2/15/2008

joe conason, hillary

For the next month or so, the conservative valentines will arrive every day at the headquarters of Barack Obama's presidential campaign. The Illinois senator's image will be illuminated by the bipartisan aura of admiration from prominent Republican commentators and strategists, as they savor the promise of his victory over Hillary Clinton, long the object of their hatred. He may well imagine that they really like him -- and surely some of them do, at least for now.
Such happy feelings are easily conjured these days, when William Kristol hopes Democratic superdelegates will do "the good deed" of pledging their ballots to Obama, when George Will urges Democrats to choose Obama as "the party's most potentially potent nominee," and when Peggy Noonan promises that Obama will be "bulletproof" against Republican attack.


that's from joe conason's 'What's Waiting for Obama' (creators.com). some of my younger readers may ask, 'joe who?' once upon a time, before bambi fever struck the chattering class, joe conason could be found in many, many places. i don't mean official magazines. he publishes in 1 of the new york magazines. (c.i. just said the new york observer. i always get it confused with new york magazine.) he publishes in salon - the online mag. his column is carried by creators.com which i did not know until going through my e-mails and finding his latest sent in by gillian but from a site i don't highlight. c.i. told me to go to creators and i'd find the same column there. creators distributes it to newspapers around the country.

but once upon a time, joe could get links at all the websites with his latest. buzzflash, truthout, et al. and he could be on democracy now, he could be on randi rhodes (randi had a bit of a crush on him), he could even substitute for al franken (much to the relief of afternoon listeners). these days, he's out in the cold because of bambi fever.

don't drink the kool-aid and be banished because jim jones must be elected! i don't even know that he's for hillary. he wrote a piece not all that long ago where he said the dem he wanted to run wasn't running. i assumed he meant russ feingold but i could be wrong. but joe's 'wrong' was to try to practice journalism when 'independent' media thought 'journalism' meant running a bambi fan club. gillian wrote 'i love him for his mind and face' and, gillian, those are 2 good reasons. but toss in bravery on the list as well.

if you missed it, today in wisconsin, bambi resorted to stereotypes. this is from nedra pickler's ap article (via yahoo so if you're using the link 4 weeks after this went up, you waited too long):

"Hollering at Republicans and engaging in petty partisan politics didn't help health care get done," he said.

1st, hillary wasn't 'hollering' at republicans for health care and so he's lying. but notice that a woman who wants her way must 'holler' in his book. she's a screeching banshee in his book and he'll get away with it and not get called because the media doesn't give a damn about sexism.

it's why the pimping remark didn't even get an action alert from fair or a mention from amy goodman. or maybe amy goodman fears calling out a false smear that hillary pimped out her daughter would hurt amy goodman's chances to publish in hustler again?

if you paid attention, you noticed how new mexico was 'vanished' when it was announced yesterday that hillary won it. here's her statement on the win:


I am so proud to have earned the support of New Mexicans from across the state.
From strengthening the economy to providing health care for every American to jumpstarting a clean energy future, New Mexicans want real solutions to our nation's challenges.
As president, I will continue to stand up for New Mexico and will hit the ground running on day one to bring about real change.


new mexico voted on super duper tuesday. they only finished their count yesterday. on that day, hillary won arizona, arkansas, american samoa, california, massachusettes, new jersey, new york, oklahoma, tennessee and now new mexico.

if you click here, you can see the speech she gave on super duper tuesday.

if you think back to that night, i found her speech very impressive and i meant to post a link to it. i've got a baby who is not even 1 year-old yet. i'm nursing, changing diapers (flyboy changes diapers as well, but, no, he can't nurse, that's all me) and doing the usual baby things. so i will forget stuff when i finally get a chance to blog and when that time comes it may also be true that the baby decides to wake up or that mommy is the only one who can hold and rock right. so my apologies for not posting it sooner. sherry and marlene (who both support hillary) have both reminded this week and i told them i'd track it down on friday. this is 'Hillary's Remarks on Super Tuesday:'

Thank you so much.
Tonight, we are hearing the voices of people across America.
People of all ages and of all colors, all faiths and all walks of life. People on the day shift, the night shift, the late shift with the crying baby. Moms and dads who want a better world for our children. Young people who deserve a world of opportunity. All those who aren't in the headlines, but have always written America's story.
After seven years of a President who listens only to the special interests, you're ready for a President who brings your voice, your values, and your dreams to your White House.
Tonight, in record numbers, you voted not just to make history - but to remake America. People in American Samoa, Arkansas, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Tennessee... and the great state of New York.
On just one really serious note, we want to keep the people of Arkansas and Tennessee in our prayers. They suffered horrible tornados tonight. We just talked to some of our folks there and people have died in both states, and our thoughts and prayers go out to them in this moment of their need.
Tonight thought is your - tonight is America's night.
It's not over yet, because polls are still open in California for a few more minutes.
I hope all of you will join our campaign at
http://www.hillaryclinton.com because you know - you know that politics isn't a game. It's not about who's up or who's down. It's about your lives, your families, your futures.
It's about the people who have shared their problems with me, looking for solutions. The mother whose insurance company wouldn't pay for her child's treatment. The couple so determined to send their daughter to college, they're willing to mortgage their home with a sub-prime second mortgage. The man who asked me what to do after training the person who will take his job in another country, the veterans who come home only to find they don't have the healthcare, the compensation, and the services they need.
It's also about the people who want to seize America's opportunity. It's about the unions and businesses who are training people for green collar jobs. It's about the auto companies and auto workers who want higher gas mileage cars so we can compete with the rest of the world. It's about our scientist and researchers who want to be able to do stem cell research right here in the United States of America.
It's about our contractors and construction workers who want to get to work to rebuild America from the bridges in Minnesota to the levies in New Orleans.
For seven years, we have seen President Bush's answer. They don't know what's at stake in this election, but we do. We know what we need is someone ready on day one to solve our problems and restore our opportunities. Because when the bright lights are off and the cameras are gone, who can you count on to listen to you, to stand up for you, to deliver solutions for you?
Well, the Republicans want eight more years of the same. They see tax cuts for the wealthy - and they say, why not some more? They see nine trillion dollars in debt - and say, why not trillions more? They see five years in Iraq - and they say, why not a hundred more?
Well, they've got until January 20, 2009 - and not one day more.
Now we know the Republicans won't give up the White House without a fight, well let me be clear, I won't let anyone swift boat this country's future. Together we're going to take back America because I see an America where our economy works for everyone, not just those at the top, where prosperity is shared and we create good jobs that stay right here in America.
I see an America where we stand up to the oil companies and the oil producing countries, where we launch a clean energy revolution and finally confront the climate crisis.
I see an America where we don't just provide health care for some people, or most people, but for every single man, woman and child in this country - no one left out.
I see an America where when a young man or woman signs up to serve our country, we sign up to serve them too.
An America with a 21st century GI bill of rights to help veterans go to college, buy a home or start their own businesses.
I see an America respected around the world again, that reaches out to our allies and confronts our shared challenges - from global terrorism to global warming to global epidemics.
That's the America I see - that's the America we will build together.
I am so lucky to have the most extraordinary staff, volunteers, and supporters...
And I am so grateful for all those long hours and late nights that you've been putting in.
And I want to thank the most important people in my life, first Bill and Chelsea, for their incredible love.
They have done so much day in and day out and I want to thank all my friends and family, particularly my mother, who was born before women could vote, and is watching her daughter on this stage tonight.
I also want to congratulate Senator Obama for his victories tonight. And I look forward to continuing our campaign and our debate about how to lead this country better off in the next generation, because that is the work of my life - that is why I started my career fighting for abused and neglected children, children who have drawn the short straw in life, because this nation gave me every opportunity and we can do the same for every child.
We must continue to be a nation that strives always to give each of our children a better future, a nation of optimists who believe our best days are yet to come, a nation of idealists holding fast to our deepest values, that we are all created equal, that we all deserve to fulfill our God-given potential, that we are destined for progress together.
It is the ideal inscribed on the base of the Statue of Liberty in this great city, that has overlooked our harbors through wars and depressions and the dark days of September 11, the words we all know that give voice to America's embrace: "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free" - a constant reminder that here in America, we face our challenges and we embrace all of our people.
So today we say with one voice, "Give us the child who wants to learn, give us the people in need of work, give us the veterans who need our care. We say give us the economy to rebuild and this war to end, give us this nation to heal, this world to lead, this moment to seize."
I know we're ready.
Thank you all and God bless you.


check out trina tonight, by the way. she's blogging right now (we're in her kitchen) and c.i. and ava are fine with (they support) an idea i just pitched for 3rd regarding a balance to slanted 'independent' media. so we'll have a hillary piece sunday (i know what it is and with ava and c.i. agreeing that's 1/2 the battle - i'm only semi-joking. but trina likes it so mike will and it will fly. i just don't want to talk about it here because what's the point of reading it on sunday if i've already talked it to death here?)


let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Friday, February 15, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the US kills allies, the refugee crisis has a new wrinkle -- voting, and more.

