this is from The Ballet's 'i hate the war:'
It's over, I'm done writing songs about love
There's a war going on
So I'm holding my gun with a strap and a glove
And I'm writing a song about war
And it goes
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Oh oh oh oh
it's a great song and if you don't already know that, read c.i.'s 'i hate the war.'
wednesday, i noted that dennis kucinich's brother had died and said if it was commented on by the campaign, i would point it out. 'perry j. kucinich, beloeve brother 12/11/56 - 12/19/07' is about the passing:
Perry Kucinich was a talented artist who produced a prodigious volume of work. Some of his works have been on display recently at a local art gallery. He and his brother Dennis were planning another showing of his works in the spring.
Perry J. Kucinich, younger brother of Ohio Congressman Dennis J. Kucinich, died early this morning in his apartment in Cleveland, Ohio. He was 51. The cause of death will be determined by the coronoer's office.
each week trina notes dennis kucinich and i should note him at least that because i do support him. he has won yet another poll. and none of his poll wins get media attention, do they? this is a press release on the poll, '"Long Shot" Kucinich Buries Democratic Rivals in Nationwide Poll Among Independent Voters:'
WASHINGTON, Dec. 21 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Democratic Presidential
Candidate Dennis Kucinich, who has been the runaway winner in polls of the
Party's progressive, grassroots base in recent weeks, scored another huge
win yesterday by capturing almost 77% of the vote in a nationwide poll
sponsored by a coalition of Independent voting groups across the country.
Of the more than 80,000 votes cast for Democratic candidates at
http://www.independentprimary.com by self-described independent voters, the
Ohio Congressman received 61,477, burying second place finisher, former
Senator John Edwards, who received only 7,614 votes, or 9.5 percent.
Nationally, more than 40 percent of voters are not aligned with any
political party, and, in 29 states, including New Hampshire, "Independents"
have the option to select either the Republican or the Democratic ballot in
a Presidential primary. In Iowa, only Democrats can vote in the Jan. 3
Democratic caucuses, and the total turnout there is expected to be less
than 10% of the eligible voters statewide (Washington Post).
This is the latest in a string of exceptionally strong finishes by
Kucinich in national on-line polls. Last month, he topped all other
candidates in 47 of 50 states in a poll sponsored by Democracy for America
(DFA), in which he received almost 32% of the 150,000-plus votes cast --
more than Edwards and Senator Barack Obama combined. In that poll, Kucinich
won both Iowa and New Hampshire. In a survey by the 90,000-member
Progressive Democrats of America, Kucinich took 41% of the vote nationwide.
And, in a poll conducted by the progressive The Nation magazine, he won
with 35% of the vote. Obama came in second with 24%, and Edwards was third
with 13%.
The creators of IndependentPrimary.com said their poll was designed to
measure the impact of independent-minded voters on the Presidential
election and was "part of a movement bringing together ordinary Americans
who think that the good of the country is more important than the good of
the political parties."
In many national polls, Kucinich is running ahead of senators Joe Biden
and Chris Dodd, and is in a statistical tie with New Mexico Governor Bill
Richardson. And, his poll numbers in New Hampshire are strong and growing.
In Iowa, however, Kucinich has been purposefully excluded from several
Presidential debates and Party-sponsored events, leading political
observers to wonder whether the "game" in Iowa is rigged against him.
kucinich wins the poll. imagine how many other polls he could be winning if they'd let into the debates. that's really disgusting. he's a sitting member of congress and they eliminate him from the presidential debates. msnbc has reposted greta cuyler's 'Kucinich would push peace, health care' (the union leader):
Dennis Kucinich first ran for President in 2004. This time, his campaign includes his third wife, Elizabeth. She's British and has a master's degree in international conflict analysis.
Tall, with red hair and an easy smile, Elizabeth Kucinich speaks about monetary policy and five minutes later dashes into a nearby room to switch a load of laundry. She seems equally at ease with both tasks.
The couple married two years ago. On the New Hampshire campaign trail, Kucinich consistently touts his wife's expertise. When they think no one's watching, they hold hands.
He and Elizabeth travel without an entourage, just a campaign intern who drives them and a staffer who manages the schedule.
