4/09/2013

when a woman is killed it's a 'personal matter'

in today's snapshot, c.i. notes kpfa's 'flashpoints' from monday evening and she objects to something nicely.

i'm not going to be nice.

an iraqi-woman died in march of 2012.  her husband killed her.  he'll be on trial shortly.  he tried to throw the cops off the murder by writing a note which told her to go back to iraq and called her a terrorist.  the thinking being, it would look like a 'hate crime.'

i don't know what's more hateful than killing some 1 you're married to.

but when they thought it was some racists who did the killing, the media ran with it like crazy.  even jezebel, which is a joke, let's be honest, even jezebel was suddenly interested.

click here for a picture of the killer playing drama queen at the woman's coffin. what a piece of scum he is.

but not just him.

a bunch of opportunists.  you had the so-called trayvon activists.

they weren't activists for trayvon.  they were little bitches who didn't have a life and wanted to use a tragic moment to push their own agenda.

so these same people grabbed on to this woman for a moment, oh they were outraged she was murdered.  they marched against her murder.  until it turned out her husband killed her.





then they didn't give a damn about her.

 here's drama fake falak rahman at muslim times:

Still reeling from the death of Trayvon Martin, the resulting protests and revelations, and stories that abound about people who die every day in this world unjustly, I was shocked to hear of the home invasion of a 32 year old Iraqi mother of five in California last week.
Shaima Alawadi was beaten within an inch of her life. She was left unconscious — left to die in her living room. Apparently, her 17 year old daughter, Fatima Al Himidi found her with a note near her body saying “Go back to your country, you terrorist.” And then, finally, she did die.
My heart weeps for that family.


or she wept until she found out 'that family' included a husband who killed his wife -who was trying to leave him and move to texas.


look here's the idiots of think progress 'updating' their story:


 “One Million Hijabs for Shaima Alawadi” has been launched on Facebook. Wake Forest and Salem students took up the call to wear hoodies and hijabs (#Hoodiesandhijabs) in support of the tragic victims:


of course, they lost interest in 'updating' when it turned out it was her husband who killed her.

they dropped her like a hot potato then.  and don't think they wouldn't do the same to trayvon.  that's why you can't trust these people who show up at a tragedy and try to hijack for their own political causes.  when gabby giffords was shot, we were really angry.  c.i. and ava know her and they said let's show some respect and not dig into the hate and not rush to judgment.  thank goodness for that because those who didn't do the same tended to tell you all this 'truth' about the shooter that ended up not being true.




look at the laughable 'one million hijabs' facebook page that claimed to care about her and stopped caring the second the husband got arrested.  here's their final post:

Dear friends,
We patiently waited for the police to take action on this case and now they have.
On Thursday, Shaima Alawadi's husband was arrested and is now a suspect of her murder. If he is found guilty, not only he killed her, but he destroyed this family.
Our sentiments go to the little ones who not only have to live without their mother but now have to face a second nightmare. No one should have to start life with such burden.
We will continue to update you on details and we ask you to be respectful since Shaima Alawadi's family members (and her kids) have access to this page.
Thank you.



good to know you'll continue to update.  of course, that was november 2012 and it's now april 2013 and you haven't written since.  but, hey, when it was a 'hate crime,' or you thought it was, you pretended to care.

these freaks, and that's what they are, pop up in john irving's 'the world according to garp.'


so arun gupta brings it up on flashbacks and trashes el cajon and then admits it wasn't a hate crime and she was killed by her 'family.'  he can't even say her husband.

i'm sick of it.

i'm sick of all the excuses for violence against women.

i'm sick of all the silence when it comes to violence against women.

it was never more obvious than when shaima alawadi died.

she was a media sensation in death ... until it turned out that she was 1 of 6 million women who are the victims of assault and abuse within their own homes and relationships.

then no 1 cared.  then no 1 wanted to say 1 word.

there was no facebook page created for this latest to die woman.  no 1 gave a damn.

i'm sick of pretending that the people on my supposed side (the left) give a damn about women.  they sure as hell don't and make it real clear over and over.


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

 
Tuesday, April 9, 2013.  Chaos and violence continue, the laughable column Nouri signed his name to is greeted with laughter by the State Dept press corps, Amnesty International issues a report calling out the executions and forced 'confessions' in Iraq but the State Dept isn't sure if they've ever talked executions with the Iraqi government, refugees in the US get some attention, Jane Arraf can't say the words "Psy-Ops" and more.

Jane Arraf files a highly disappointing and misleading report for Al Jazeera today.  It opens.

Jane Arraf:  Ten years after Baghdad fell to US forces, the anniversary is just another work day where there would have been portraits for only Saddam Hussein, there are posters for upcoming elections.  The fall of Saddam's statue in central Baghdad signaled that his regime was finished.  Iraqis joined US Marines in bringing the statue down. 



Let's stop here there before she embarrasses herself further and let's deal first with the statue.  If you hear that crap about the statue on a US network, you tell yourself, "Media Whore."  And know that they're not going to tell the truth even all this time later.  But apparently Al Jazeera is as cowed as everyone else.  Shame on them, shame on Jane.

The truth is now well known.  A friend who was with CBS News has always credited Jan Ackerman (Post-Gazette) with accidentally "approaching" the story when covering US Army Reserve Cpl Michael Rega Jr. April 11, 2003 -- two days after the staged take-down of the statue:

Now Rega is in Baghdad, with the 303rd Psychological Operations Company (Tactical) waging the information war and trying to convince the Iraqis that the American presence in their country is a good thing.
Yesterday, an Associated Press photo of Rega being kissed on the cheek by an Iraqi man appeared on television Web sites and in newspapers across the country, indicating he's on track with his mission.

And that propaganda photo that AP distributed? Taken by Jerome Delay who's now working for AP and the US government in Africa (currently trying to stir war on Mali). Don't mistake him for a reporter, he's not.  Jerome Delay also took the 'news' photos of the Saddam statue for AP.  His propaganda is everywhere.

July 3, 2004, the Los Angeles Times ran David Zucchino's "Army Stage-Managed Fall of Hussein Statue:"

As the Iraqi regime was collapsing on April 9, 2003, Marines converged on Firdos Square in central Baghdad, site of an enormous statue of Saddam Hussein. It was a Marine colonel -- not joyous Iraqi civilians, as was widely assumed from the TV images -- who decided to topple the statue, the Army report said. And it was a quick-thinking Army psychological operations team that made it appear to be a spontaneous Iraqi undertaking.
After the colonel -- who was not named in the report -- selected the statue as a "target of opportunity," the psychological team used loudspeakers to encourage Iraqi civilians to assist, according to an account by a unit member.

The same day Jon Elmer (New Standard) noted that "Marines brought in cheering Iraqi children in order to make the scene appear authentic, the study said.  Allegations that the event was staged were made in April of last year, mostly by opponents of the war, but were ignored or ridiculed by the US government and most visible media outlets."  Click here for peace activist Nevill Watson (April 17, 2003) telling Australia's SBS TV it was a rent-a-crowd.  August 4, 2003, Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber would offer "How To Sell A War" (In These Times):

The problem is that the images of toppling statues and exulting Iraqis, to which American audiences were repeatedly exposed, obscured a larger reality. A Reuters long-shot photo of Firdos Square showed that it was nearly empty, ringed by U.S. tanks and marines who had moved in to seal off the square before admitting the Iraqis. A BBC photo sequence of the statue’s toppling also showed a sparse crowd of approximately 200 people–much smaller than the demonstrations only nine days later, when thousands of Iraqis took to the streets of Baghdad calling for U.S.-led forces to leave the city. Los Angeles Times reporter John Daniszewski, who was on the scene to witness the statue’s fall, caught an aspect of the day’s events that the other reporters missed. Most Iraqis were indeed glad to see Saddam go, he wrote, but he spoke near the scene with Iraqi businessman Jarrir Abdel-Kerim, who warned that Americans should not be deceived by the images they were seeing.


Please note, Sheldon and John wrote that before the Psy-Ops report was issued.  That's the report the Los Angeles Times broke the news on and SourceWatch quotes from the report:



 

On Point, a US army report on lessons learned from the war, notes that it was a Marine colonel, not Iraqi civilians, who decided to topple the statue. "We moved our [tactical PSYOP team] TPT vehicle forward and started to run around seeing what they needed us to do to facilitate their mission," states a U.S. military officer involved in the operation. "There was a large media circus at this location (I guess the Palestine Hotel was a media center at the time), almost as many reporters as there were Iraqis, as the hotel was right adjacent to the Al-Firdos Square. The Marine Corps colonel in the area saw the Saddam statue as a target of opportunity and decided that the statue must come down." The pyschological team used loudspeakers to encourage Iraqi civilians to assist, packed the scene with Iraqi children, and stepped in to readjust the props when one of the soldiers draped an American flag over the statue. "God bless them, but we were thinking from PSYOP school that this was just bad news," the officer reported. "We didn't want to look like an occupation force, and some of the Iraqis were saying, 'No, we want an Iraqi flag!' So I said 'No problem, somebody get me an Iraqi flag.' " [1]


After the military report was released in 2004 and David Zucchino reported on it, Janine Jackson (FAIR) noted an interesting press move:

Today, the elite media strategy appears to be to pretend they always knew the event was a U.S. military exercise. The July 3 New York Times, for example, refers to the square where "American marines toppled a statue of Saddam Hussein." But it's worth looking back to recall just how much was made of this purportedly spontaneous event, likened by some to the fall of the Berlin Wall. AP's April 10, 2003 headline: "Iraqis topple statue of Saddam and celebrate the fall of Baghdad." The L.A. Times, in the editorial "New Day in Ancient Land," explained it as the work of "Iraqi mobs." The Chicago Tribune likewise described "a crowd of hundreds of Iraqis assisted by U.S. marines" and opined, "This was the day the fog of war lifted. And the whole world could see the truth." Well, as it turns out, not exactly.