Starting with war resistance.
Brad McCall is a war resister who went to Canada because he could not serve in an illegal war. Yesterday he blogged about an e-mail he received from an angry Petty Officer 1st Class Daniel Driggers whom McCall attempts to explain it again to, "I am protecting my nation by doing what I have done. I am also supporting my fellow soldiers that are serving in this war. By leaving and making it clear that I will not conform to this act of hate committed by my government, I make it clear that there are soldiers with conscience and that we (soldiers) should be kept safe in our own borders, and not in some country that we have no business in." Earlier this week, he addressed another e-mail from a soldier and responded, "You see, the military is built so that men, and women, have no chance to speak out against what is obviously wrong. In the Army there was this saying: 'Out of sight, out of mind'. Most lower ranking soldiers live on that principle. They believe that the quieter they stay, the smoother they will flow through, and essentially, the quicker they will get out. They are afraid to speak out. They know what can happen. I knew what would happen when I spoke up."

With Canada's Supreme Court refusing to hear appeals on the issue of safe harbor status for war resisters in Canada. The country's Parliament remains the best hope for safe harbor war resisters like McCall may have. You can make your voice heard by the Canadian parliament which has the ability to pass legislation to grant war resisters the right to remain in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (
pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use.

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb,
Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at
The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).

Meanwhile
IVAW is organizing a March 2008 DC action:
In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan
March 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation. Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." As part of their fundraising efforts for the event, they are holding houseparties and a recent one in Boston featured both IVAW's Liam Madden and the incomprable Howard Zinn as speakers. IVAW's co-chair Adam Kokesh will, of course, be participating and he explains why at his site, "But out of a strong sense of duty, some of us are trying to put our experiences to use for a good cause. Some of us couldn't live with ourselves if weren't doing everything we could to bring our brothers and sisters home as soon as possible. The environment may be unking, but that is why I will be testifying to shooting at civilians as a result of changing Rules of Engagement, abuse of detainees, and desecration of Iraqi bodies. It won't be easy but it must be done. Some of the stories are things that are difficult to admit that I was a part of, but if one more veteran realizes that they are not alone because of my testimony it will be worth it."

IVAW calls for an immediate end to the illegal war, for reparations for the Iraqis and for full benefits for US service members. Today the Military Personnel Subcommittee of the US House Armed Services Committee held a meeting on "Medical Care For Wounded Soldiers."
US House Rep Susan Davis is chair of the subcommittee and she opened with a statement which included: "The purpose of today's hearing is for members to get an update on the implementation of the Army's Medical Action Plan (AMAP) and hear how the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force are caring for their wounded warriors. At out last hearing on this subject back in June of last year, the Army's Vice Chief of Staff, General Cody, suggested that we have him back in October and January to testify on the progress of AMAP towards Full Operational Capability. Circumstances precluded such follow-up hearings, and we understand that General Cody has just returned from Iraq in the past few hours, but we will nonetheless push foward so that we may learn how far the AMAP has come, and how far it still has to go." Testifying were Vice Admiral Adam Robinson, Surgeon General of the Navy; Lt. Gen. Eric Schoomaker, Surgeon General of the Army; and Brig. Gen. Michael Tucker, Assistant Surgeon General of the Army. With those and members of Congress, you might think the hearing could get somewhere.

You would be wrong. Can someone offer US House Rep Joe Wilson a job with MoviePhone? How much time did he use talking about the documentary Fighting for Life? Did the limited time of the hour and 45 minute hearing really allow for Wilson to read from p.r. material for the film? To note a screening? But regardless of the Congress member, there appeared to be far too much concern with making nice and far too little concern about getting down to what was being done or what needed to be done.

Rep John McHugh broke from his peers to ask actual questions regarding demobilization and to address the stories the committee was hearing about servicemembers "being ordered to demobilze while still undergoing treatment." McHugh noted the information on this continues to come in despite the fact that "we brought those concerns to your predecessor and we were assured by Navy leadership that those practicies would end." Robinson claimed to be unaware of any such stories and insisted that care for those in the service was maintained before offering, "From the surgeon in me, I'm tell you that most of the time I don't think that anyone should leave the service until their medical condition has been delineated or treated." It was all a lively side-step by Robinson. The question wasn't 'What do you think?' Again, to McHugh's credit, he did show some focus and determination and followed up with, "To be clear, in general terms, it would not be the navy's policy to discharge a soldier who a few days later had surgery scheduled?" When pressed Robinson would answer and answered, "That is correct." However, he quickly followed with, "I would expect that we would care for them." You would expect? What is the policy and is the policy followed? This is the military appearing before Congress -- what is the policy, what are the orders. It's very basic.

Bethesda (National Naval Medical Center) was mentioned often. Walter Reed Army Medical Center is set to be closed and replaced with a systematic facility that would see Bethesda expanded. Schoomaker stated that the "full integration of services" has already began and used US Secretary of Defense Robert Gate's shoulder injury to illustrate the way the system flows. Robinson maintains that, under the new system, "there won't be anyone left behind" and that "inroads" are being made.

US House Rep Nancy Boyda started off noting that a one year ago the committee was informed "military to civilian transitions were supposed to be halted" but when she looks at the 2009 budget, she sees they "are still in there." In March of 2007, the subject was addressed with US House Rep McHugh endorsing the 'need' for military positions to be transitioned to civilians as 'cost-cutting' steps. At that time, McHugh noted that 5,500 positions had already been 'transitioned' to civilians with 2,700 left to go. Boyda's point was that, after previous hearings, this is still in the budget. The response was, for the Air Force, that the positions "not filled by 2009 will revert back to the military." Did Boyda have a point in asking the question? Apparently not because she mistook herself for a high school guidance counselor in all that followed -- non-stop repetitions of speaking-for-me-we-want-to-make-sure-your-needs-are-met. Over and over. Really, when you a member of Congress, why not try conducting yourself like one. Boyda went on to insist that we (but really her, remember, speaking for herself) want the military to have "the ability to make the decisions that you think are best for our military personnel." Boyda may see that as footage to run in her re-election campaign but the reality is not only does Congress have an obligation but there's also the fact that the Walter Reed scandal requires that Congress provide serious oversight. If anyone member of Congress other than McHugh (a Republican) had any idea what they were doing in that hearing, they hid it very, very well.

Having wasted so much time with 'Help-me-help-you' babble, there wasn't time for all the witness to answer her question on what they needed. Schoomaker stated "we need more latitude" when it came to mental health. It really would have been nice to have had a follow up to that but Boyda ensured that no follow ups would come as she wasted her time. Schoomaker also wanted to see "a medical suppliment".

Susan Davis, the chair, captured the mood of the hearing and it wasn't pretty as she asked, "Any additional thoughts on what the problems were? Whether there was a" here she laughs "misscomunication somewhere?" Exactly what was funny about that? And does Davis really think that's how to chair a committee? It was disgusting. Davis wanted to know about the "bedside training" of the military's CADRE.

Tucker explained that the CADRE comes "from all the ranks in the Army" and that the course-work is currently a 40 hour training; however, it is becoming a three week course based out of Houston beginning in October. The three week course will put "them through the bedside manner, like you've spoken about, ma'am." He explained the special duty pay which was not initially in place (this despite his terming the CADRE's work to be "the Lord's work"). Currently they get $300 of special duty pay a month the first year and $375 the second.

Schoomaker gave a complicated example that was meant to confuse but, judging by their performance, the committee showed up confused. Schoomaker's example rested around the fact that when you are in the military and found to have a health problem, say weak ankles, they discharge with a rating, say 30%. But a person usually has more than just that or, as Schoomaker termed them, a "total person," they have a "combination of problems." And the problem with military care for active duty service members, according to Schoomaker is that. After discharge, the same service member will begin receiving treatment in a VA hospital and the VA will certify him or her for additional health problems. Schoomaker appeared to be making an argument that both the VA and the military should work from the same table -- this was what he found "fundamentally flawed" in the process. It really shouldn't require a great deal of work on the part of Congress to ensure that the VA and the military work from the same disability tables. And it should be the VA's because, as Schoomaker pointed out, that table addresses the "total person" and the health in full. Why don't they use it currently? No one on the committee thought to ask. It's cheaper to discharge with one disability, cheaper for the military. It keeps the costs of beneifts down. Sure would have been nice if Davis or Boyda had thought to use their time for something that really mattered. Schoomaker cautioned of quick fixes, "When you speed up a bad process all you have is a fast bad process."