At campaign stops in Acworth, Westmoreland and Keene, the couple spoke to packed crowds and conceded privately they were pleasantly surprised to find such strong support.
wow, i think in what's above, i've ended up noting more on dennis kucinich in 1 post than the weekly nation magazine does in a month.
let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'
Friday, December 21, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, it's reported that Dems will round out their year of selling out with promises to sell out even more, media discussions on PTSD, the 3900 mark hovers, and more.
Starting with war resistance. Travis Lupick (Canada's Straight) notes the season and, "It will be a lean Christmas for some Iraq-war resisters living in Vancouver. These former U.S. army recruits are waiting on refugee claims and are fighting a return to the U.S. that could include imprisonment. Brad McCall moved to Vancouver after abandoning his army company in September. He told the Straight that this Christmas was going to be different from those of his childhood in Alabama. There wold be no spending money on presents this year, said McCall, who is still without a work visa. But it's not all bad. 'I've got plenty of dinner invitations,' he added. 'There will be no lack of food for me.' McCall said that he would spend the holidays quietly, just hanging out with his Canadian girlfriend. He maintains that he has no regrets, including joining the U.S army. 'Now that I'm in Canada and I'm in Vancouver, I realize how little I did really know about the world,' he said. 'I had pretty much been brainwashed my entire life, not to realize the struggles that are happening all over the world on a daily basis'." The publication first told McCall's story in October when Charlie Smith reported on McCall's attempt to enter Canada September 19, 2007 only to be denied entry by Canadian authorities, "I don't know what kind of police officer he was. He put me in handcuffs in front of all these people that were watching that were trying to get into Canada also. I told them, 'Why are you playing the part of the hound dog for the U.S. army?' They didn't know what to say. They just started stuttering and mumbling."
On November 15th, the Canadian Supreme Court refused to hear the appeals of war resisters Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey. The Canadian Parliament has the power to let war resisters stay 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. Both War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist are calling for actions from January 24-26.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes 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, Carla 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 event:
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.
"In the face of a scandalous health care system, failing schools, and a fraudulent endless war, we are as docile as tattered scarecrows in a field of rotten tomatoes. As for that war, you may have heard that a quarter of the heavily-armed 'shooters' working in the streets of Baghdad for the Administration's mercenary Blackwater foreign legion are alleged to be chemically influenced by steroids or other mind-altering substances," declares Bill Moyers on tonight's Bill Moyers Journal. That's from tonight's essay and you can catch it right now at YouTube. PBS is fundraising in some markets so if you're thinking of watching PBS programming this week, check your local listings to make sure that the program airs at its usual time. On WBAI Sunday, 11 a.m. to noon, The Next Hour will feature Paul Krassner and Sean Kelly joining Janet Coleman and David Dozier for a discussion about the season. Monday's Cat Radio Cafe (also on WBAI, from two p.m. to three p.m.) will continue the seasonal motif with Coleman and Dozer. And Wednesday (the 26th), CCCP returns to WBAI for their monthly broadcast. The Christmas Coup Comedy Players is original comedy programming created for public radio. It will air from two p.m. to three p.m. and feature Coleman, Dozer, John McDonagh, Marc Kehoe, Scooter, Moogy Klingman and (Wally's favorite) Will Durst. Remember WBAI broadcasts from NYC and for those not in the broadcast area, WBAI streams online. For those who may miss Bill Moyers Journal, remember it streams online and it provides transcripts as well. It is fully accessible for all news consumers. PBS' NOW with David Brancaccio also regularly airs tonight (again, check your local listings) and the half-hour program will be addressing the issue of being homeless as they probe a new program which provides apartments to homeless persons." This show is already posted online for streaming. NOW with David Branccacio has also selected their "Top 10 NOW reports of 2007" (currently on the front page of the website).
And lastly, Rory O'Connor examines what's being left out in the promotion of the selection for Time magazine's latest "Person of the Year" in "Time to Cover up?" (MediaChannel.org).