On the topic of the statue?  For those who whine that Ava and I were too hard on poor little Peter Maas when we wrote about James Steele: America's Mystery Man In Iraq  in our "TV: The War Crimes Documentary," Maas has a little history with the fall of the statue as well.  Got a real problem with the truth as Peter Hart pointed out for FAIR in 2011.  Know reality and know what happened.  Peter Maas' dishonesty was actually planned as a parenthetical but let's talk about what really happened that day.  Jane Arraf remembers, right? She just never tells you what happened that day. 

Two friends of mine were at the Palestine Hotel that day.  That's where most US and foreign journalists were.  Jane could probably give you a list of who was there.  The Pys-Ops operation worked so well because the US press was so overyjoyed to see the US military.



The part of this 'statue' story they don't tell you is that everyone had left Baghdad -- security wise -- before US troops came in.  They like to play big and brave but I had two friends in the Palestine Hotel and they were scared.  Most of the journalists there were.  See Big Bad Saddam Hussein was protecting them.  And then everyone of his forces were fleeing -- all gone by April 8th.  There was no real concern about the safety of the Iraqis in Baghdad -- not among journalists at the Palestine Hotel.  No, the concern there was who would protect them.  And they shouted support for US Marines who pulled up April 9th at the Palestine Hotel.  The manufactured joy in that day's photos of Saddam's statue being pulled down is said to have been nothing compared to the outpouring of slavish devotion by the journalists when the Marines pulled up.  The same unit that pulled up would move quickly to the square where the statue would be pulled down by the US military shortly after.

That's what the press doesn't tell you and it's key to understanding how that moment was sold.  Not by accident, not by the press misunderstanding what was going on.  But by their doing exactly what they were told to by the US Marines and doing it out of gratitude that someone was present to protect them.  Some were especially timid rabbits that day because the US military had fired on the hotel the day before.  (See CPJ's report here.)  Was that all part of softening up the press? 

Who knows but someone should Jane Arraf why she continues to lie about that moment?  Someone should ask why, after a Psy-Ops operation is exposed, people continue to treat as real?  And especially why at Al Jazeera.  Now we should note Jane made her name at CNN.  December 3, 2004, FAIR issued a press advisory entitled "The Return of PSYOPS: Military's media manipulation demans more investigation" -- CNN had again 'fallen' for propaganda (this time on Falluja) and 'reported' it leading FAIR to remind:

CNN 's history of voluntary cooperation with PSYOPS troops is also worth considering. In March 2000, FAIR and international news organizations revealed that CNN had allowed military propaganda specialists from an Army PSYOPS unit to work as interns in the news division of its Atlanta headquarters.
As FAIR reported at the time (3/27/00), some PSYOPS officers were eager to find ways to use media power to their advantage. One officer explained at a PSYOPS conference that the military needed to find ways to "gain control" over commercial news satellites to help bring down an "informational cone of silence" over regions where special operations were taking place.
And a 1996 unofficial strategy paper written by an Army officer and published by the U.S. Naval War College ("Military Operations in the CNN World: Using the Media as a Force Multiplier") urged military commanders to find ways to "leverage the vast resources of the fourth estate" for the purposes of "communicating the [mission's] objective and endstate, boosting friendly morale, executing more effective psychological operations, playing a major role in deception of the enemy, and enhancing intelligence collection."


So is Al Jazeera refusing to allow reports to note that the pulling down of Saddam Hussein's statue was a PSY-OPS operation or is Jane's CNN training?  Ten years later, when you can't tell the damn truth, people have a right to ask that question and, more than that, they have a right to have the question answered.

It matters and it matters because of so much that Jane Arraf's not telling.  That PSY-OPS operation?  It was used as an 'end marker.'  Battles were going -- in Baghdad -- and the news media ignored it to report on the statue.  From History Commons:

While the iconic Firdos Square photo op dominates US news broadcasts (see April 9, 2003), the fighting throughout Baghdad and elsewhere in Iraq goes almost unreported. CNN’s Paula Zahn makes a passing reference to “total anarchy” in Baghdad; CNN reporter Martin Savidge and CBS reporter Byron Pitts give brief oral reports on the fighting, but no film is shown to American viewers. The Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media will later note: “Despite the fact that fighting continued literally blocks from Firdos Square, apparently no camera crews were dispatched to capture those images. According to CNN and FNC [Fox News Channel], in other words, the war ended with the collapse of the statue of Saddam Hussein in Firdos Square.” After that, the Journal will conclude, “the battlefield itself disappeared”; author and media critic Frank Rich will note that war coverage dropped “precipitously on every network, broadcast and cable alike.” War footage will drop 76 percent on Fox and 73 percent on CNN.


That PSY-OPS operation was really more about tricking US eyes than Iraqi eyes.

It is not a minor point and when, ten years after it happened, nine years after a US military report exposed it as a PSY-OPS operation, a journalist wants to talk about that moment, that damn well better be honest.

Let's fall back to yesterday's Flashpoints (KPFA).

Dennis Bernstein:  A decade after US forces sealed their victory over Iraq by tearing down the statue of Saddam Hussein, Iraqis continue to flee their country adding to the estimated 4 million displaced by the war and occupation.  The Progressive magazine has a report on the largest community of Iraqi refugees in the United States who fled as a result of the US war and occupation.  Joining us to talk about that report is Arun Gupta, he is the author [of "Little Baghdad, California"] and he's a widely published journalist. You can see his stuff all over the place, in The Progressive, Truth Out, In These Times, the Guardian.  It is good to have you with us on Flashpoints.

Arun Gupta: Great to be with you today, Dennis.

Dennis Bernstein: Okay, well we -- Even as we covered that war and the unfolding of that war, we saw that first tens-of-thousands, then hundreds-of-thousands, then millions of Iraqis were, in fact, displaced internally and then fled the country.  You write about a situation in southern California where many are.  I'm hoping that you can just set the scene, outline the situation.  What's happening down there?  Paint a picture and who it is that's struggling there near the US southern border?

Arun Gupta: Well this is actually a really fascinating story of how I really found the story.  So in March of 2012, an Iraqi-American woman, Shaima Alwadi, is murdered in her home in El Cajon, California. She's beaten to the point of death and later dies in a hospital.  A note is left next to her body that says, "Go back to your country, you terrorist."  I wasn't too far away at the time, so I thought I would go down there and check out the story because it became this international sensation of this potential hate crime, murder in southern California. 


I'm not including Arun's comments about El Cajon.  Sorry.  We didn't fall for the crap last year.  From March 26, 2012:

One visitor has been lobbying in the public e-mail account repeatedly since Saturday morning for us to include the death of Shaima Alawadi. No, thank you. In this morning's four e-mails, the visitors argues that surely the Iraqi press must be covering the woman's death. They are. Here for Al Mada. They're also covering that Omar Sharif's grandson "admits" he's gay and half-Jewish. We're not going to be devoting space to that story either. For those who don't know, the woman is an Iraqi-American who came to the US in the early 90s. She was beaten and she's died. That's what's known. The coverage is a bunch of items that are speculation. And inflated outrage. It allows people to pretend they care about an issue, these momentary topics that flare up every few months. But they don't really have much to do with news. To be clear, her death is tragic, unfortunate and all too common for women in the US and around the world. However, nothing is known. When we covered the Iraqi woman run down in the US, killed by her own father, there were eye witnesses and that was a story the media didn't want to touch. This isn't any such story. The media has portrayed it as 'killed by an outsider who hates foreigners' and that is easy to cover, no real risk to anyone and allows everyone to mount their soapboxes. I'm sure there's already a Facebook outrage page for the woman, there are not, however, any real facts about who killed her or why.



For the record, the woman's husband was charged in the murder of his wife.  He is charged with killing his wife.  If you can't say that, I don't know why you're talking about.  Most women in the United States who are murdered are murdered by someone they know.  Most women in the US who are victims of violence are the victims of violence from someone who they have been or are involved with.   Why is it so many of us on the left have such a problem talking seriously about the terrorism from supposed loved ones?  If you're not getting the point, when this murder was falsely portrayed as a hate crime, the left media was all over it, Workers World was all over it, everyone was all over it.  The minute the police charged the husband?  Everyone walked away.  It's not a 'personal issue.'  It's murder and if her death mattered when it might have been a hate crime, it matters when she died as a result of domestic terrorism. (I'm not using the gentile term "domestic abuse." I'm sick of terms that lie.)   I think on the left we need to real hard look at ourselves.