US Rep John Kline wondered if "we let this emphasis on PTSD . . . pull us away from this orthopedic effort?" Schoomaker disagreed that there was a signature injury to the Iraq War although he did feel there was a signature weapon "blasts." On "blast injury," Schoomaker wondered, "Are we keeping balanced? Are we looking at all the gaps? . . . And are we doing all the things for this singular weapon which is blast?" Robinson offered that "amputations are seen" which makes it appear to have an end point that conditions such as PTSD may not appear to have. He stated that "research needs to be done also in terms of the limbs and the bio-mechanics and the future is really bounding with opportunities." But TBI -- traumatic blast injury -- "is something that's unseen and we don't know what we don't know. With a limb there is an amputation . . . With" TBI "you don't know." Robinson also noted that PTSD was present during Vietnam and the veterans who developed it "were not treated . . . and now we're seeing . . . 35 years later that that was an important thing."

Davis was in wind-down mode (even though the hearing could have run for 15 more minutes) and wondered whether evaluations (she termed what had transpired an "evaluation") should be done yearly or every six months. All offering testimony agreed that a year was too long and that they should meet every six months on this topic.
Davis' website notes, "A leading advocate for military families in San Diego and around the world, Davis intends to conduct thoughtful hearings which will focus on the needs of our servicemen and women and their families." That intention was not present in the hearing.

In today's New York Times,
Lizette Alvarez and Deborah Sontag continue to explore the violence taking place for veterans when they return and they open with the story of Sgt. Erin Edwards who, despite taking the necessary steps to keep her husband Sgt. William Edwards away from her, was killed by her husband in 2004. Steps she took were not followed through on and one example is the fact that William Edwards was not supposed to be allowed off base without an officer accompanying him but that wasn't enforced. The reporters observe that there was a minor wave of attention to domestic abuse and spousal homicide rates in the US military at the end of the 90s, but "just as the Defense Department undertook substantial changes, guided by a Congressionally chartered task force on domestic violence that decried a system more adept at protecting offenders than victims, the wars in Afghanistan and then Iraq began." The reporters note that, "The fatalities examined by The Times show a military system that tries and sometimes fails to balance the demands of fighting a war with those of eradicating domestic violence. According to interviews with law enforcement officials and court documents, the military has sent to war service members who had been charged with and even convicted of domestic violence crimes. Deploying such convicted service members to a war zone violates military regulations and, in some cases, federal law." On January 27th, Alvarez and Sontag contributed "Combat Trauma Takes the Witness Stand," January 13th, they contributed "Across America, Deadly Echoes of Foreign Battles" and, February 14, 2007, Alvarez reported on the the increase for moral waivers allowing those with felony convictions to join the military.

Meanwhile,
Ian Fisher (New York Times) gets a first for his paper, Iraqis killed by US forces are innocent -- and before an investigation! If you're thinking there's a major shift taking place at the paper of record, think again. The six dead aren't just any Iraqis, they're the heart of the counter-insurgency plans, the 'Awakening' Council. Fisher reports that the six "mistakenly fired on American soldiers in the north, the Iraqi police said. The American forces fired back, killing them and two women in nearby houses, the polic said." Contrast that with any other event even the September slaughter in Baghdad on the part of Blackwater. No Iraqi dead ever gets that sort of treatment from the New York Times but the "Awakening" Council isn't any mere Iraq, they are Iraqis on the US payroll, paid to drop arms against the US, and 'loyal' as long as the money's there. Those deaths were yesterday (and the two women are barely dealt with). Today, Alexandra Zavis (Los Angeles Times) reports 3 'Awakening' Council members shot dead in Baghdad by "an American helicopter" which also wounded two more and notes, "Sheik Mohammed Ghuriari, who heads the so-called Awakening Councils that supply fighters to protect neighborhoods in north Babil province, said it was the third U.S.-led strike on one of their checkpoints in less than two months.".

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

Bombings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad car bombing claimed 2 lives and left four more wounded. Reuters notes a Tal Afar bombing where 16 civilians were killed at a mosque. Sahar Issa reports that there were two bombers with one getting shot and the other detonating the bomb. Alexandra Zavis (Los Angeles Times) explains, "The attackers struck during the midday Friday prayers, the most important of the Muslim week." M-NF announces, "Attack helicopters responded to a small-arms fire attack on Coalition Forces near the town during the early morning hours Feb. 15. The helicopters engaged one structure with rockets."


Kidnappings?
Reuters reports aa family of four ("including two women") were kidnapped in Balad Ruz today.

Corpses?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 corpses in Baghdad and 5 corpses in Diyala Province. Reuters notes 1 corpse discovered in Balad Rus.

Meanwhile,
Moahmmed Abbas (Reuters) quotes puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki who apparently -- possibly during his time as exile -- is a big fan of Donna Summer: "We must keep our fingers on the trigger." Because? Love is in control?

Picking up
from yesterday, we'll return to the subject of the refugees. Over 4 milliion refugees have been created by the illegal war. The figure includes internal and external refugees -- both those displaced outside their country and those displace internally. The Iraqi Parliament is calling for provisional elections and Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) reports that among the unanswered questions are those pertaining to the refugees including where they would vote if they were allowed to vote? Would they be counted as voters in the provinces they hailed from or, if internally displaced, voters for the provinces they currently reside in? Rubin also notes, "The problem is that many of the nation's most powerful political parties have divided up most of the seats on the Independent Higher Election Commission, which oversees national election policy. That means there are few, if any, independent brokers overseeing the election process, according to Iraqi academics and lawmakers. Some other parties are not represented on the commission."

Yesterday, Antonio Guterres, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, reminded that is still not safe for refugees to return to Iraq.
IRIN quotes Guterres: "We have clear criteria for the promotion of returns -- those criteria are not met by the situation in Iraq now. So we are not promoting returns to Iraq in the present circumstances because we do not believe the conditions are there for that to be possible on a meaningfuly scale." Haifa Zangana (Guardian of London) explains:

The return of some refugees is not related to the success of the surge, the establishment of security or a reduction in "sectarian violence", the euphemism for death squads that have infiltrated the security services and local militias. The savings of most refugees have run out, and they face real poverty since they cannot compete for the few jobs available in countries that have historically been poorer than Iraq. While I was in Amman in June, I met an Iraqi engineer who now works as a cleaner to provide for his family. Others, especially the elderly and children, are exhausted by visa restrictions; Most refugees, being of urban backgrounds, rented flats at steep prices, forcing families to share, sometimes with up to five adults and children in one room. Many refugees, previously from professional backgrounds, have had to rely on charity donations or support from relatives living in Europe.
Refugees in Syria or elsewhere rely on pensions, requiring them to go back to their workplaces in Iraq once every couple of months, leaving their families behind. Some go back also to collect monthly food rations to partially sell in the country. In the past, due to corruption in various government offices, some employees didn't attend work but collected half their salaries. Their bosses collected the rest in exchange for allowing them not to show up except for occasional days. All these arrangements came to an end after neighbouring countries implemented visa restrictions and it is almost impossible to get a visa to the UK or the US, despite their responsibility in creating the mayhem in Iraq. Now many refugees who have survived so far with such arrangements are desperate, and their only remaining hope is to share life with their extended families inside Iraq. In most cases they are "internally displaced", ie still refugees.

The Myth of the Great Return. Or as Patrick Cockburn (Independent of London via CounterPunch) observed last weekend: "As a propaganda exercise designed to show that the Iraqi government was restoring peace, it never quite worked. The majority of the returnees said they were returning to Baghdad, not because it was safer, but because they had run out of money in Syria or their visas had expired. There has been no mass return of the two million Iraqis who fled to Syria and Jordan or a further 2.4 million refugees who left their homes within Iraq." The propaganda push did a lot of damage in real time.

Turning to US politics, as
Mike, Marcia, Kat, Rebecca, Cedric and Wally noted yesterday, Hillary Clinton won New Mexico -- a Super Duper Tuesday state that only finished its count yesterday.

2/14/2008

brief post

so hillary won new mexico. how does the crap bag mark of buzzflash handle it? by burying the link to it way down the page and by his headline:

Clinton narrowly wins New Mexico after hand count, but delegates split evenly -- 26-26. 2/15

he really is a piece of work. women should avoid buzzflash if they have any self-respect. that site so hideous and it always has been.

that's a big state and bambi wanted it. he lost it and it's time for the bambi groupies to down play hillary's win.

maybe the losers will next cry 'recount!' or some such smear.

speaking of losers, have you heard all the crazy talk regarding dennis kucinich? nancy pelosi threatened him! she had surrogates threaten him! no 1 threatened him. it's like a kucinich campaign, it starts off at the highest point and then peters out.

so hillary gets john glenn's endorsement and bambi gets lincoln chafee's. who does buzzflash promote high up? the republican chafee.

okay, i 1st had to stop to nurse the baby. then i was surprised (flyboy knew) with kat, ava and c.i. while i have been playing hostess, it's equally true that c.i.'s had my baby in one arm while also working on tonight's entry for the common ills and juggling 2 cell phones. so my defense isn't much of one. i'll try to have more tomorrow night.