From media notes to media gossip passed off as reporting. Frank James (Baltimore Sun) notes an article that ran in an online publication we don't note (the 'objective' reporters that aren't). Grasping fully that the grapple with the truth at PoorLice andTicksOh and the truth always loses, it's equally true the website is a megaphone for the Jane Harman types so when they 'report' something, fully grasp that they may be attempting to advance something that's not set. They report that "Iraq fatigue" has set in among the Congressional Democrats not at the top of the House or Senate. This "fatigue" -- the laughable 'news' source tells you -- is from a number of factors including the desire to "avoid showdowns with Bush over the war, wherever possible". There have been no showdowns with the White House. PoorLiceandTicksOh then wants to talk about how "forcing" votes on withdrawal hasn't worked. What withdrawal? There's been no voting on withdrawal -- forced or otherwise. PoLiceandTicksOh may be advancing for the "Blue Dogs" (no surprise) but if their report is correct, then prepare yourself for issues such as "troop readiness," diplomatic escalation and the alleged benchmarks while the Dems new strategy will be "to push Bush to accelerate any withdrawals called for by Petraeus". That's not a strategy. That's cowardice and a betrayal of the Congress. Petraeus can give any report he wants (and we now all grasp it doesn't even have to be factual) but the United States Congress is the third branch of the federal government, a branch co-equal with the executive and judicial. The idea that a new 'strategy' will be to do whatever General Davey Petraeus says is an insult to the Constitution. Citizens elected Congress members and they weren't elected to turn over the powers to a military general. Could it happen? Anything could but Nancy Pelosi already has her record lowest numbers in the eighth district currently and she is facing re-election. If she wants to hand the seat over to Cindy Sheehan, she should go ahead and pursue this non-strategy. Sheehan is a serious challenger. It's not a vanity campaign and she actually stands for something. Katha Pollitt and others didn't grasp it before the polling but Pelosi, who looks so wonderful from outside the Bay Area, has been a middle-of-the-roader while representing one of the country's leftist districts. She's going to have to campaign to win the election -- this from the woman who called off her regular townhalls in 2006 after she flat out lied to constitutents that there were no plans for permanent bases in Iraq and, when challenged on that lie, tried to back peddle with, "Well, nothing's permanent. Nothing lasts forever." No, nothing does. Including Congressional terms. Something Pelosi's beginning to grasp.
We're going to stay on the Congress for a bit more. The following is the letter that Senator Hillary Clinton wrote last week (December 12th) to Secretary of State Condi Rice, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Attorney General Michael Mukasey:
I write to express my deepest concern about recent news reports that the U.S. government has failed to properly respond in the case of Jamie Leigh Jones, a young American woman who claims that she was brutally raped and detained in Iraq by U.S. contractors. I urge you to take swift action to investigate these allegations immediately.
As I hope you are all aware, recent news accounts indicate that Ms. Jones, a Halliburton/KBR employee in Baghdad, alleges she was gang-raped by her fellow employees and then held under guard against her will in a shipping container in order to prevent her from reporting the horrific crime. She states that she was denied food and water during her detention and told that she would be fired if she left Iraq to seek medical attention. More than two years later, news reports state that no U.S. government agency or department has undertaken a proper investigation of the incident.
These claims must be taken seriously and the U.S. government must act immediately to investigate Ms. Jones' claims. These allegations implicate all three of your departments. If one of your departments has already launched a private investigation, I urge you to disclose your findings without delay. If no investigation has been started, I urge you to decide the proper course for an inquiry into these claims and to commence your investigation with the utmost urgency.
Click here for the PDF formatted letter. First, note that Clinton didn't just send the letter to Mukasey -- who, as AG, is over the Department of Justice -- it effects all three departments. (And more.) Second, Clinton led on this issue among women in the Congress and Clinton wasn't one of the women running for office in 1992 on the gender-quake and the rage of what was done to Anita Hill in 1991. Hello, Di-Fi, where are you? Patty Murray was among those women and she is circulating a letter similar to Clinton's (and also to all three department heads). Republican Olympia Snowe (who ran for the Senate three years after) has signed on to Murray's letter. But a lot of women were happy in 1992 to point to Anita Hill facing the all male Senate panel and say that's why we needed to elect them. Many of them got elected and many are still in office. Exactly what are they doing? (There's no reason to let the men off the hook but I am noting, for those too young to remember or those who forgot, the mistreatment of Anita Hill in 1991 fueled the 1992 genderquake which a number of female politicians were eager to ride the wave of. Of the male Senators, Florida's Senator Bill Nelson is among those being active on the issue. And, of course, it was a House Rep, Republican Ted Poe, who immediately sprung into action.)