Arun Gupta:  But when I get there, I realize, wait a minute, there's this enormous Iraqi community here about half-an-hour east of San Diego -- in kind of the foothills of these mountains, in semi-arid, desert-like landscape and upon being further researched, I find there's something like over 30,000 Iraqi-Americans and I'm like, "How did 30,000 Iraqis wind up in the desert of southern California?" [. . .]  A lot of the people I was talking to told me "this is really a Chaldean community here."  Now Chaldeans are the oldest Christian sect in the world.  They are -- they're actually Roman Catholics.  Catholiscm has something like 22 different rites -- Chaldeans are one of them.  And they are a community that has been about a million-strong in Iraq.  The former vice president under Saddam Hussein, Tariq Aziz, he was a Christian -- Chaldean Christian.  And they've really suffered a lot from the war.  They've been persecuted a lot because of their beliefs but a also because a lot of them are wealthy, they were entrepreneurs, business owners.  They were the ones who could have alcohol stores in Iraq so a lot of them would be kidnapped for extortion, you know, for ransom and that sort of thing.  And hundreds of thousands of Chaldeans have fled Iraq since the 2003 war began. 


Let's get into some of the refugees and their stories.  At the end of last month, Ben Bergman did a report on this topic -- Iraqi Americans in El Cajon -- for NPR's Morning Edition (link is text and audio):

BERGMAN: Rida Hamida is a social worker at Access California who helps arriving Iraqis.

HAMIDA: They come to the airport, there's thousands of people walking around, nobody knows their name. They're lost. They're frustrated. They don't know the language.

BERGMAN: Hamida says Iraqis are reluctant to talk about their struggles because they don't want to appear ungrateful. Refugees get health care and cash assistance from the county, about $300 a month. But after eight months, the checks stop coming. Ready or not, Hamida has to convince them to find a job, even though the work almost always pales in comparison to whatever they were doing in Iraq.

HAMIDA: They actually have a Ph.D. and were the principal of a school of 2,000 students. And I'm trying to help them take an entry-level position as a customer service representative just to survive.

HANNA GAZNAKH: (Foreign language spoken)

BERGMAN: Hanna Gaznakh says he left his job as a radiologist in Iraq to settle in Anaheim with his son and wife two months ago.

H. GAZNAKH: Because the war in Iraq, security, this not good.

BERGMAN: At 63, he doesn't think he'll find any job, let alone be a radiologist again. But he hopes his son, who's dealt with PTSD, will find a better life here.

This is from Gupta's article for The Progressive:
,
It’s not hard to understand why. Farah Muhsin, who came to San Rafael, California, in 2008 to study political science, says her family decamped to Syria in May 2003 after her mother, a journalist in Iraq, appeared on "death lists issued by the Badr Brigade and the Da'wa Party."
"If you go to Iraq today, they say America has destroyed our country and allowed criminals and warlords to become politicians, take control of our government and imprison and torture thousands of people," Muhsin says. "As harsh and cruel was life under Saddam Hussein, it was much better than today."

Arun Gupta told Dennis Bernstein the unemployment rate was over 60% for Iraqi-Americans in that area. 

Arun Gupta:  The refugees are given a little money to set them up but basically it's only enough money to rent an apartment, pay the security [deposit], get the utilities hooked up.  So they get donated furniture.  The Chaldean community, there are two Chaldean Churches there, has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars to help people furnish their apartments.  But at the same time, and I talked to social workers at four separate agencies, and I was told by pretty much all of them that there's just a systematic wage theft going on.  So the Chaldean community is very entreprenureal.  It owns hundreds of stores throughout the area.  And certainly not everyone is doing this, we don't want to paint a broad brush, but there are all these allegations that people work in grocery stores and they're hired and told, "I'll pay you $150 a week."  This is for like a 50 hour work week.  Or a common tactic I heard separately from three different social workers is that owners of a business, say a car wash, will hire someone and say, "Well the first month, you'll be a trainee.  You need to learn the job so you're going to be an unpaid trainee for one month and then at the end of the month, we'll put you on the payroll."  Well what happens is they work for one month for no wage and then they're let go and then the owner just hires someone else as a trainee. And they don't know the system, they don't know the laws, the enforcement is very weak. 


FYI, if you're in training at a car wash or whatever in the US, you're supposed to be paid and you're supposed to be paid at least minimum wage which is $7.25 an hour nationally. Leaving aside groups such as those who get tips, in California there is a state law which makes the minimum wage $8 an hour (San Francisco has its own minimum wage law of $10.24 an hour).  (Employees who get tips must, when their tips are factored in, be making at least minimum wage.  If not, the employer is supposed to increase the pay so that minimum wage is reached.)

Along with California and Michigan, another asylum state has been Massachusetts.   Asma Khalid (WBUR -- link is audio and text) reported today on the Iraqi-Americans who have come to Massachusetts:

Take Anas al-Hamdani. His life in America hasn’t been easy. But he’s safe, and he says that counts for a lot when you know how it feels to be kidnapped, beaten up by insurgents, and stuffed into a trunk.
Shortly after he landed in Massachusetts, al-Hamdani found a job washing dishes at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge. But he lives in Lynn.
“Every morning, I wake up 5 in the morning, and bus, bus, two buses, and two trains,” he says, explaining his daily commute.
As al-Hamdani goes into a back room at MIT to grab some milk, he starts speaking in a stream of consciousness. He says he needs to go to school, change his life and try to become more than “just a dishwasher.”
That’s where Iman Shati, an Iraqi refugee herself, can help. Life used to be grand for Shati — a three-car garage, a garden, a spacious house in Baghdad. Then the bombs started falling.
Five years later, she moved to Massachusetts with her family. Her son, who was an engineer in Iraq, took a kitchen job to pay the rent. She quickly realized he was not an anomaly. Many Iraqi refugees are highly educated — doctors, lawyers, engineers.
“For the community, when they came here, there was a lot of problems,” Shati says. “They struggle to find work. The money is not enough to pay the rent, to pay the utilities.”
So Shati created the Iraqi and Arab Community Association in Lynn. The city has become a local hub for Iraqi refugees.

As noted in yesterday's snapshot, "Thug Nouri al-Maliki signed his name to a column the Washington Post runs in tomorrow's paper."  Poor US State Dept -- they got push back today on the claim that Nouri wrote it -- the press was even laughing at the spokesperson's denials in today's press briefing.

QUESTION: Iraq?

MR. VENTRELL: Okay.

QUESTION: Yes. Patrick, today marks the 10th anniversary for the fall of Baghdad, and here we are 10 years later, the city is divided, it’s basically ethnically cleansed, has no services, no security, bombings everywhere. Could you reflect on the past 10 years and what kind of lessons could be drawn, let’s say, as we look into what might happen in Iran and Syria?

MR. VENTRELL: Look, Said, we talked about this last month when we were at the 10-year mark from the beginning of the war, and I’ll just say that we’ll leave the retrospective to historians.
Here’s where we are now. We have a Strategic Framework Agreement with the Iraqis that governs our relationship, and it’s a wide and broad relationship that includes cooperation on economic, political, cultural, and a number of areas. And so we continue to be engaged with our Iraqi partners, and there’s still many complex challenges, but we’ll continue to engage with our partners on the path forward.


QUESTION: Today, in his article in The Washington Post, his op-ed, Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki suggests that you are on solid grounds, your alliance is really very strong and solid, and there is tremendous potential for partnership and business. Do you agree with him? Do you concur that relations are excellent with Iraq?


MR. VENTRELL: Well, we read his op-ed with great interest and we share his commitment and that of the vast majority of Iraqis to a strong bilateral relationship as outlined in the Strategic Framework Agreement.
Go ahead.


QUESTION: Mr. Barzani, the president of the Kurdistan region in Iraq was quoted yesterday as saying that relation with Maliki has reached the non-return point (inaudible) something big coming on. Are you in touch with the Kurd and Maliki with respect to their deteriorating relationship between --


MR. VENTRELL: Well, one of the focuses of our diplomacy is trying to improve that relationship and make sure that Iraqis of all different stripes and affiliations are working through the political process and improving their collaboration, working together through the political process. And so that is a focus of our diplomacy.


QUESTION: But are you concerned about what he’s saying, the point of no return?


MR. VENTRELL: We’ve made very clear that we think that these issues need to be continued to work through in a diplomatic way in the political sphere, and we’ll continue to do what we can through our mission and from here in Washington to help facilitate an improvement in those relations.
Samir, you’ve been – or was it Michel? You’ve been patient.


QUESTION: Yeah. In his op-ed, Prime Minister Maliki has said that the United States has not lost Iraq; instead, in Iraq the United States has found a partner of our shared strategic concerns and our common efforts on energy, economics, and peace and democracy. Do you agree with that?