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Thursday, February 14, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the US military's state of readiness is explored in Congress, the Iraqi Parliament takes some action, and more

Starting with war resisters.
Lance Griffin (The Dothan Eagle) profiles war resister Brad McCall who explains why he went to Canada rather than to deploy to an illegal war. "They," McCall explains of service members who were returning from Iraq, "were telling us all of these things they did over there; things where you would have thought you were listening to the Nazi tribunals. Innocent people were dying, more of them than the terrorists. That's when I realized I couldn't go over there and be a part of that. When I joined up, I agree with our mission, which was we were fighting terrorism. And I agreed that we were looking for weapons of mass destruction, taking a tyrant out of office and bringing freedom to a people that had never known freedom before. But now I see the war as being about money to line the pockets of politicians and corporations. It's a battle over (expletive), pretty much." At his own site, McCall noted February 4th, "I received my first notice to appear befor a Canadian court today. So I'm pretty bummed. Oh, yeah, and my family are being very, well, unsupportive. So, it's just a horrible day." Griffin reports of McCall's attempts to win refugee status in Canada, "He expects to lose, then he predicts a long appeals process. He said he hopes the political climate in Canada changes before his appeal options run out. If it does, he plans on living the rest of his life in Canada. If it doesn't . . . 'If somehow I get deported, then I guess I will be serving some time in Ft. Leavenworth,' he said. 'Do I think that's fair? No, because I'm standing up for my moral right to make decisions for myself. But I'll do it'."

With Canada's Supreme Court refusing to hear appeals on the issue of safe harbor status for war resisters in Canada. The country's Parliament remains the best hope for safe harbor war resisters like McCall may have. You can make your voice heard by the Canadian parliament which has the ability to pass legislation to grant war resisters the right to remain in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (
pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use.

Meanwhile
Kate Murphy (Oakland Tribune) reports that Oakland High School was the setting for a debate regarding military recruiters access to schools between military recruiter Sgt. Jose Delao and war resister Pablo Paredes. Murphy reports (separate story) that on Tuesday the two ("Delao encourages young people consider the path he chose, while Paredes tries to spare them from making the same choice") debated in front of "dozens" of students and quotes Paredes explaining, "Right now, tens of thousands of people, just like you, have come back from the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts with injuries that are going to affect them for the rest of their lives" and that there are other means to funds for college: "Whatever dream you're trying to chase in the military, there are other ways to chase that dream." As Dee Knight (Workers World) noted at the start of the month, Paredes was among those taking part (Friday January 25th) in the US to show support for war resisters in Canada: "In San Francisco, the delegation to the Canadian Consulate was led by Pablo Paredes and Mike Wong. Paredes is a former U.S. sailor who refused orders to return to Iraq, and is now a GI Rights Hotline counselor. In December 2004 at Camp Pendleton, Calif., he publicly refused to get on a ship returning to Iraq. 'I don't want to be part of a ship that's taking 3,000 Marines over there, knowing a hundred or more of them won't come back,' he told reporters at the time. Mike Wong is a Vietnam War-era veteran who chose exile in Canada for five years in the 1970s."

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb,
Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at
The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).

Meanwhile
IVAW is organizing a March 2008 DC action:
In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan
March 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.
Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." As part of their fundraising efforts for the event, they are holding houseparties and a recent one in Boston featured both IVAW's Liam Madden and the incomprable Howard Zinn as speakers. IVAW's co-chair Adam Kokesh will, of course, be participating and he explains why at his site, "But out of a strong sense of duty, some of us are trying to put our experiences to use for a good cause. Some of us couldn't live with ourselves if weren't doing everything we could to bring our brothers and sisters home as soon as possible. The environment may be unking, but that is why I will be testifying to shooting at civilians as a result of changing Rules of Engagement, abuse of detainees, and desecration of Iraqi bodies. It won't be easy but it must be done. Some of the stories are things that are difficult to admit that I was a part of, but if one more veteran realizes that they are not alone because of my testimony it will be worth it."

Kokesh and IVAW will have testimony worth hearing. But today in Congress, maybe not so much with others? Michele A. Flournoy rips through group associations faster than Fox 'News' offers up excuses for the White House. No longer with CSIS, she's now with CNAS and the only logical explanation for the switch may be that the taint on CSIS is too extreme (War Hawks and War Hawks who were wrong). CNAS is the Center for a New American Security and if you ever wonder why so many 'reporters' sound so damn similar look no further than the ambitious start-up of CNAS which has already signed up, for their 'writers program' -- think of it as day-camp, if not day care, for those not ready for sleep away camp. Little Davey E. Singer and Davey Clouds, the paper of record's Two Davids (Cloud is no longer with the paper) along with Greg Jaffe (ex-Wall St. Journal) get cookies and watered down juice each day. Are the three so busy with pillow fights and panty raids (on one another?) that our young students can't think a minute or two about affialiating with an organization that things counter-insurgency (slaughtering the native people) is something to hop on board with? There really isn't a great deal of independence in the press (Big or Small).

Wearing a shocking pink wrap-around (was it a sari, a sarong or a mini-burka?) that may have been as frightening to the eye as her plans for war-war-more-war! are to the heart and mind, Michele A. Flournoy was among those speaking to the US House Armed Services Committee held a hearing on Military Readiness: Implications for Our Stategic Posture which was chaired by Ike Skelton.

Ike Skelton brought up West Point professor and Army General Barry McCaffrey's remarks that ten percent of today's army recruits do not need to be in uniform (McCaffrey to the Senate Armed Services Committee in April 2007: "
Ten percent of Army recruits are of low caliber and do not belong in uniform") and Flournoy responded that "1 in 5 are receiving some kind of waiver to enter the force" and that, relying on what she identified as anecdotal evidence, that military command she speaks with say that "more and more of their command time worrying about a central number of problem children in their unit." What's being discussed there are the multiple waivers being granted and the lowered standards for recruting. Moral waivers -- such as the one Steven D. Green were let in on -- are a serious issue and just as head injuries are the key injury of the Iraq War, recruits let in on waivers may be the key characteristic of enlistment today. [Steven D. Green has been portrayed in military court-martials as the ringleader who plotted the gang-rape and murder of Abeer in the home invasion that also killed her five-year-old sister and both of her parents. Green maintains that he is innocent. Others participating in the War Crimes have admitted to their own guilt and consistently fingered him as the ring-leader. Green is scheduled to go on trial in a civilian court in April.]

US House Rep Jim Saxton, apparently hoping to serve in the jury pool at Green's trial, maintained that "we have looked at this at length and found that some soldiers with waivers do better than soldiers without." Flournoy wasn't speaking of "some," she was speaking of a trend. Saxton didn't help his own argument wasting everyone's time with a statistical citation that had no point. "About .26%," he declared of recruits let in with waivers, "was the rate of disatisfaction expressed by waivered [recruits]" while the "unwaivered" -- e.g. traditional recruits -- was "double that." Imagine that. More recruits let in on a moral waiver that allowed them, like Green, to avoid a jail term or probation are happy to be in the military? That is a shocker. Flournony restated that she was maintaining this was an issue that needs to be studied -- by the military and Congress, she was repeatedly clear -- and noted, "In some cases, these waiver soldiers become models in the army. In other cases, they don't and they show greater difficulty in meeting army standards so I think it is something we need to watch over time. I think the jury's out . . . and we need to watch it very carefully over time."

To be clear, the waivers have always existed and many men and women have joined the military under those circumstances and excelled by the service's own standards. That's not the issue nor is the issue that the waivers exist. The issue is the heavy reliance on them today. Someone who may be a bit below the basic standards that really wants in (even to avoid jail or probation -- though some get waivers for academic backgrounds and other issues) can (and they have) live up to all the goals and even surpass those goals. That's not the issue. The issue is that these cases were not the norm for recruitment in times past. Today, if the military couldn't rely on the waivers, they wouldn't meet their targeted goals and a lot of people who should not be accepted are being let in. This is an issue for those stationed and it is an issue for career military types. We'll come back to this topic but let's highlight the rest of the hearing briefly since it seems like the press these days has a really hard time reporting on Congressional hearings.