Marie Tessier (The Women's Media Center) observes, "The Jones case is the perfect storm of competing public values. It is a dreadful reflection of a thriving American culture of violence against women. It is one odious long-term consequence of an ill-conceived war in Iraq in an era of troop cutbacks. It illustrates the fate of crime victims in the real world experience of criminal and employment law. Still, Jones, now 23, is an emblem of a new generation of women who have come of age expecting justice for sexual assault, and willing to tell their families, the media and the world about their exploitation. They intend to hold law enforcement officials and employers accountable for every violation of trust that has followed the crime. As employment lawyers know, Jamie Leigh Jones is, in the end, one extreme example among thousands of victims of violence whose jobs and careers suffer as a result. Experiences like hers at KBR are the reason that sexual assault is recognized as an occupational safety problem throughout the workforce by the Centers for Disease Control and the Pentagon, for example." Stephanie Mencimer (Mother Jones) zooms in on the possibility that Jones may not be able to sue KBR:
When Jones went to work for KBR in Texas, and later for its subsidiary, Overseas Administrative Services, she signed contracts containing mandatory binding arbitration clauses, which required her to give up her right to sue the companies and any right to a jury trial. Instead, the contracts forced Jones to press her case through private arbitration, which she did in 2006. In that forum, the company that allegedly wronged her pays the arbitrator who is hearing the case. For that she can thank Dick Cheney.At the time of the alleged attack on Jones, KBR was a subsidiary of Halliburton, the behemoth military-contracting and oil-technology firm. (KBR was sold off earlier this year.) So Jones is covered by the Halliburton dispute-resolution program, which was implemented when Cheney was Halliburton's CEO. The system bears the markings of Cheney's obsession with secrecy and executive power. On his watch, Halliburton, in late 1997, made it more difficult for its employees to sue the company for discrimination, sexual harassment, and other workplace-related issues.
AP explains that along with Jones, Tracy Barker (sexually assaulted by a State Department employee STILL employed by the State Dept even after he admitted to the assault) and notes of the third woman that Rep Poe spoke of, but did not identify, that she "was molested several times and raped by a KBR co-worker. After the alleged rape, her attacker was allowed to work alongside her. Military officers escorted him off the base when she complained, and she was fired."
On Iraq, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer editorializes regarding the military bombings by Turkey, "Turkey's air and land attacks on Kurdish civilian targets in an attempt to disable the Kurdish separatist group, the PKK, have been roundly condemned by both Iraqi and Kurdish governments. Not only was the Iraqi government not notified -- so that's how we treat soverign nations -- our own military commanders there were left in the dark, and Gen. David Patraeus is angry about how it was handleed. So now U.S. and Turkish officials are reviewing how the attacks went, hoping to 'streamline' the process furhter. Gosh, not informing two of the four concerned parties seems pretty streamlined to us." China's Xinhua reports that Condi Rice spoke with Ali Babacan, Turkey's Foreign Minister, Wednesday night via phone and that "during the phone conversation, Babacan told Rice that Turkey was pleased with intelligence sharing from the United States." In other news from the Kurdish north of Iraq, Damien McElroy (Telegraph of London) reports that the region's prime minister, Nechirvan Barzani, has stated that things "must be changed" or the Kurdish MPs will leave the 'coalition' (puppet) government which would destroy al-Maliki's leadership role (emphasis on "role"). Things? The oil law and the referendrum on oil-rich Kirkuk [whether it remains a part of the central (puppet) government or is folded into the Kurdistan region]. Also at the Telegraph of London, Con Coughlin provides (apparently unknowingly) the laugh for the day: the United Kingdom's new Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, states "the big difference between Iraq and Afghanistan is that Iraq has the wealth and resources to finance its own reconstruction, whereas Afghanistan has to reply on hand-outs." For those not in on the joke, that lie's been repeated many, many times before. Click here for the Institute for Policy Studies' "Wolfowitz Chronology" to be reminded of War Hawk Paul Wolfowitz telling Congress pre-Iraq War and after it started that reconstruction would be paid for with Iraqi oil.