MR. VENTRELL: We do. It was a good op-ed and it had – yes, this is a very --


QUESTION: How much of it was written by the Embassy? (Laughter.)

MR. VENTRELL: No, this was the Prime Minister’s signature.

QUESTION: Oh, there was no – the U.S. Government had no input into Mr. – into Prime Minister Maliki’s op-ed which extols the wonderful virtues of everything that has happened since the (inaudible)?

MR. VENTRELL: We were not involved in his op-ed --

QUESTION: No?

MR. VENTRELL: -- at all, and it very much was his expression.

QUESTION: It was just a coincidence that he – you guys agree on absolutely everything?

MR. VENTRELL: Look, I’ll let the – the Iraqi side can clarify their message, but I think it was very much here, 10 years later, a way for the Iraqi Government and Iraqi people to make clear that there’s still very important collaboration going on between our two countries. And we want to see that continue, so we’re positively encouraged by it.

QUESTION: But why do you think he said that the United States has not lost Iraq?

MR. VENTRELL: I think what the Prime Minister is trying to do is really emphasize how important the Strategic Framework Agreement is and the cooperation we can have on all these issues going forward.

QUESTION: Do you believe --

MR. VENTRELL: Said, one more.

QUESTION: -- Mr. Maliki is not listening to anyone? I mean, look at the executions. The death penalty is just getting out of – I mean, out of control in Iraq. In the last week alone, something like 10 people were executed, and there are dozens more that are just waiting in line. Do you raise, at least, this issue with them?

MR. VENTRELL: Which specific issue? What was the question in there, Said?

QUESTION: The issue of the death penalty and executions. And basically, there are – many of them, they are only guilty of belonging to this sect or that sect.

MR. VENTRELL: I’d have to look into seeing what contacts we may have raised human rights concerns.


Patrick Ventrell's title is Acting Deputy Spokesperson.  And he's not sure if the executions have been raised with the Iraqis?  Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and the United Nations have condemned these executions.  The United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has asked for a moratorium on these executions and a State Dept spokesperson is unaware of whether or not the State Dept's raised the issue with the Iraqi government?

Today Amnesty International released a new report [PDF format warning] " Death Sentences and Executions in 2012" which finds the five countries executing the most people are China, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the United States. The report notes there were at least 129 executions in Iraq last year.  From the report:

A stark rise in executions was reported in Iraq, making it the country with the third highest number of executions in the world and with the biggest rise in confirmed executions from 2011.  At least 129 people were executed, almost twice the known total for 2011 (at least 68) and the highest figure since 2005.  Executions were often carried out in batches, with up to 34 in a single day.  At least five women were executed, and at least two were sentenced to death.  Amnesty International recorded at least 81 new death sentences in total, but the real figure is possibly in the hundreds.  According to government statistics, death sentences numbered between 250 and 600 in each of the previous five years.  Most death sentences were imposed for terrorism-related offences, others for murder.  All death sentences are automatically reviewed by Iraq's Court of Cassation, and then need to be ratified by the presidency before an execution can be carried out.  Hundreds of people remained on death row with ratified death sentences; they could be executed at any time.
Abid Hamid Mahmoud, Saddam Hussain's presidential secretary and bodyguard, was executed by hanging on 7 June.  He had been sentenced to death in 2010 by the Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal (SICT) together with Tariq Aziz, the former Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, and Sadoun Sahkir, the former Interior Minister.  All three were convicted of participating in the crackdown on opposition political activitsts under Saddam Hussain.  Tariq Aziz and Sadoun Shakir remain at risk of imminent execution.  On 16 December, Iraqi Vice-President Tareq al-Hashemi, now in exile in Turkey, and his son-in-law Ahmed Qahtan, were sentenced to death in absentia for possession and use of weapons.  These were their fifth respective death sentences in 2012, with the others imposed for terrorism-related offences.
Many trials of those sentenced to death failed to meet international standards for fair trials, including the use of "confessions" obtained under torture and other ill-treatment.  Defendants described how they suffered systematic torture while in detention, including being beaten with cables, burned on the face with cigarettes, and given electric shocks to the hands, wrists, fingers, ankles and feet, or were left in a room with water on the floor while an electric current was applied to the water.  But courts continued to include "confessions", even if formally withdrawn, as part of the evidence when handing down a sentence.  Some Iraqi television stations broadcast these self-incriminating "confessions" before the opening of a trial.
Four Iraqi men, Nabhan 'Adel Hamdi, Mu'ad Muhammad 'Abed, 'Amer Ahmad Kassar and Shakir Mahmoud 'Anad, were sentenced to death on 3 December, for membership of an armed group and involvement in terrorism-related offences, after an unfair trail in Anbar, western Iraq.  They were reported to have been tortured after their arrest, while being held incommunicado for several weeks at the Directorate of Counter-Crime in Rmadi, the capital of Anbar province.  Their "confessions" were then broadcast on local television channel, al-Anbar, on 24 and 25 April.  When brought to trial, they told the Anbar Criminal Court that they had been forced under torture to "confess." Witness testimony from fellow detainees and photographs of some of the men's injuries supported their allegations.  The medical examination of one of the men also revealed burns and other injuries consistent with torture.  No investigation into their torture allegations is known to have been held.

But the State Dept's Patrick Ventrell isn't sure if any talks about the executions have taken place?   Remember that the next time the White House wants to gab about concern for human rights.



Mass arrests continue -- despite the protests -- and you can't have mass executions without mass arrests.  NINA reports that in Kirkuk alone, 47 were taken in as part of a mass arrest.  Alsumaria reports that MP Nahida Daini is calling out the mass arrests in Diyala Province, the lack of stated reasons behind the arrests and that they appear to be an effort to prevent people from participating in the upcoming elections (April 20th).  Daini is a member of Iraqiya and she knows about violence -- in February 2012, her brother was kidnapped and discovered dead in Tikrit days later.   Violence being reported today?   National Iraqi News Agency reports 1 contractor was shot dead in Hilla late last night, 1 Oil Ministry employee was shot dead today in Mosul, .an armed Ramadi attack left one police officer injured,  and a Haweejah attempted assassination by bombing of Sahwa Commander Brigadier Khalaf al-Jubouri left two bystanders injured (the commander wasn't harmed).   All Iraq News adds that 2 police officers were kidnapped while an Anbar Province bombing claimed the life of 1 police officer and left another injured.




Friday's snapshot noted many explosive remarks.  Nouri, for example, stated he was going to form a majority government and that he was going to call for early elections.  The US State Dept's Pervert for the Middle East Brett McGurk announced that the answer for Iraq was a majority government.  Brett, of course, didn't get to be US Ambassador to Iraq.  Though he wanted to be.  Really, really wanted to be.  Didn't get it.  No.  That point was driven home to him this week.  Dar Addustour reports the US Embassy in Baghdad is walking back Brett's remarks, insisting he mispoke and/or was mistranslated. Looks like for now Stephen Beecroft remains the US Ambassador to Iraq and Brett's going to have to answer to him.  Again, Brett wanted to be ambassador.  But he's not.




In other political news out of Iraq,  All Iraq news reports that the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, the party of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, issued a statement today declaring that the Iraqi people -- and the Kurds in particular -- will not allow a dictatorship to return.  Jalal remains in Germany, recovering from a December stroke.  Dar Addustour reports that efforts are underway to make KRG Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani President of Iraq. Still on the political, from the April 2nd snapshot, "Alsumaria reports that Salah al-Obeidi, spokesperson for the Sadr bloc, declared today that pressure is  being put upon police and military recruits to get them to vote for Nouri's State of Law slate."  Al Rafidayn reports today that Ammar al-Hakim, leader of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, has also called out the efforts to pressure police and army to vote for a specific list of candidate (Al Rafidayn notes that al-Hakim avoided naming the list in question).


Henry Kissinger's name is in the breeze today: War Crimes.  National Iraqi News Agency reports, "Iraqiya Hurra coalition demanded the government to sue the United States in international courts and claim compensation for material and moral damage in Iraq throughout the occupation years."  While Ahram Online notes:

Leading Muslim Brotherhood figure Essam El-Erian on Tuesday accused opposition figure Mohamed ElBaradei, along with several world leaders, of facilitating the 2003 US invasion of Iraq and demanded their prosecution by an international court. El-Erian, vice chairman of the Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party, accused former British prime minister Tony Blair, former US state secretary Colin Powell and former Italian PM Silvio Berlusconi of having been instrumental to the US invasion of Saddam Hussein's Iraq ten years ago. 
 "Defendants should also include the one [ElBaradei] who covered up for the scandal... without saying one honest word that could have saved Iraq from invasion," El-Erian asserted. 
 "The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and its men, including ElBaradei, who served as agency director for 12 years, should be tried," he said.



















kpfa
flashpoints







4/08/2013

his crush on annette funicello doesn't excuse his bad writing

i'm glad joe leydon had a crush on annette funicello it seems to have made him happy.  it has not; however, produced a column worth reading.

maybe those who want to have sex with women would benefit from grasping that this is not society's default position?  that some women and some men are attracted to men?

instead, he wrote a really bad and really stupid column.


i find this offensive:


Annette Funicello represented an all-American ideal of perky, spunky, mid-'60s sexuality -- nonthreatening, effervescent, even wholesome. (She may be the only actress in the history of showbiz to look demurely G-rated even while wearing a bikini. Compared to her, even Sally Field in "Gidget" looked hot to trot.)

there's no reason to bring sally field in it.  but to do so and then suggest that she's 'hot to trot'?  that's just disgusting.

sally wasn't even 20 when she made the tv show 'gidget' and you're a trashy liar for suggesting that she could get away with more on tv than annette could on the big screen.  especially in 1965, tv wasn't going for 'out there.' 

there are some images of sally field here - some from gidget and some from a little after.

you'll see that even in a 2-piece you can't see sally's belly button.  that's how tv was then. barbara eden's navel wasn't an issue until people commented on it (season 3) at which point it was covered.

he can't even be honest.

and that's not the only place.