US House Rep Solomon P. Ortiz was concerned that "the time it would take to restore military readiness gets longer and longer every day." Those invited to give testimony did not dispute that or question it -- it was noted that when there's no X-day for the wars (Iraq and Afghanistan) to be completed, restoring readiness will be always be an estimate that's altered continually -- such as with Bully Boy's decision to 'pause' the drawdown. US House Rep Duncan Hunter was concerned with the readiness of the inventory -- both in terms of whether or not bar-coding is used to track military equipment and also in terms of "what it would be better to leave" in Iraq "and what we might want to cascade to the Iraqis." On the first part, it wasn't clear (whether any tracking was used consistently throughout the branches). On the second part, this fell back into the theme that the US military is being asked, in Iraq (Afghanistan as well, but the comments focused on Iraq), to carry out tasks that are not military tasks. US House Rep Patrick Murphy noted a recent trip overseas where he was asked by a service member "Where the hell is everyone else?" because the military was doing the work that the US State Department and USAID should be doing. US House Rep Vic Snyder stated that the cost will be "20 to 30 billion additional dollars to do the kind of counter-insurgency we need to do." No one bothered to ask what "kind" that was or to question the idea that counter-insurgency was a plus. Sharon Pickup of GAO did make the point that "DoD needs to" clearly outline "what it is getting for the money" but that was a passing comment that no House member felt the need to explore. This despite the fact that Pickup's comment was perfectly in keeping with what Skelton outlined in
his opening remarks, "If an unexpected contingeny arises, what will be the cost to us in lives and in dollars? Is that cost one we are truly prepared to accept, or would we instead wish we had done more to prepare for or prevent it? We must also evaluate the initiatives and programs which the Department of Defense is proposing to address our strategic risk and determine whether they are realistic, and whether their scope and pace is sufficient to protect national security." But maybe, here's where we get back to the main topic, answers aren't going to come when centrists think-tank flacks are the ones speaking. Why were the Dems put in control of both houses of Congress? To end the illegal war. And they can't even expand upon the witnesses they call to testify. Anita Dancs of the National Priorities Project was far more informed on the January 23rd broadcast of Uprising Radio (noted in this snapshot) than Floury was today speaking to a Congressional committee.

From the US Congress to the Iraqi Parliament,
Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) reports on yesterday's actions when they "passed a budget and approved two major bills" and states, "The major winners are Sunni Muslims -- who won a limited amnesty for prisoners and an Oct. 1 date for provincial elections -- and Kurds, who won a budget that allocated 17 percent of Iraq's funds to them, instead of 13 percent as the Shiite-led government had proposed." We'll come back to the elections shortly. Raheem Salman and Alexandra Zavis (Los Angeles Times) also cover the topic noting that there was another walkout yesterday and that "questions remain about how they will be implemented" which brings to mind the start of the month when Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) reported on the criticism coming from CIA asset and Iraqi exile Ahmed Chalabi that the Iraqi Parliament, "People should pay attention to what they are discussing and voting on." Salman and Zavis note that nothing is yet implemented (the presidency council must sign off or at least let it pass through without object) and point out, "Analysts cautioned, however, that Iraqi leaders remained deeply divided on key issues, including the distribution of Iraq's massive oil wealth and the future of disputed territories such as oil-rich Kirkuk." On the issue of the prison amnesty, Solomon Moore (New York Times) examines the prison-industrial-complex created in Iraq where "[t]ens of thousands of news prison beds" are demanded by unnamed US officials and there are "the 26,000 prisoners" in Iraqi prisons "still awaiting trial" plus "24,000 additional prisoners held in separate American military prisons."

Meanwhile the protests and strikes go on by "Awakening" Council members in Diyala Province and Al Anbar Province (see
Monday's snapshot). James Cogan (World Socialist Web) explains:

In the working class Shiite suburbs of Baghdad, the US military has essentially ceded control to the Sadrist movement in exchange for an end to its operations against Sunni opponents and its assistance in hunting down Shiite insurgents who attack the occupation forces. The US sponsorship of large Sunni-Baathist militias, however, has produced open opposition to Sadr's collaboration. Factions of the Mahdi Army have called in recent weeks for an end to the ceasefire. Sadr has refused, making it likely that there will be substantial break-aways from his 60,000-strong militia and the emergence of new Shiite resistance groups.For their part, the Sunni militias are becoming increasingly frustrated by their continued marginalisation from political power. They are coming under constant attack by groups who oppose their collaboration, and have clashed with government or US forces several times over the past month. Last week, in Diyala province, the Awakening Council announced it was suspending all cooperation with the occupation following the murder of two girls, allegedly by Shiite police.In Anbar, the US military faces the prospect of an even greater collapse of its deals. This week, the 20,000-strong tribal Awakening Council militia issued a threat to use armed force to seize control of the provincial government.

Garrett Theroff (Los Angeles Times) reports that "Awakening" Council member Hisham Mahdi Salih has made a trip to Baghdad to persuade the puppet government, via "meeting with Prime Minister Nouri Maliki and other high-ranking officials" that the police in Diyala Province are torturing people -- including him -- in an attempt to grab more power. The puppet government (especially it's Interior Ministry thugs) armed and trained by? The US. The "Awakening" Council armed and trained by? The US. There will be open, armed civil war in Iraq if the US can just keep pitting sides against one another by arming thugs.

In some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Sahr Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that wounded three people, a Baghdad car bombing that claimed 4 lives and left thirty-three people wounded, a Mosul roadside bombing (in the continued targeting of officials) wounded Col. "Hazim al-Juburi and 3 of his security detail," a Basra roadside bombing wounded two Iraqi soldiers, a Muqdadiyah roadside bombing wounded three children and, outside Mosul, "Al-Anfal Intermediate School was bombed".

Shootings?

Sahr Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that Mejeed Mahmoud Hussein ("Staff General and commander of a division in former Iraqi Army") in Samarra today (he "had been detained in Bucca prison by Coalition Forces for three years and was released 2 months ago"), an armed clash outside Baquba resulted in seven police officers being wounded, Sheikh Abu Ali al-Buhruzawi was shot dead in Baquba and, yesterday, Labib Ali al-Zaidan, his wife and 7 members of their family were shot dead in Awja during a home invasion. Reuters notes "a member of a neighbourhood police patrol" was shot dead in Hawija.

Kidnappings?

Sahr Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 people were kidnapped outside Baquba. And although the interpreter was released yesterday, the Press Gazette notes that the CBS correspondent remains missing following the kidnapping of both on Sunday.

Corpses?

Sahr Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 corpses discovered in Baghdad.

Returning to the topic of elections in Iraq, the
United Nations notes that Staffan De Mistura, Special Representative for Iraq, "said action is critical following the passing of new legislation calling for governorate elections before 1 October." Yes, in February the Iraqi Parliament gets attention for the "elections are coming!" law that may or may not come to pass but October 1st is the actual scheduled day which, no doubt, will provide many ink-stained photos just in time to attempt to influence the US presidential elections. de Mistura stated, "It is vital that all steps are taken to ensure that the Independent High Electoral Commission is in a state of readiness for future elections. We hope by ensuring transparency and professionalism in the selection processes that this can be achieved."

The United High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres is touring the MidEast this week. Yesterday, Gueterres visited Jordan and "thanked King Abdullah II for his country's generosity in hosting more than a half a million" Iraqi refugees, the UN noted, with Jordan being one of the two main countries externally displaced Iraqis have sought asylum (Syria being the other most popular choice). The United Nations is issuing a call for $261 million to fund programs that will provide assistance to the internally and externally displaced Iraqis. IRIN reports that the Iraqi government "has earmarked US$40 million to help ease the plight of internally displaced persons (IDPs) and Iraqi refugees in other countries, its spokesman said on 13 Februrary."

We'll pick up on that topic tomorrow. Instead we'll close with US politics.
Danny Schechter (writing at Common Dreams last Friday) observed, "Neither Democratic candidate is focusing on the reality of mounting inflation, joblessness, the credit squeeze/debt burden (Student loans and mortgages) and the growing income gap. Are they only reading their own press, and ignoring this financial time bomb? Are they in denial?" They? Try many US voters who see "Troops Home If I'm Elected" in either or, worse, believe the spin that Bambi's better on the illegal war than Hillary. Bruce Dixon (Black Agenda Report) makes the case for holding both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama's feet to the fire -- and doing so now, not, as some fools suggest, after one of them (maybe) makes it into the White House. If it sounds familiar, you've probably heard it last week. But unlike an 'anti-war' 'leader,' Bruce Dixon has credibility. Unlike Tom Hayden, Dixon has consistently maintained that Obama and Clinton were twins, two-of-akind and, unlike Hayden, Dixon didn't rush out an embarrassing, gushing endorsement of Obama at the start of last week. When you attempt to show up after that trying to argue that both should have their feet held to the fire, the laughter you're greeted with has been more than earned. Dixon makes the case and does so with his integrity intact and he concludes, "It's time for a little less respect for the high and mighty of either party, and a little more action. It's high time for activists inside and outside the Democratic party to look for creative, innovative, sometimes impolite and civilly disobedient ways to reach larger audiences as they speak truth to the powerful. Even and especially when those in power are nominal Democrats." And if you don't grasp the importance of what Dixon's saying, try flashing back to spring of 2004 when John Kerry was riding high and no pressure was put on him because it was more important to elect him -- got to get him into office! -- so everyone stayed silent and, for those who can't remember how that ended, Kerry never made it into the Oval Office. Demands for peace do not wait for elections. Those gushing over Bambi and working overtime to create a 'record' for him don't grasp that (and may never). Again, Joe Wilson has been shut out by Little Media that couldn't get close enough to him not all that long ago. His column endorsing Hillary has been expanded and can be found at TaylorMarsh.com and No Quarter. Did Joe Wilson change? No, Little Media did. File him with Joe Conason, Paul Krugman, Gloria Steinem and all the others kicked to the curb (and attacked) because they had their own judgements.