War Hawk Down? Many hoped when John Howard was outed in elections and Kevin Rudd became the country's new prime minister. AFP notes that Rudd "was elected on a promise that he would pull out the 550 troops deployed in Iraq along with the British forces in the south of the country." In addition, Australia has approximately 1,000 troops stationed 'outside' of Iraq. AFP reports Rudd commented on a surprise trip to Baghdad today, "Australia will continue to support our friends in Iraq through navy deployment in the Gulf to assist in long-term security of Iraqi exports." Doesn't sound like Australia is "out" of the illegal war or that the new prime minister is planning for that.
While Democratic leadership may or may not be planning a coma for 2008 (you really can't call it caving after it keeps happening), it's worth noting that the number of service members announded dead since the start of the illegal war currently stands at 3896. That's four away from the 3,900 marker. With over a week left in the year, it might end with the marker being reached.
Perspective on the Democratic 'leadership' in Congress: The 3000 mark was reached December 31, 2006. And, in one year's time, nearly a thousand have died. The Congress held their first session on January 4, 2007. At that point the number dead was 3006. There was a huge shake-up in the Congress, for any who've forgotten. Democrats promised a lot with regards to Iraq and they delivered nothing. In the November 2006 elections, they had a sweep. They had hoped to win control of one house. They won control of both houses of Congress. Since their first session, 890 US service members have been announced dead in Iraq. Since they were handed control, Byron W. Fouty and Alex R. Jimenez went missing. They were part of a group that was slaughtered. (By Iraqis waived through checkpoints, for those who've forgotten.) Hopefully, they are still alive. But they went missing May 12th. (They are two of four missing since the start of the illegal war. Keith M. Maupin went missing April 16, 2004 and Ahmeda Qusai al-Taei went missing right before the November elections, October 23, 2006. Ahmeda Qusai al-Taei is the US soldier who married an Iraqi and was captured while visiting her in Baghdad, outside the Green Zone.) The count doesn't include the deaths from physical wounds following the departure from Iraq. Five service members are known to have died. The number is probably higher. This year three died, from physical wounds received in Iraq, after leaving Iraq: Jack D. Richards (July 29, 2007), Gerald J. Cassidy (September 25, 2007) and Anthony Raymond Wasielewsk (October 8, 2007). In addition there are the many who have come back with mental traumas and have taken their own lives. They aren't included in the count either.
That is what Democrats have to show for their non-action after the American people went to the polls in November 2006 to give them control of both houses of Congress with a mandate to end the illegal war. They have not ended the illegal war (they really haven't even tried to end it) and 890 US service members have been announced dead in Iraq since Congress' first session of this year.
In some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad car bombing that claimed the lives of 4 police officers and 1 civilian (seven police officers and one more civilian were also wounded) and the driver of the car was also killed, and an Al Salam mortar attack that claimed the life of 1 child (two more wounded).
Shootings?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 people shot dead in Diyala province.
Kidnappings?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 person was kidnapped in Al Touz.
Corpses?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 corpses discovered in Baghdad.
Mohammed Al Dulaimy also reports, "The U.S. military and Iraqi police said one Iraqi police officer was killed and one marine was injured in an altercation at a joint outpost in the Jazeera area of Ramadi on Wednesday. The police officer died of stab wounds and the marine was treated for minor injuries from lacerations at a military hospital. The U.S. military said the incident is under investigation by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service. Colleagues of the police officer said the man's throat was slit." On Thursday, Stephen Farrell (New York Times) reported on an event that left someone, assumed to be 18-year-old Waleed Khalid Khudhaier, an Iraqi police officer, dead -- Farrell noted that the event was under investigation (an Iraqi police officer and a US marine are thought to have been involved in a knife battle on a base and the police officer was killed) and that:
The incident is an embarrassment for the United States military, which has paised Anbar as a model for Sunni tribes and American soldiers cooperating to fight fundamentalist groups like Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, the homegrown militant group that United States intelligence officials say is led by foreigners. The death has provoked local anger and demands for legal action.