Annette's career fell into decline, alas, as relatively innocent trifles such as "Beach Blanket Bingo" were edged out of theaters by the likes of "The Graduate" and "Easy Rider," as the much-sought "youth audience" started demanding less homogenized and more realistic depictions of teen and twenty-something life in feature films.

her last beach movie is 1965.  'the graduate' is 1967.  quit your damn lying.  'easy rider' is 1969.

aip made b-movies.

that includes annette's films.  these were cheaply made films.

not only did studio films released YEARS after not end them, what actually ended them was aip moving from the beach (the beach boys were losing popularity) to motorcycle films the wild agnels in 1966 - these would be replaced with drug films and with films that combined motorcycles and drugs. 

i can't believe the garbage that gets printed these days.


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



Monday, April 8, 2013.  Chaos and violence continue, Nouri signs his name to a laughable column, Nouri's push for majority government and for early parliamentary elections continue, political prisoners Lynne Stewart and Bradley Manning get some attention, WikiLeaks releases new documents, and more.

Starting in the US,  Lynne Stewart is a political prisoner.  As we noted at Third yesterday, the 'change' of 2008 has brought about many political prisoners.  Lynne is an attorney, a grandmother, a breast cancer survivor.  She's in prison because --

Well why is she in prison?

We're taught you will go to prison if you break a law.  So what law did Lynne break?  She broke no law.  She broke an agreement with the Justice Dept when she gave Reuters a press release from one of her clients.  This was when Bill Clinton was president.  Then-Attorney General Janet Reno and the Justice Dept examined it and saw no law had been broken -- because there was no law -- said, "Lynne, don't do this again" and that was it.  Then the Supreme Court put Bully Boy Bush in the White House and the bully picked John Ashcroft to be the Attorney General.  For those who've forgotten, Arianna Huffington found John Ashcroft charming and used to rave -- as late as 2004 -- over his singing voice.  So if you wonder why Huffington Post never takes up Lynne's case, there you go.  Ashcroft went after Lynne.  Despite the Justice Dept having already ruled on the matter, he decided he was going to take her to trial and he would used Ground Zero as the location for the trial and he would use 9-11 as the backdrop.  The same way this lying administration linked Iraq to 9-11?  That's how they linked Lynne to 9-11. 

It's shameful and it's shameful that so few have had the courage to speak up for Lynne.  As bad as it was under Bully Boy Bush, Lynne was able to remain free on bail when he occupied the White House.  It's nearly a year after Barack Obama is sworn in as president that the Justice Dept insists Lynne go to prison while the appeals are being ruled on.  Lynne's already had breast cancer and been treated during this process.  But that doesn't matter to Barack.

No, Barack only cares about a woman's health if he's lying about his mother Stanley and using her death to try to scare up votes.  In addition, it's Barack's Justice Department that fought Judge John G. Koeltl's sentence of 28 months, forcing the judge to resentence Lynne (in July 2010) to ten years.  As Stephen Lendman has pointed out, "Obama Wants Lynne Stewart Dead" (People's Voice).  Lynne's cancer has returned.

On this week's Law and Disorder Radio,  an hour long program that airs Monday mornings at 9:00 a.m. EST on WBAI and around the country throughout the week, hosted by attorneys Heidi Boghosian, Michael S. Smith and Michael Ratner (Center for Constitutional Rights) topics addressed include political prisoner Lynne Stewart.


Michael S. Smith:  Michael, we sorely miss our friend Lynne Stewart who's in prison serving a really unjust ten year sentence.  And, of course, as we've reminded our listeners over the last few weeks, Lynne has taken ill again.  And there's a petition for her and I know you want to talk about it and get as many active because we want to get Lynne out of prison on a compassionate release.  So tell our listeners how they can help and what the situation is now for Lynne.

Michael Ratner: Well we're going to link to how you can sign the petition.  Lynne's got Stage IV Cancer as a lot of you know.  That is, her initial cancer which was in remission when they put her in prison three years ago is now in full bloom.  It's spread to her bones.  It's spread to her legs. It's spread to her lungs.  It's spread to her lymph nodes.  And it really is fatal.  We all want to get her out and get her some better medical care that she can get.  She's in a seven person cell down in Fort Worth, Texas.  Get her up to New York, better medical care and be surrounded by her family and friends.  And in order to do that, the Bureau of Prisons, the people with the key have to make a motion to Judge Kotel to ask that she be given a compassionate release.  It's possible.  You can get that.  They don't do it very often.  But with all the friends and supporters that Lynne has, we're hopeful that we can accomplish that.  6,000 people have signed the petition so far.  And I want to read you what Lynne said in thank you to these people -- two of them were Dick Gregory and Desmond Tutu and I'll read you something that Tutu said also. But here's this from Lynne:  "I want you individually to know how grateful and happy it makes me to have your support.  It's uplifting to say the least.  And after a lifetime of organizing, it proves once again that the People can rise.  The acknowledgment of the life-political and solutions brought about by group unity and support, is important to all of us.  Equally, so is the courage to sign on to a demand for a person whom the Government has branded with the "T" word -- Terrorism.  Understanding that the attack on me is a subterfuge for an attack on all lawyers who advocate without fear of Government displeasure, with intellectual honesty guided by their knowledge and their client's desire for his or her case, I hope our effort can be a crack in the American bastion.  Thank you, Lynne."  Pete Seeger wrote her back and said, "Lynne Stewart should be out of jail."  And he signed the postcard "Old Pete Seeger" accompanied by a drawing of a banjo.  Bishop Desmond Tutu, this was his esprit de corps.  He said, "It is devastating.  Totally unbelievable.  In this democracy, the only superpower?  I am sad.  I will sign praying God's blessing on your reference. Desmond Tutu."  Let's hope Lynne gets out on compassionate release while she's still able to at least be part of her community.  And if you'll go to Law and Disorder.org, we'll put the link where you can sign the petition.  And if you'll grab a pencil, I'll give you the name and address of the Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons  because a well-aimed letter at him is not going to hurt.  His name is:

Charles E. Samuels Jr.
Federal Bureau of Prisons
320 First Street, NW
Washington, DC 20534

Please send a letter.  Go to Law and Disorder.org -- our website -- sign the petition. We'll be updating you every week on how Lynne is doing.


We'll return to the topic of political prisoners but let's stay with radio for a moment.  On this week's Progressive Radio, Ruth Conniff fills in for Matthew Rothschild and her guest is author and activist Aruhdahti Roy.  Excerpt.



Ruth Conniff:  I want to segue to the Iraq War anniversary that we just passed.  And you were an opponent of the invasion of Iraq ten years ago and now that we've passed this anniversary, I'm curious to know what you think Americans should take away from this experience of the Iraq War?  You said recently that the psychosis of US foreign policy prevails even though George W. Bush is gone.  What did you mean by that?  And do you think that President Obama is as bad as George W. Bush from a global perspective?

Arundhati Roy:  Well from a global perspective I don't think that there's much to choose between him and Bush.  I mean President Obama has expanded the war into the sovereign territory of Pakistan and Pakistan is now being torn apart, you know?  So you have Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, now they've -- two days ago they started talking about "a game changer" in Syria because they don't know who's using chemical weapons -- though they probably supplied it to both sides.  So you have -- you have a situation where it looks like it's a psychosis which is -- You know, look at -- look at what's going on with Tony Blair says that it was one of the better decisions he made in his life and now he's getting paid $500,000 a lecture to go and talk about morality and ethical behavior and God, and so on, you know?  Bush is painting self-portraits of himself in the shower and [former US Secretary of Defense Donald] Rumsfeld is congratulating people who participated in the war -- after killing 134,000 people and the sanctions were more than a million.  So what are American citizens to do?  I think, well, perhaps it's a good question for all of us because all of us seemed to be strapped into some kind of straight jacket and the idea is that, "Are you going to again go out and vote for a Democrat or Republican or Democrats and Republicans when we know that this is what is going on?"  So until, in some way, we are able to at least -- at least not participate so enthusiastically in what these governments are doing with us.  It is the same thing in India, though people don't actually participate so enthusiastically. I mean in India the current government has actually 10% of the population voted for it in this great majority that it claims it has.  And I think more people vote for the American Idol than vote for the American president.  But the problem is that we are faced with a crisis in our idea of democracy because governments who claim to represent us, do not.  I mean, before the Iraq War, millions of people marched against it.  None of the governments in any way cared about what people really wanted.  So, to answer your question, I think the danger of somebody like Obama is that he smokes up the mirrors and a lot of the opposition just thinks "Oh, he's better than Bush!" and so then it divides the opposition -- whereas he's actually doing things in terms of foreign policy which are sometimes worse than Bush.