2/13/2008

shuster

have you noticed the push back coming from some losers for little david shuster?

shuster was suspended (not fired) by nbc.

david shuster: Bill, there's just something a little bit unseemly to me that Chelsea is out there calling up celebrities saying, 'Support my mom.' And, apparently, she's also calling these super delegates.

bill press: Hey, she's working for her mom. What's unseemly about that? During the last campaign, the Bush twins were out working for their dad.

david shuster: Didn't it seem like Chelsea's sort of being pimped out in some weird sort of way?

that took place on msnbc.

bill press clearly shot down shuster's 'theory.' press clearly pointed out an example where children campaign for their parents. that should have been the end of it.

the 'discussion' that tries to absolve shuster acts as if the line came out from nowhere.

he'd tried to involve press in the trash and press hadn't bitten.

an abc news story brings up petraeus. did any 1 say a word about petraeus pimping his child? no. what shuster did was offensive.

saying 'bully boy pimped dick cheney' is not offensive. saying 'al gore pimped bill clinton' is not offensive. they are grown ups who chose to be in public life. a child of some 1 public is not open game just because their parents are. and to say a parent pimps their child leaves ha-ha territory and enters the objectionable. i'd feel that way if they'd said it about cheney's young daughter. (i assume he's got a young 1. i don't know the ages of the cheney children.) i loathe dick cheney and will smile serenely when he dies. but i would never accuse him of 'pimping' his child. i might accuse him of 'pimping' kbr. or scooter libby. but i wouldn't go there on some 1 and their child.

when you do, you've entered into an offensive field.

that's really obvious and some people want to play dumb.

it's interesting that the 1st time that sort of remark is made by 'news' people (by 1, bill press refused the bait), it's about hillary clinton. how many years have we had male candidates for president. where's the news person saying 'pimp' before? 'pimp' is not a 2008 word. it was around in 2000 and in 2004. it was popular then. it was popular when carter ran for the white house. these people who want to act like it just entered the popular dialogue are insane. and find me 1 who was accused of 'prostituting' their child or 'whoring'? you won't. not from a respected news source.

this crossed a line. bill clinton is correct and people are correct to be outraged by it.

shuster is not a comic. if a comic had said it, no 1 would care.

shuster is supposed to be in the news business. the fact that he was hosting a msnbc talk show does not change the fact that he is supposed to be a news person. and what he did crossed a huge line.

fair's trying to drum up some sympathy for him by re-releasing their 2005 story (or maybe older) about how he was shocked when he went to fox 'news,' shocked, by the slant. a person with a brain wouldn't have been shocked.

now when it was time to finally sort-of apologize, as media matters documents, he lies and claims he was praising chelsea before the remark.

some people born during 1 of reagan's terms or after may not get it.

they won't, for instance, remember that amy carter was ripped apart while the nixon daughter's were never called ugly. they won't remember the way poor amy carter - a child then - was beat up. it doesn't happen with republican children. it was a shock that it would happen with a nice looking young girl. there is a double standard and when bill clinton was elected in 1992, most of us remembered how amy was treated and the evil things she was called.

with chelsea, it started immediately and rush did his infamous 'joke' where he compared her to a dog. there was a push back. and there should have been.

so that probably does go into it. the way chelsea's been treated before and the way amy carter was; however, the reality is that the line was tasteless and out of bounds. it never should have been said. when it was an apology should have been made immediately.

instead shuster wanted to argue. when msnbc made him apologize, he lied.

david shuster deserves no sympathy.

he has yet to make an honest apology.

i am so frustrated by the way some are trying to defend shuster and justify what he did. it is not acceptable. it is never acceptable.

and, again, it never happened until we had a woman run for president and be a serious contender. suddenly, in their efforts to pass her off as 'so evil' they went with the notion that she'd even stoop to 'pimping' her daughter.

that's disgusting.

and remember (a) i voted for cynthia mckinney on super duper tuesday and (b) i don't like hillary and never have.

it's offensive and people need to stop kidding themselves that it's not.

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Wednesday, February 13, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, one CBS News employee is released by kidnappers, it sounds like a treaty when Iraqi government spokespeople describe it, and more.

Starting with war resistance.
Courage to Resist notes a new campaign for Andrew Hegerty, Jeffrey Gauntt and James Blanks, all US service members, all in Mannheim, Germany in a US military prison for refusing to deploy to Afghanistan. They note Agustin Aguayo's confinement there earlier and how much letters meant to him. Aguayo went to Iraq as a medic. He found that training and ethics were disregarded (that's putting it mildly and Aguayo's comments are echoed by many others who were sent to Iraq as medics). While serving, Aguayo had a religious awakening or deepening. Seeing death and destruction strengthened previous beliefs and led him to contemplate additional issues. Not surprising and not uncommon. But the military command attempted to play dumb, attempted to act as though such a thing never happened, could never happen. Aguayo applied for CO status.
He was then informed that his CO status would be determined AFTER his second tour of Iraq. On his first tour, he'd refused to load his gun due to his religious deepening. While this was going on, his fight for CO status was also going through the federal courts. Despite that, the US military told him he was going back to Iraq. Aguayo self-checked out briefly trying to demonstrate how serious he was about not returning to Iraq. When that message was not received, he self-checked out again and was gone for less than the 30-day rule of thumb (30 days or more usually is seen by the US military as desertion, less is generally seen as AWOL). Aguayo turned himself in. He was court-martialed and charged with desertion which was only one of the many violations in the military 'justice' system. He is appealing the verdict from his court-martial (he has already served the time the judge sentenced him to).

Courage to Resist provides contact info for James Blanks (due out this month), Jeffrey Gauntt (due out April 2008) and Andrew Hegerty (due out in August 2008) are reachable at: Unit 29723, Box LL, APO, AE 09028-9723, USA -- Just put the name of whichever of the three you are writing to.


And while you're writing, Canada's Supreme Court has refused to hear appeals on the issue of safe harbor status for war resisters in Canada. The country's Parliament remains the best hope for safe harbor war resisters may have. You can make your voice heard by the Canadian parliament which has the ability to pass legislation to grant war resisters the right to remain in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (
pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use.

Monday's snapshot notes the 44th Munich Conference on Security Policy and the protests taking place which included war resister Chris Capps who was an awarded a peace medal from the Munich American Peace Committee. Tim Slater (Media with Conscience) provides some of Capps speech:

To all of you here, at this protest: I would like to thank you, not just for awarding me this prize, but also for exposing and standing up to the arrogance of those leaders who commonly make decisions that destroy the lives of those who certainly are not a threat to their nations' security. To be certain, it is the legitimate right of a just government to protect the lives of its citizens. However, this is not accomplished by bombing and invading countries on the other side of the world where the majority of their citizens live in poverty. The kind of 'security' policies my country, the United States, has pursued over the last few years has enraged much of the world's Muslim population, and brought more desperation to Iraq and Afghanistan; it has led to loss of privacy and liberty for American citizens, and it has reverted my country to the dark ages when torture was an acceptable form of interrogation. Today, as it stands, America has invaded Iraq supposedly to defend its "national security". The allegations that Iraq was a threat to America have since been proven false. As a result, four thousand American soldiers have died in Iraq, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis are dead over thirty thousand Americans are wounded, and millions of Iraqis have become refugees. It is time to show the people in there [indicating the location where the Munich Security Conference was being held] that military force should only be a very last resort, that it should not be used until all other options are exhuasted, and until it is completely transparent and evident that we truly must take these actions to defend ourselves. Thousands of soldiers have made the same decision I have: the decision not to do the bidding of those who consider them Federal property. Many more people have refused to pay their taxes until these wars come to an end; and then there are people like you who have taken to the streets to show their outrage about these destructive policies. It is going to take all of us and all of our efforts to put these policies to an end and hold our leaders accountable for them.

