suicide bombings, drive some of the more
radical responses from societies. So there is some truth to it. I don't think I
would agree with the-the decibel level of the questioner's comments though.
Riz Khan: Well, Laith, this came in via Twitter to us, a viewer by
the name of Mosharraf Zaidi who says, "Even with stability in Iraq, does Maliki
have the sense to ensure a free and fair process? Is it even up to
him?"
Laith Kubba: Well, I mean, the good news is there is
sufficient, I think, awareness and organization in Iraq to have elections that
are, generally speaking, fair and free. I think the last elections had a high
turnout -- about 70%. Of course, there were cases of fraud. But by and large, I
think it was representative. So that's on the good side. But I think on the
negative side, even if you had representatives in Parliament, the system is in a
grid-lock because it's a parliamentary system, not a presidential system. It
does not produce an effective executive that takes the country and move forward.
You have, ultimately, a quote over power and that paralyzes government.
Riz Khan: I'll get to the intracacise of that in a moment because
there are some interesting intracacies to the elections in Iraq but, Scott, if I
could put this to you from LiveStation chat room, people are online here, Crane
in the USA says, "How can fair and transparant elections be ensured when there
are repeated bombings?" And let me ask you, do you think the elections will go
ahead in January with all the delays and potential problems?
J. Scott Carpenter: I do. I'm a perinally optimist about this, that
at the last minute -- however late the last minute is, the Iraqis will find some
way to have these elections because they see how important they are to the
political future of Iraq, to American withdrawal -- frankly. I do think there
will be elections that are credible in Iraq because people don't trust each
other and so there will be lots of observation which is what drove the
credibility and legitimacy of the provincial elections is that there were so
many political party observers watching one another that when the results were
broadcast, no one really questioned the legitimacy of the
results.
Riz Khan: Steven Clemmons, do you think the west, there are those
who think the west is really pushing for the elections as a way of closure to
finally dust their hands and finally close the chapter on Iraq.
Steven Clemmons: I don't think it's just to dust their hands and
put a punctuation point. I mean I think everyone would like to see that what we
did there succeeded in something. But I think that we've seen Iraqi society
already get near ripping itself in shreds internally and the reason why
elections and civil institution building and these democratic processes which J.
and Laith were speaking about are so important is it creates opportunites for
cohesive and collaborative governance within Iraq. That if it doesn't proceed
and move forward, the place has a high possibility of pulling itself apart. So I
think it's much more than us saying we're done with this -- with this experiment
although, clearly, I would like us to move on as well and see Iraqi society take
responsibility for itself succeed. But on the other hand, I think that this is
an important part of showing that the Iraqi government can have some durability
and sustainability after we begin to much more greatly downsize our troop
presence.
Riz Kahn: We have this came in, I'll put this to you, Laith, this
comes in from Facebook as well and it's from Cambodia where a viewer by the name
of Heidi Aljani in Pursat says, "We were warned of the United States' prolonged
military presence when Obama spoke of Iraq. The new excuse: Iraqi people and
their government are to blame for the inability to govern themselves." Now do
you believe that the elections are definite and looking at this issue that Iraq
has too much of an issue trying to govern itself. What's your
view?
Laith Kubba: Well two things. Number one, I think elections will
take place, that's not the issue. Yes, there is a problem currently in finding
the right formula on how Iraq should govern itself. But I think by and large, it
is the right thing to do is to leave Iraqis to work it out for themselves;
however, that does not mean walking out. I think it's really too idealistic. I
think that will create enough power vacuum and might lead to escalating violence
where the US has to send back some troops and intervene again.