Since Arundhati mentioned War Hawk Tony Blair, let's move over to England for the latest on him.    Over the weekend,  Jonathan Owen (Independent) reported on a new development in the Iraq which has still not released its final report:

Hitherto unseen evidence given to the Chilcot Inquiry by British intelligence has revealed that former prime minister Tony Blair was told that Iraq had, at most, only a trivial amount of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and that Libya was in this respect a far greater threat.
Intelligence officers have disclosed that just the day before Mr Blair went to visit president George Bush in April 2002, he appeared to accept this but returned a "changed man" and subsequently ordered the production of dossiers to "find the intelligence" that he wanted to use to justify going to war.
This and other secret evidence (given in camera) to the inquiry will, The Independent on Sunday understands, be used as the basis for severe criticism of the former prime minister when the Chilcot report is published.


Press TV picks up on the report and notes Blair ordered intell to be cherry-picked to make the case.  The Daily Mirror emphasizes that "the inquiry heard that the day before Mr Blair went to see Mr Bush in the States, he appeared to accept Iraq did not pose a threat to Britain."  Jason Groves (Daily Mail)  adds, "By contrast, one senior MI6 officer said it was clear 12 months before the war that Saddam Hussein had no nuclear weapons and no significant WMD at all."  The Scottish National Party issued the following statement:

New reports in today’s Independent on Sunday reveal even more evidence of Tony Blair's dishonesty in his planning for the illegal invasion of Iraq.
According to media reports evidence given to the Chilcot inquiry by British intelligence has revealed the former Labour Prime Minister conceded Libya was more of a threat than Iraq and more likely to have weapons of mass destruction, but that following a meeting with George Bush, Blair ordered the production of the dodgy dossiers to find the evidence to go to war.
SNP Defence spokesperson Angus Robertson MP said:
"The case against Tony Blair is mounting day by day, and we look forward to seeing the findings of the Chilcot Inquiry.
“We know the UK’s participation in the illegal invasion of Iraq was based on a massive deception by the former Labour Prime Minister and the Westminster system.
"Despite intelligence that Libya was a greater threat than Iraq Tony Blair led the UK into war with Iraq, but into business deals in the desert with Libya.
"The lives of 179 UK service personnel and many tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians were needlessly lost because of Blair’s determination to blindly back George Bush.
"The most important lesson of Iraq is that our foreign and defence should be conducted according to the rule of international law, and that is the prospect offered by an independent Scotland.
“Those who supported the illegal Iraq war can be in no doubt about their own culpability, and the Iraq war is a graphic example of why Scotland should not leave these decisions to Westminster.”

Today Tony Blair has his own unofficial statement.  Speaking at Lafayette College in Easton, Pennsylvania today, Tom Coombe (Patch) reports, Blair declared the present to be "the toughest times to be a leader."  He also issued a statement today praising Empire Thug Margaret Thatcher -- praise that should bother Labour Party members with any real memory.  Thatcher was a thug all by herself but she raised a thug as well.  In fact, her son Mark carried out her empire lust in the '00s.  You can refer to Morning Edition's January 13, 2005 report about the $563,000 fine Mark Thatcher was able to pay to escape prison in South Africa or to Michael Wines' "Thatcher's Son Pleads Guilty in Coup Plot, Avoiding Prison" (New York Times, January 14, 2005) or, months later,  to Harvey McGavin's "Thatcher is refused US visa over coup plot conviction"  (Independent):

Sir Mark Thatcher has been refused a visa to live in the United States following his conviction for involvement in the failed coup attempt in Equatorial Guinea. Sir Mark, the son of Baroness Thatcher, the former prime minister, had intended to join his wife and their two children in the US after being given a four-year suspended jail sentence and fine at his trial in January, but immigration authorities turned down his visa application, it was confirmed yesterday.
"It is quite true that my visa application has been rejected," Sir Mark said in a statement. "It was always a calculated risk when I plea-bargained in South Africa."
Sir Mark was fined £265,000 by a South African court but escaped jail as part of a deal in which he admitted to having "unwittingly" financed the attempted overthrow of the government in Equatorial Guinea.


At least she lived long enough to see her son carrying out her own empire lust be publicly disgraced around the globe.  At least there is that.

Today, Dahr Jamail (Al Jazeera) reports that the Iraq War has been the deadliest war ever for journalists.  Excerpt.


"The media were not welcome by the US military," Soazig Dollet, who runs the Middle East and North Africa desk of Reporters Without Borders told Al Jazeera. "That is really obvious."
Unfortunately for Al Jazeera and Tareq Ayoub, Dollet's statement was all too true.
Al Jazeera bore a constant barrage of bellicose verbiage from Bush administration officials during the invasion and occupation. Then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld labeled Al Jazeera Arabic's reportage as "vicious, inaccurate and inexcusable."
But the verbal attack had been preceded by bombs in Afghanistan.
The US bombed Al Jazeera's office in Kabul during the 2001 US invasion of Afghanistan, and attacked the media outlet multiple times during the 2003 Iraq invasion, including the killing of Ayoub, despite the fact that Al Jazeera supplied the Pentagon with their headquarter's coordinates in Baghdad in February 2003.
On the same day Ayoub was killed a US tank shelled the Palestine Hotel, home and office to more than 100 unembedded international journalists operating in Baghdad at the time. The shell smashed into the Reuters office, killing two cameramen, Reuters' Taras Protsyuk and Jose Couso of Spain's Telecinco. That day there was also an attack on an Abu Dhabi TV office by US forces.
In a chilling statement at the end of that bloody day in Iraq, then-Pentagon spokesperson Victoria Clarke spelled out the Pentagon's policy on journalists who were not embedded with US troops when she warned them that Baghdad "is not a safe place. You should not be there."




As noted in Tuesday's snapshot, Monday evening saw  Dar Addustour, Al-Parliament, Al-Mustaqbal and Al-Nas  attacked in Baghdad, their employees threatened (five people stabbed, more left with bruises and fractures), offices destroyed and cars set on fire (a fifth Baghdad newspaper, Al Mada, was threatened but not attacked).  Al Mada notes that the National Union of Iraq Journalists have condemned the attacks.  All Iraq News adds that Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi denounced the attacks, "Nujaifi assured that targeting the journalists is a dangerous issue and against the dialogue and democracy in Iraq.  He stressed that the repetition of such attacks is a justification for the ignorant of the performance of the press in Iraq."

Saturday, Reporters Without Borders found the words to call out the attack:


Reporters Without Borders condemns the attacks that around 50 men armed with clubs and knives carried out on four Baghdad-based newspapers – Al-Nass, Al-Barlaman, Al-Dustour and Al-Mustaqbal Al-Iraqi ­– on 1 April. The assailants smashed computer equipment and furniture and assaulted employees. Six journalists were hospitalized. It is still not known for sure who was behind the attacks.
Various theories have been proposed. Al-Dustour editor Bassam Al-Sheikh said he thought the attackers were members of a radical Shiite militia led by Mahmoud Al-Hassani Al-Sarkhi, who had been criticized in all four newspapers in connection with his suspected ambition of controlling the Shiite holy city of Karbala. Al-Mustaqbal Al-Iraqi editor Ali Al-Darraji told Reporters Without Borders he thought the attacks were carried out with the aim of intimidating and “gagging independent voices.”
They are the latest and most serious in a string of cases of harassment and violence against journalists. While the interior ministry condemned this week’s attacks, Reporters Without Borders is concerned about the lack of concrete measures by the authorities to protect media personnel. “We deplore the increase in abuses targeting journalists and the fact that the Iraqi security forces are often involved in cases of reporters being harassed and prevented from doing their work,” Reporters Without Borders said.


The so-called Committee to Protect Journalists has still not said one word.  By contrast, last Thursday the International Press Institute issued a statement condemning the attacks which included:

"The armed assault against journalists and newspaper offices in Baghdad is unacceptable. We condemn this barbaric attack in the strongest terms," said IPI Executive Director Alison Bethel McKenzie. "This latest act of violence shows that Iraq continues to be a tremendously dangerous country for the media. We call on the government to guarantee the safety of all journalists, as is their responsibility."