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb,
Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at
The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).

Meanwhile
IVAW is organizing a March 2008 DC action:
In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan
March 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation. Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." As part of their fundraising efforts for the event, they are holding houseparties and a recent one in Boston featured both IVAW's Liam Madden and the incomprable Howard Zinn as speakers.

Earlier this month
David Ovalle (Miami Herald) reported on 21-year-old Alex Lotero, an Iraq War veteran who has been disagnosed with PTSD but still could not get treatment forcing him to self-check out (they did, however, offer him a discharge that would strip him of all of his benefits -- an offer that should result in a Congressional investigation). Lotero was in jail at the time. Today Ovalle reports that Lotero remains in jail after "nearly two weeks without seeing a judge after his arrest on charges of going AWOL" and quotes Anady Lotero (his mother) explaining that during this two weeks, he hasn't been receiving "his usual medications for anxiety, sleep disorder and back pain." Ovalle explains, "On Monday, Maj. Nathan Banks, an Army spokesman in Washington, said the rules actually allow for 30 days to pick up a soldier who is absent without leave. Often, the military will ask a jail to release a soldier and send him a bus ticket to his home base. Lotero, however, will be picked up by an 'extradition team' sent from Fort Benning, Ga., Banks said." AP quotes Adrieen Willis of Veterans for America who says the transfer should have taken place already ("within 72 hours"), "He hasn't seen a lawyer, he hasn't had any of his medication, he hasn't had any of the rights of an American citizen, so it's a little concerning. It's very odd that he can be sitting there without representation, without seeing a judge for 30 days." Very odd and that also describes a soldier Erin Emery (Denver Post) reported on Sunday: "A Fort Carson Soldier who says he was in treatment at Cedar Springs Hospital for bipolar disorder and alcohol abuse was released early and ordered to deploy to the Middle East with the 3rd Brigade Combat Team. The 28-year-old specialist spent 31 days in Kuwait and was returned to Fort Carson on Dec. 31 after health care professionals in Kuwait concurred that his symptoms met criteria for bipolar disorder and 'some paranoia and possible homicidal tendencies,' according to e-mails obtained by The Denver Post. The soldier, who asked not to be identified because of the stigma surrounding mental illness and because he will seek employment when he leaves the Army, said he checked himself into Cedar Springs on Nov. 9 or Nov. 10 after he attempted suicide while under the influence of alcohol. He said his treatment was supposed to end Dec. 10 but his commanding officers showed up at the hospital Nov. 29 and ordered him to leave."

Turning to other abuses, from the front page no less,
James Risen (New York Times) reports on women working for US corporations reporting sexaul assaults in "by co-workers while working as contractors in Iraq but now find themselves in legal limbo, unable to seek justice or even significant compensation. Many of the same legal and logistical obstacles that have impeded other types of investigations involving contractors in Iraq, like shootings involving security guards for Blackwater Worldwide, have made it difficult for the United States government to pursue charges related to sexual offenses. The military justice system does not apply to them, and the reach of other American laws on contractors working in foreign war zones remains unclear five years after the United States invasion of Iraq." UPI notes Jamie Leigh Jones was among those offering testimony to the US House Judiciary Committee. Maddy Sauer (ABC News) reports Jones and other victims of sexual assault explained how the arbitration clause in employment contracts for KBR and others requires victims "to argue their cases of sexual harassment, assault and rape before secretive arbitration panels rather than in an open court before a judge and jury." Feminist Wire Daily recaps, "Jamie Leigh Jones, a former KBR employee testified again on Tuesday at a congressional hearing that she was drugged and gang-raped by a group of her co-worker in the Green Zone KBR camp in Iraq in 2005" and reports on the second woman offering testiomny: "Mary Beth Kineston, an American truck driver for KRB, says she was sexually assaulted by a fellow driver, who continued to work for KRB even after she made a complaint. Subsequently, she was groped by another KRB worker and was fired when she attempted to place a second complaint." Maddy Sauer quotes US House Rep Ted Poe who opposes the arbitration route (at least in sexual assault cases) and states, "Air things out in a public forum of a courtroom. That's why we have courts in the United States." Risen notes, "Ms. Jones and her lawyers said 38 women who worked as contractors in Iraq, Kuwait and other countries had contacted her since she testified" in December "to discuss their own experiences. Now Congressional leaders are seeking answers from the Pentagon, the State Department and other agencies to try to determine the scope of the threats facing women who are contractors." Risen also quotes Pamela Jones who worked for KBR in Kuwait and reported her sexual assault even though she knew that doing so meant "that you could lose your job."

Not a lot of respect for health care in Iraq either. Which is how
Sunday reports included of a US raid on a hospital. Reuters reported that the al-Rashad mental hospital in Baghdad was raided (citing an official at the hospital and an official with the Iraq Health Ministry) and the hospital's "acting director [was arrested], accusing him of workining with al Qaeda and recruiting mentally ill women and using them in suicide bombing operations" which revolves around the unproven claim that the February 1st Baghdad pet markets bombings were the result of women who were mentally challenged/disabled. Today Steve Lannen (McClatchy Newspapers) reports on the arrest that US Rear Adm. Greg Smith briefed on today, "A senior American official who asked not to be named because he wasn't authorized to discuss the case publicly said American investigators now thought the bombers were adults -- one in her 20s, the other in her 30s -- with long histories of psychiatric conditions including depression and schizophrenia. . . . The administrator who's being questioned is suspected of using his access to mental-patient records and possibly providing them to Islamic extremists, the official said." Smith's remarks on this today were:

On Sunday, Iraqi and coalition forces detained a hospital administrator in connection with the possible exploitation of mentally impaired women by al-Qaeda. On February 1st, two women were used to deliver a backpack filled with explosives and a suicide vest into the crowded pet markets in Baghdad. As part of the investigation into these tragic events, last Sunday, Iraqi and coalition forces detained the acting administrator of the al-Rashad Physciatric Hospital of Baghdad at his office and conducted a thorough search of the facility. The administrator remains in coalition force detention and is being questioned to determine what role, if any, he may have played in supplying al-Qaeada with information regarding patients at the al-Rashad Psychiatric Hospital or from other medical facilities in Baghdad. Because this is an ongoing investigation, I'm not at liberty to discuss any more details on this particular incident but will provide more information as it becomes available.

99 was the number of people who died in the two Baghdad bombings at the start of the month,
according to CBS and AP who also note, "Iraq's parliament on Wednesday passed three key pieces of legislation that set a date for provincial elections, allot the US $48 billion for 2008 spending, and provide limited amnesty to detainees in Iraqi custody. The three measures were bundled together for one vote to satisfy the demands of minority Kurds who feared they might be double-crossed on their demand that the budget allot 17 percent to their semiautonomous regional government in the north." Reuters apparently received a new pair of pom-poms thereby explaining their use of the term "breakthrough" to describe the passage of the 2008 budget . . . The budget for 2008 that should have passed last year but instead was passed February 13th of 2008 and only after threats to disband the Iraqi Parliament.

Staying with legislatures, in the US, the House Appropriations Committee's subcommittee on Defense, chaired by US House Rep John Murtha, met this morning and heard begging from government officials for more money. Apparently explaining why the US does not have health care or an adequately funded educational system, US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates declared that "we must make the choices and investments necessary to protect the security, prosperity and freedom of Americans for today and future generations." Gates declared? Via Gordon England, the deputy of the department. When begging for a $35,9 billon increase, you'd think the head of the department could show up. But he does have an excuse, he has "
a fracture to his right shoulder sustained when he slipped on some ice. . . Secretary Gates has been examined by a physician and is receiving treatment for this injury. He continues to perform all other duties and responsibilities of his position."

In Diyala Province and Anbar Province, the 'Awakening' Councils have been on strike. The US collaborators, paid approximately $300 a month, are
the focus of a posting by a McClatchy Newspapers correspondent at Inside Iraq:

I believe the Americans tried to follow the steps of the awakening council in Anbar which was created by the sheikhs of Anbar province tribes. The mistake of the Americans was not studying the psychological side of Anbar experience. People of Anbar are almost from one main tribe and they all suffered from Qaida. When they decided to fight Qaida, they gathered their efforts to work as one real team because they wanted to end their suffering. They formed their awakening council and they succeeded because they had an exact goal. There is no way to compare between the awakening council of Anbar and any other awakening council whether its formed by Iraqis or American. Anbar awakening council is the real copy while the others are imitations.
Since almost one weak, the awakening council in one of Baghdad 's neighborhood and in Diyala province suspended their cooperation with the government. They both accuse the official security forces (police and army) of attacking these councils. The awakening council in Amiriyah neighborhood west Baghdad says that a joint force of the Iraqi and the US armies arrested some of its members. The supporters of the awakening council in Diyala demonstrate for the last four days demanding to depose the police chief of Diyala accusing him with the sectarian violence.