Staying with the issue of the elections, this morning Dow Jones reports that the
KRG's represenative Qubad Talabani is stating that, following the January
elections, the draft oil law may "finally pass." Sahar Issa and Hannah Allam
(McClatchy Newspapers) report that a bill may be presented
"to parliament for a vote within days". Qassim Abdul-Zahra
(AP) reports that KRG President Massoud Barzani "demanded"
today that Kirkuk become a part of the Kurdistan Region. Kirkuk is disputed
territory due to Saddam Hussein forcing Kurds out of the region during his
reign. Both the Baghdad-based government or 'government' and the KRG claim
Kirkuk really belongs to them. This is not a new issue. It is so not a new issue
that the 2005 Iraqi Constitution addressed the issue and mandated that a
referendum be held on the matter. Article 140 has never been followed. The issue
has not been resolved. It is repeatedly pushed aside. Sort of like the draft
election law. Weeks ago was the deadline for passing the elections law and the
deadline was missed. Appearing before the US
House Armed Services Committee last week, the Pentagon's Michele
Flournoy insisted that time remained: Although the government of
Iraq's self-imposed deadline of October 15th for passing the elections law has
passed, we judge that the COR [Council Of Representatives] still has another
week or two to come to some kind of an agreement on the elections law before it
will put the January date -- the early January date -- in jeopardy in terms of
the election commission's ability to actually physically execute the, uh, the
election. If a new law with open lists is not passed, the fall back solution for
them is to return to the 2005 election law which is based on a closed list
system. But that could be used for upcoming elections, the COR would simply have
to vote on an election date. If that law is not passed in the next two weeks,
they will be looking at slipping the date to later in January which would still
be compliant with the [Iraqi] Constitution but would be later than originally
planned. It is now one week since Flournoy claimed Iraq had two
weeks. There is no progress. The same day she was testifying to Congress, " Rod Nordland (New
York Times) reported, "The Iraqi Independent High Electoral
Commission and United Nations elections experts have said Iraq needs at least 90
days to adequately prepare for the vote. Iraq's existing election law was
declared unconstitutional by its highest court, which said it needs to be
replaced or amended." The court ruling would appear to render obsolete
Flournoy's claim that the law for the 2005 elections could still be used with
just passage of legislation for a new date. In addition, 90 days? There are 3
days left in this month, 30 in November and 31 in December. That's 64. 90
days needed. 90 minus 64 (check my math always) is 26 days. That would be
January 26th, if legislation passed Parliament today. If. And maybe. The Iraqi
Freedom Congress' Amjad Ali weighs in with " Amid violence, Iraq Freedom Congress
calls for a sovereign, secular, transitional government" ( Flesh & Stone): Over nearly seven years the "political process"
did not result in anything but ferocious fighting between the forces and the
parties that were part of this process in order to gain as much privilege,
influence, power and wealth as possible. This conflict resulted in prolongation
of the political chaos, an insecurity in Iraq, exacerbated poverty and
destitution, and curtailed social and health services. The elections, one of
the mechanisms of imposing the "political process," have never solved the issue
of the power struggle because none of the elections held changed the sectarian
and ethnic quotas. And that means the elections merely reproduced the same
forces that are currently in power. All of the elections have been
characterized by farces such as fraud, political assassinations, and the delayed
announcement of voting results until agreements among the influential forces had
been reached. However, after every election, we witnessed an increase of
violence and terrorist activities as part of political arm twisting among these
forces. National reconciliation was one of the themes to bring together the
political movements that did not participate in power sharing with the forces
that supported the war and occupation. The reconciliation was projected by the
occupation administration to involve the pan-Arab nationalist forces who were
excluded from the formation of a new Iraq to impose security and political
stability. However, fears of the parties in power (political Islam, Shiite in
particular, and Kurdish nationalists) has undermined national
reconciliation. In the midst of the current political situation, neither the
occupation nor the successive governments have been able to establish a state in
Iraq. The conflict among the parties and the forces has always been a key factor
in that lack of progress. Moreover, the conflict over what would be the identity
of the state -- whether an Islamist Shiite, a Islamist Sunni, Arab nationalist,
or federal moderate Islamist --is another obstacle to the establishment of an
Iraqi state. The ongoing violence, which is another form of political
conflict, will not end through a political process that was brought by the
occupation. And the experience of nearly seven years of conflict between the
political forces taught us that the violence would not be terminated. In fact,
it would only reproduce more violence and terror. What is happening today, such
as restructuring old alliances and forming new ones and the escalation of the
conflicts within the one party, is an explanation of how deep the crisis is. As
a result we could hear the prime minister and a number of political parties
calling for an end to the rule of consensus or democracy through
consensus.RECOMMENDED: " Iraq
snapshot" " The
bombings and Iraq wants to go nuclear" " US
military announces a death" " Carly Simon's last
album?" " Carly Simon's Never Been Gone" " Recommend album: Never Been
Gone" " carly releases new album, blowhard
attacks" " Andy Worthington, Carly Simon" " carly releases new album, blowhard
attacks" " Carly" " Some things do not require an
apology" " Carly Simon makes sense, Patrick
Cockburn doesn't" " Thomas E. Ricks, buy a bra" " Afghanistan and
more" " Choices" " THIS JUST IN! FRANCHISE
BABY!"
Posted at 03:27 pm by cedricsbigmix
Permalink
|
|
|