Today, UNAMI released a statement  which includes:

UNAMI remains concerned at the rise in violence in Iraq and the increasing toll on lives of Iraqi civilians and its detrimental impact on civilian infrastructure, Iraqi continues to suffer from attacks perpetrated by a number of terrorists groups, among them Al-Qaeda in Iraq and the Islamic STate of Iraq.  The most affected areas remain Baghdad, and the governorates of Anbar, Salahuddin and the disputed areas of Ninewa and Kirkuk.


Through Saturday, Iraq Body Count counts 123 violent deaths so far this month.   Violence continues today.  National Iraqi News Agency notes that a Hilla roadside bombing has claimed 1 life and left another person injured, a Baghdad roadside bombing claimed the lives of 2 Iraqi soldiers and left three more injured, a Mosul roadside bombing claimed the lives of 2 police officers and left a bystander injured, a Falljua attack left two police officers injured, and a Samarra rocket attack left two police officers injured.  Alsumaria notes a Kirkuk Province bombing has left two people injured,  a sticky bombing in south Baghdad claimed the life of 1 person, and a Kirkuk sticky bombing claimed the life of Sahwa leader Abboud Mahmoud LhalboiAll Iraq News adds that a Falluja sticky bombing has left one Sahwa injured.

All Iraq News reports, "The Ministry of Justice implemented seven death sentences to terrorists according to the article (4) of Anti-Terrorism law."  IANS notes, "The increasing of executions in Iraq sparked calls by the UN mission in Iraq, the European Union and some international human rights groups to stop Baghdad's use of capital punishment, criticising the lack of transparency in the proceedings of the country's courts.Friday the United Nations Human Rights Commissioner Rupert Colville issued a statement on the death penalty which included:

On Iraq, we continue to have serious reservations about the criminal justice system, including with regard to due process, conviction based on forced confessions and trial proceedings that fall short of international standards. Even the best legal systems cannot be guaranteed to be free of error, and any miscarriage of justice cannot be undone.


Still on the topic of violence, Thug Nouri al-Maliki signed his name to a column the Washington Post runs in tomorrow's paper.  It includes:

Iraq is building an inclusive political system, with free multiparty elections, a multiethnic government and an independent judiciary. Our gross domestic product is expected to grow by an average of at least 9.4 percent annually through 2016. Last year, we surpassed Iran to become OPEC’s second largest producer of crude oil.



Aaaahhhhh.  Inclusive political system, free multiparty elections and a multiethnic government and an independent judiciary.  What sweet fictions.  The reality is far different.  Nouri gave a speech three days ago asserting that the 2010 elections were fraudulent.  He also decried quotas to guarantee representation.  But in the column that he signed his name to, he believes in so much.  If only.



Last week, Nouri al-Maliki, chief thug and prime minister of Iraq, was supposed to appear before Parliament; however, he refused to do so -- apparently another way to show respect for an "inclusive political system."   Nouri insisted that he should host just a few select members of Parliament and take questions from them.  That's not what the Constitution dictates but Nouri never follows the Constitution (which is why he should be removed from office).  All Iraq News reports today that MP Abdul Hussein Raysan, with the Sadr bloc, declared, "Maliki's request to host him outside the parliament, if being related to his latest statements over forming majority government, it will collapse the national partnership in Iraq."  Oh, yeah, Nouri's Friday speech.  Ignored by AFP, Reuters, AP, CNN, BBC, Antiwar.com, etc, etc.  That speech wasn't minor and it's not going away.  It has major implications and if you doubt it look at how the western media scurries from the light to avoid covering it.

NINA reports today that Kurdistan Alliance MP Mahmoud Othman states it is impossible for Nouri to get his wish to have a majority government and that "it would fail because of the political conflicts and problems among the blocs."

Nouri was supposed to appear before Parliament today but again was a no-show.  All Iraq News notes he says he was too "busy with preparing the documents of the security file."

We covered Nouri's Friday speech on Friday.  So most reading should have already been aware what Nouri spoke of.  For those late to the party -- try to find a seat quickly without making a lot of noise, please -- Nouri announced that he would be forming a majority government and it was the only way to solve the political problems in Iraq.  He also stated that he will call for early parliamentary elections within two months.  This was a major speech putting forward major issues. 



Parliamentary elections are scheduled for March 2014.  April 20th, provincial elections are supposed to take place in 12 of Iraq's 18 provinces.  Provincial elections determine who runs the provinces.  Parliamentary elections determine who runs the country.


Today Mushreq Abbas (Al-Monitor) becomes the first journalist for a non-Iraqi publication to report on the speech:




Maliki’s electoral proposals reveal the nature of Iraq’s political divide. He said, “The political process has entered into the recovery room. Relations between our partners was based on disruption, which necessitates early elections that will draw a new political map to revive the country...Security and development will not be achieved unless there is political stability, which is achieved by forming a majority government...What exists now is not a partnership, but quotas, and this is very harmful to the political process as long as there is no political majority that supports the local and federal governments.”
Maliki, who is both the prime minister and head of the State of Law coalition, had previously called for a “majority government” by asserting that his coalition will win “a majority of the seats in all Iraqi cities.” He also asserted that his opponents’ attempts to prevent his nomination for a third term as head of government (2014-2018) were “desperate” and “unconstitutional.”
Abbas' article suffers from a lack of context.  For example, third term?  It should probably be noted that Nouri al-Maliki, in February 2011, publicly swore he wouldn't seek a third term.  That's context. 

Context is also, when talking about the results of the April 20th elections and what they will mean for Nouri, noting that only 12 of Iraq's 18 provinces will be voting.  And noting that Nouri has refused to allow Anbar or Nineveh -- where protests against him are strongest -- to vote in the elections.  When you purge the voter rolls, don't pretend you'll be getting an objective result.



 All Iraq News reports Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi met today with Martin Kobler. Kolber is United Nations Secretary-General Ba Ki-moon's Special Representative to Iraq.  Kobler raised the issue of Nouri's push for early parliamentary elections.  Nujaifi replied not happening without a tempoary government being formed.  NINA quotes from a statement:  "Nujaifi answered Kobler about the possibility of early parliamentary elections, saying, 'This matter is conditioned with the necessity forming an interim government that does not represent any political party and its members do not aspire to nominate for election'."  Kitabat cover it here.


 Why is Nujaifi proposing what he's proposing?  Because that's what was needed in 2010.  Some realized ahead of time.  The then top-US commander in Iraq, Gen Ray Odierno knew it.  The idiot ass Chris Hill shot it down.  He emerged from one of his bi-polar, manic depressive episodes long enough to whine to the White House that Odierno was taking the spotlight away from him.  Odierno wasn't the only one who saw a problem.  (Though credit him with realizing Nouri wouldn't step down if his political slate lost.) (For those who didn't pay attention, Iraqiya beat Nouri's State of Law in 2010.  Nouri refused to step down.)  France led with the proposal for a caretaker government as the political stalemate dragged on (it would eventually last eight months).  They attempted to get the UN to appoint one but the Susan Rice, representing Barack, stopped it at the UN and ensured the plan died.

That's how the Iraqi people were stripped of their votes, how the US government stole democracy from the Iraqi people.  A caretaker government should be a non-neogotiable demand for the next parliamentary elections.


Al Rafidayn reports that today WikiLeaks  published 1.7 million US diplomatic documents from the seventies (1973 - 1976).  The paper notes that WikiLeaks angered the US government in 2010 with the publication of government documents but, unlike those, these documents came from the US National Archives and a large number were from or to former US Secretary of State and War Criminal Henry Kissinger. 

The 89-year-old War Criminal associated with many War Criminals.  Marcus Gee (Toronto Globe and Mail) noted some of Kissinger's War Crimes last June:

It was a rainy day in spring when they brought Charles Horman home.
The U.S. journalist and filmmaker had been abducted and killed after the Chilean military overthrew president Salvador Allende in September, 1973. Six months later, his body arrived by plane in a crude wooden crate with "Charles Horman from Santiago" scrawled on the side.
As the makeshift coffin was unloaded at Green-Wood Cemetery in Brooklyn, N.Y., the driving rain washed the words away, sending trails of black ink down the box. It was April 13, 1974.
Even before Mr. Horman's widow, Joyce, found herself standing in the rain that day, she had vowed that no one would ever erase the memory of what had been done to her husband.
She has been true to her word.
In the chaos that followed General Augusto Pinochet's decision to depose Mr. Allende on Sept. 11, 1973, hundreds of the leftist president's supporters were taken away to be tortured, beaten or killed. Mr. Horman, an Allende sympathizer living in Santiago, was one of them.
In the month that followed, Ms. Horman, then 29, and her father-in-law, Ed, searched frantically for Mr. Horman -- an ordeal dramatized in the Oscar-winning 1982 film Missing, starring Sissy Spacek and Jack Lemmon.
[. . .]
Now, prosecutors in Chile, Argentina, Spain and France want him to testify about what happened in Chile. Last month, a Chilean judge staged a re-enactment of the Horman killing at Santiago's National Stadium, and now wants Mr. Kissinger at least to answer written questions about U.S. involvement in the coup.