The 'Awakening' Council was addressed in the press conference (held by M-NF with Smith leading) today by Iraqi government spokesperson Dr. Ali al-Dabbagh who declared, "The Iraqi government supports all the Awakening Groups whether they were in Tikrit, Salah ad Din, Diyala, Anbara or even in Mosul. According to the potentials that the Government of Iraq views so that the security issue could be under the responsibility of the Iraqi forces. This is the policy of the Iraqi government with the Awakenings. We think that the Iraqi forces cannot perform the security services in the hot zones without the support from those people including the Awakenings and the members in the Awakenings." Rear Adm. Smith then went on to assure that the US military has always been in a "strong partnership" with that striking 'Awakening' members in Diyala Province and that talks "are ongoing". al-Dabbagh noted the treaty the White House hopes to structure and enter into with the puppet government (without any consent from the US Congress), "The negotiations with the United States; we still haven't set a date for that. Of course there are some points that the Iraqi government will take into consideration because Iraq seeks to build some really good relationships with the Americans. And the current relationship between the United States and the Multi-National Forces and Iraq is actually a relationship imposed on Iraq because Iraq lost the war. And that's why Iraq has been imposed by resolutions by the Security Council. And Iraq now is gaining back its sovereignty. Iraq wanted to be removed from the 7th Chapter from the United Nations so that it will enter some negotiations as a country that has full sovereignty so that it can maintain the best interests of the . . . of his people. We don't want Iraq to be a source or a starting point to any attack to any other countries. And we don't want any kind of military bases, long-term military bases in Iraq in addition to many other detailed things that needs much more sessions of negotiations so that we can reach to the best interests . . . to something that serves the best interests of both the United States and America . . . and Iraq." Good he remembered to work in Iraq there. What he's describing is involved and does require the US Congress. Meanwhile, the wounded Robert Gates got another blow today when another Iraqi official spoke publicly.
Peter Graff (Reuters) reports that Mowaffaq al-Rubaie, the country's National Security Advisor, states that US forces should continue the drawdown as planned, without the 'pause' that Robert Gates and US Gen. David Peteraeus favor. He wants the figure below 100,000 (100,000 US service members stationed in the country). And, possibly most interesting, he declared that regardless of whether the Democratic Party's presidential nomination went to Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama and that the chosen then went on to win, he didn't see US forces leaving: "When they are in the oval office, they will think twice and they will consult with commanders on the ground." Wow, more truth than 'anti-war' 'leaders' like Tom Hayden can offer as they rush to cheerlead Obama. But then the 'anti-war' 'leader' Hayden is writing about such end-the-war issues as . . . super-delegates.

In some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad mortar attack wounded one person and that two US service members were injured in a Baghdad bombing. Reuters notes a Falluja roadside bombing left two people injured.

Shootings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 5 people were shot dead ("building workers" en route to work) by unknown assailants in Diyala Province and -- included in this section because the unknown assailants are described as "gunmen" -- an invasion of al Somood primary school outside Baghdad resulted in a school guard's wife being beaten and her son hung. In addition to the five construction workers shot dead, Reuters notes two more were injured.

Corpses?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 corpses discovered in Baghdad while a head was discovered in Khalis and, falling back to yesterday, a corpse was discovered in Kirkuk.

Damien McElroy (Telegraph of London) reported this morning that talks "with members of a faction of" the Mahdi Army, were supposed to lead to the release of the two employees of CBS News kidnapped on Sunday. Michael Holden and Mohammed Abas (Reuters) report that the translator has been released but the CBS correspondent has not and, as Heather Langan (Bloomberg News) notes, "The U.S. television network hasn't identified them."

The
January 24th snapshot noted Martha Burk's "Gender Budgets, Anyone" in the new issue of Ms. magazine, Winter 2008. It is now out and the magazine's issued a press release on the issue now on the stands:

MEDIA ADVISORYFor immediate releaseCONTACT: duVergne GainesSusie Gilligan310-556-2500dgaines@feminist.orgsgilligan@feminist.orgNew Ms. Features Exposé on Ward Connerly and His Deceptively Named"Civil Rights Initiatives"The winter issue of Ms. magazine-on newsstands 1/29/08- features an in-depth investigation of Ward Connerly, the mastermind behind the deceptively named "civil rights initiatives" designed to eliminate state affirmative action programs for women and minorities in public contracting, employment, and education. As Connerly gears up to target five states with ballot measures this November (AZ, CO, MO, NE, OK), Ms.'s investigation uncovers Connerly's:-Extensive ties to big government contractors. Connerly has long served as a lobbyist and consultant for the good ole boys network of big contractors that want to shut out women- and minority-owned businesses from competing for government contracts. With more and more government services and functions being privatized, hundreds of billions of dollars are at stake.-Eye-popping compensation package. Connerly and his firm have taken in $8.3 million in compensation from his nonprofits since 1998 or nearly half of the organizations' total revenue. Last year, his compensation topped $1.6 million, amounting to a whopping 66% of his non profits' total revenue-possibly in violation of federal tax laws that prohibit individuals from using charitable organizations to enrich themselves.-Deceptive campaign tactics. Renowned legal scholar Kimberle Crenshaw exposes Connerly and his supporters' deliberate attempts to mislead voters into believing their initiatives are pro-civil rights and pro-women. She examines the current dispute in Missouri over proposed ballot language, revealing how vitally important it is that supporters of affirmative action sound the alarm on Connerly's tactics of deception."Voters need to know what's really going on," says Ms. Executive Editor Katherine Spillar. "Connerly is a well-paid front man for the good ole boys network of large public-works contractors who don't want to compete with women- and minority-owned firms."Note to editors: Executive Editor Katherine Spillar and Kimberle Crenshaw are available for interviews. If you want to request a copy of the article or inquire about reprint opportunities please contact Jessica Stites
(
jsites@msmagazine.com; 310-556-2515).

The articles noted above run from page 34 to page 41. Currently, only Michele Kort's "
Are U.S. Policies Killing Women?" is available online from the Winter issue but the issue itself is now available at book stores, newstands and magazine racks everywhere.

Quickly, US politics.
Ted Rall explains what the 'anti-war' leaders won't regarding their beloved. Delilah Boyd (A Scrivener's Lament) notes the data on the Viriginia primary -- exit polls for those voting in the Democratic primary which finds that 72% of Republicans who voting in the DEMOCRATIC primary voted for Obama, those self-identifying as conservative brought the number to 73%. Larry Johnson (No Quarter) puzzles about who showed up to vote and the exit polling Boyd's referring to backs up what he was observing. SusanUnPC (No Quarter) highlights a disturbing article on the Bambi 'followers'. Today in the New York Times, Maureen Dowd wants to speak sisterhood and expects someone to take her seriously. Bob Somerby (The Daily Howler) critiques Dowd's pose (which is nothing but a tactic to allow her more slams at Hillary Clinton) and -- near the end -- continues to address the media silence on MSNBC. Delilah Boyd addresses the sliming of Chelsea Clinton by MSNBC here. Also on politics NOW on PBS (which airs on Friday in most markets) interviewed Donna Edwards last month -- she just beat out incumbent Al Wynn in Maryland's Democratic primary.

Finally,
Ian Bell (UK's The Herald) writes about what's at stake in the case Rose Gentle and Beverly Clarke are arguing for their late sons:

Mr Blair will never face any sort of trial over Iraq: that would be the silly part. Such things do not happen to British prime ministers. These days, even impeachment is unthinkable, for better or worse. The western democracies insulate their leaders from such possibilities. There is no accident in that. Equally, if Mr Blair conducted himself according to the dictates of his conscience throughout the Iraq affair, as he continues to insist, insults and impertinence might sound callow. Errors are not equivalent to bad faith. If the then prime minister also acted from the sincere assumption that edited intelligence reports could always be trusted, the case for his defence could begin to seem credible, morally at least.The trouble is that none of this has anything to do with war crimes. There is a ton of legal argument on that subject, obviously, but the basic criteria can be put crudely. When is war justified? The first justification is banal: if you are under attack. Secondly, you can fight legally if there is clear, demonstrable evidence that an attack upon you is in preparation. Thirdly, you can wage war if you have received the explicit support of the United Nations. Anything else is unlawful. Hence, perhaps, the unusual spectacle of fully nine Law Lords gathering to hear the appeal lodged by Rose Gentle and Beverley Clarke. It will take some smart legal thinking to extricate the government, and Mr Blair's reputation, one suspects, from this one. The bereaved pair's lawyers argue that soldiers, given their unique relationship with the state, have a right to know that the cause in which they are ordered to fight is lawful. Mr Blair, they say, did not perform that duty of care.