 

Last year, Reed Brody penned, "If Charles Taylor Can Be Tried for War Crimes, Why Not Kissinger?" (The Nation).  Anna Maria Tremonti interviewed the War Criminal for The Current (CBC) and asked about "the issues that won't go away."  When she brought up War Crimes, Kissinger got uncomfortable.


Anna Maria Tremonti:  Couldn't you also be vulnerable to those type of charges?

Henry Kissinger:  Who?

Anna Maria Tremonti:  You.

Henry Kissinger:   I personally?

Anna Maria Tremonti:  Mmm-hmm.

Henry Kissinger:  You know, that's one of those questions on which one ends the interview but just for your information if you read the, uh, the provisions of the-the International Criminal Court, it does not have retrospective, uh, jurisdiction.  And on this page, we'll end the interview.


Anna Maria Tremonti:   Well can I talk to you, sir -- Hello?  Dr. Kissinger walked away from the microphone. Henry Kissinger is a former US Secretary of State, he was in New York.  The argument now put forward by some prominent writers and activists is that Kissinger is vulnerable to the possibility of International War Crimes trials for the bombings in Vietnam that annihilated entire villages in the search for guerrilla fighters, for similar secret bombings in Cambodia and for the secret US support of the coup in Chile that led to the assassination of Salvador Allende and the take over by General Augusto Pinochet.



Kissinger longs for the glory days when he dated Jill St. John, Candice Bergen and Marlo Thomas and commanded some respect.  Those days aren't coming back.   WikiLeaks issued a press release which includes:


THE KISSINGER CABLES

"The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer." -- Henry A. Kissinger, US Secretary of State, March 10, 1975: http://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/P860114-1573_MC_b.html#efmCS3CUB
The Kissinger Cables comprise more than 1.7 million US diplomatic records for the period 1973 to 1976, including 205,901 records relating to former US Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger. Dating from January 1, 1973 to December 31, 1976 they cover a variety of diplomatic traffic including cables, intelligence reports and congressional correspondence. They include more than 1.3 million full diplomatic cables and 320,000 originally classified records. These include more than 227,000 cables classified as "CONFIDENTIAL" and 61,000 cables classified as "SECRET". Perhaps more importantly, there are more than 12,000 documents with the sensitive handling restriction "NODIS" or 'no distribution', and more than 9,000 labelled "Eyes Only".
At around 700 million words, the Kissinger Cables collection is approximately five times the size of WikiLeaks' Cablegate. The raw PDF data is more than 380 Gigabytes in size and is the largest WikiLeaks publication to date.
WikiLeaks' media partners will be reporting throughout the week on their findings. These include significant revelations about US involvements with fascist dictatorships, particularly in Latin America, under Franco's Spain (including about the Spanish royal family) and in Greece under the regime of the Colonels.
The documents also contain hourly diplomatic reporting on the 1973 war between Israel, Egypt and Syria (the "Yom Kippur war"). While several of these documents have been used by US academic researchers in the past, the Kissinger Cables provides unparalled access to journalists and the general public.


The documents are raising attention to efforts by government servants to subvert their own country's best interests, the efforts to spy for the US, and much more.  Take India where the son of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi (who became prime minister when she was assassinated) is said to have secretly done the bidding of a corporation.  Murali N. Krishnaswamy (The Hindu) reports:


Much before he became Prime Minister, during his years as an Indian Airlines pilot, Rajiv Gandhi may have been a middleman for the Swedish company Saab-Scania, when it was trying to sell its Viggen fighter aircraft to India in the 1970s.
The astonishing revelation that he was the “main Indian negotiator” for a massive aircraft deal for which his “family” connections were seen as valuable, is contained in the Kissinger Cables, the latest tranche of U.S diplomatic cables obtained by WikiLeaks and accessed by The Hindu as part of an investigative collaboration. The cables will be released on Monday.

 CNN-IBN report the immediate response from the Indian Congress, "The Congress has rejected the WikiLeaks revelation that named late former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi in a scandal." The Times of India and other outlets including BBC News and Zee News are reporting on this scandal but Zee News is also reporting on an October 18, 1973 cable that reveals the Vatican's immediate response to the slaughters and massacres launched by thug Augusto Pinochet when he took over Chile as false and "Communist propaganda."  There are embarrassments and exposures.  Australia will focus on the latter.  Paul Bleakley (Australian Times) reports:

AUSTRALIAN Foreign Minister Bob Carr has been revealed as a long-term source of intelligence to the United States of America in previously secret diplomatic reports released by WikiLeaks today.
The reports show Senator Carr began communicating with American diplomats over forty years ago when he was still a rising star in the New South Wales Labor Party. It is understood that American officials approached Carr to gather information regarding internal Labor politics during the mid-1970s, at a time when the left-wing Whitlam government threatened to undermine the US-Australian alliance.

The foreign minister of Australia was also a spy for a foreign government.  That's rather shocking.  Other documents in the release have historical value.  Sofia News Agency explains:

The site for investigative journalism Bivol.bg, official partner of WikiLeaks for Bulgaria, has analyzed the records from the latest whistle-blowing project "The Kissinger Cables."
The 1.3 million US diplomatic cables from the period of the Cold War, 1973 – 1976, released by WikiLeaks, contain 4 226 diplomatic cables from the US Embassy in Sofia. 574 of them are classified as "CONFIDENTIAL" and just 31 are classified as "SECRET." The key word (tag) Bulgaria is found in 16 389 texts, 405 of which have the grief "SECRET."


The revelations are not of a time that the US government has moved beyond -- it continues to try to put its fingers in everything.  Last week, WikiLeaks released a cable regarding Venezuela -- a cable from the current administration.  RT reported:

In a secret US cable published online by WikiLeaks, former ambassador to Venezuela, William Brownfield, outlines a comprehensive plan to infiltrate and destabilize former President Hugo Chavez' government.
Dispatched in November of 2006 by Brownfield -- now an Assistant Secretary of State -- the document outlined his embassy’s five core objectives in Venezuela since 2004, which included: “penetrating Chavez’ political base,” “dividing Chavismo,” “protecting vital US business” and “isolating Chavez internationally.



Whistle blower Bradley Manning supplied WikiLeaks with documents for their 2010 release.  Monday April 5, 2010, WikiLeaks released US military video of a July 12, 2007 assault in Iraq. 12 people were killed in the assault including two Reuters journalists Namie Noor-Eldeen and Saeed Chmagh. Monday June 7, 2010, the US military announced that they had arrested Bradley Manning and he stood accused of being the leaker of the video. Leila Fadel (Washington Post) reported in August 2010 that Manning had been charged -- "two charges under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The first encompasses four counts of violating Army regulations by transferring classified information to his personal computer between November and May and adding unauthorized software to a classified computer system. The second comprises eight counts of violating federal laws governing the handling of classified information." In March, 2011, David S. Cloud (Los Angeles Times) reported that the military has added 22 additional counts to the charges including one that could be seen as "aiding the enemy" which could result in the death penalty if convicted. The Article 32 hearing took place in December.  At the start of this year, there was an Article 32 hearing and, February 3rd, it was announced that the government would be moving forward with a court-martial.  Bradley has yet to enter a plea and has neither affirmed that he is the leaker nor denied it.  The court-martial was supposed to begin before November 2012 but was postponed until after the election.  Februrary 28th, Bradley explained he leaked the documents so that US citizens could know what was actually going on,  "I felt we were risking so much for people who seemed unwilling to cooperate with us, leading to frustration and hatred on both sides. I began to become depressed at the situation we found ourselves mired in year after year. In attempting counterinsurgency operations, we became obsessed with capturing and killing human targets on lists.  I wanted the public to know that not everyone living in Iraq were targets to be neutralized."


Bradley's court-martial is currently expected to begin in June.  Matthew Fleischer (Take Part) reports:

In effect, Manning is being formally tried as a traitor because Al Queda can read the information he leaked on the Internet.
"This charge is incredibly troubling," Trevor Timm, cofounder and executive director of the Freedom of the Press Foundation, tells TakePart. "The charge is so vague, it doesn’t exclusively encompass classified information. It's any information that could be accessed by 'the enemy.' That means it doesn't just affect Manning, or even just future whistleblowers. Any active military member who writes an op-ed critical of U.S. policy could be aiding an enemy. It could affect military members on Twitter or Facebook."

Bradley was noted in the roundtable for Third Sunday:
 
Betty I want to drop back a second, to when Bradley Manning spoke in the military court about why he passed on documents to WikiLeaks.  He said, "I felt we were risking so much for people who seemed unwilling to cooperate with us, leading to frustration and hatred on both sides.  I began to become depressed at the situation we found ourselves mired in year after year.  In attempting counterinsurgency operations, we became obsessed with capturing and killing human targets on lists.  I wanted the public to know that not everyone living in Iraq were targets to be neutralized."  I agree with Mike, it's dishonest to write or talk about Bradley and leave out counterinsurgency.  That is what repulsed and motivated him.


And being a whistle blower turned Bradley into a political prisoner.







wbai
law and disorder radio
michael s. smith
heidi boghosian
michael ratner