Today UNICEF announced, "An estimated two million children in Iraq continue to face threats including poor nutrition, disease and interrupted education. Iraqi children were frequently caught in the crossfire of conflict throughout 2007. Insecurity and displacement continues to cause hardship for many in the most insecure parts of the country and further eroded access to quality essential services country-wide." Among the many distrubing facts UNCIEF reports, we'll grab two. "Hundreds of children lost their lives or were injured by violence and many more had their main family wage-earner kidnapped or killed." Earlier this week, IRIN reported that "Iraqi women parliamentarians and activists are pressing for a new law to help the increasing number of widows and divorced women in their war-torn country" and quoted parliamentarian Nadira Habib stating that violence had created ("over the past three decades") over 1 million widows in Iraq but the country plans to cut subsidies in next year's budget, despite the fact that "country's social protection programme" already only provides the US equiavalent of fifty-dollars a month to those in need. Cara Buckley (New York Times) reported on some of the problems facing Iraq's internally displaced refugees and noted that you have to jump through a hoop to get new benefits in another area -- you must return to the area that turned you and your family into a refugee to ask them to take you off the role (one of the women interviewed by Buckley explained it was just too dangerous for her to return there) and then apply in your new neighborhood.
UNICEF also notes: "Approximately 1,3500 children were detained by military and police authorities, many for alleged security violations." Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) examines the realities of the US prison releases in Iraq and doesn't find 'happy' and 'pretty.' She tells the story of a woman (Leila Nasser) who sees her husband hauled away while she's six-months pregnant because he committed the 'crime' of sleeping on the roof. At least 15 months later, she waits outside the prsion for Mohammed Amin's release, waits with their one-year-old son Moubin that the father has never seen due to the 'crime' of sleeping on his home's roof. Fadel notes, "More than 25,000 Iraqis are now in US dentention facilities. The Jihad reconciliation committee of Sunni and Shiite Muslims had requested that 562 men be released. Last month, 48 people were released, but more were detained."
In other non-progress news, Reuters reports, "Iraq's powerful Shiite Muslim leader, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, has called for curbs on US-backed neighourhood patrol units, which are mainly Sunni, saying weapons should only be in the hands of the government. Mr Hakin, head of the biggest party in the Shiite-led government, praised the role of the patrols, known to Iraqis as 'Awakening councils', in contributing to a sharp drop in violence but said they should only play an auxillary role."
Finally, two things on the issue of the PTSD. The Army Times' Kelly Kennedy spoke with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez (Democracy Now!) today about her recent reporting:
JUAN GONZALEZ: Your series presents a really fascinating picture of how the medical folks who dealt with some of these soldiers, the psychologists who dealt with them, reacted to their situation, and also how the commander dealt with being faced with an actual mutiny by his troops. Could you enlighten us about that some more?
KELLY KENNEDY: Yeah, I think there's--that's one of the key differences of this war. I'm a veteran myself, and I served in Mogadishu, and I served in Desert Storm. We didn't know what PTSD was--post-traumatic stress disorder. We didn't have mental health people we could go to while we were out in the field or while we were out in battle. We didn't talk about ethics. We didn't talk about how we were feeling or how we would react professionally to certain situations. And these guys are. They're going to mental health, and they're saying, "Hey, I'm upset about this." And the mental health people are talking with the unit commanders and saying, "Hey, maybe you need to pull your guys out Adhamiya," or "Hey, maybe your guys need some more rest." And they're certainly saying, "Listen, if you think you're going to act unprofessionally, you need to do something else. You need to take care of that." And I think that's huge. I don't think a lot of people understand that that's a big difference in this war, between the last war and this war.
And the reason they do that is because early on in this war we did have situations where troops did not behave properly. In Vietnam, we certainly saw it. For these guys to stand up and say, "Listen, we're not sure we can handle it right now," could be considered very courageous, in my mind. The commander, I think, also realized that, and he said as much, that he sees the two sides of the situation.
After Bravo Company's IED went off, Charlie Company was supposed to go back out and patrol the same area. When some of the members who had been patrolling with Charlie Company before the scout platoon went as the quick reaction force to the IED attack for Bravo Company, they were struck by how much it looked like the first IED attack that--the roadside bomb attack, and they reacted as if it were their own men, and they went right to mental health and they got sleeping medications, and they basically couldn't sleep and reacted poorly.
And then, they were supposed to go out on patrol again that day. And they, as a platoon, the whole platoon--it was about forty people--said, "We're not going to do it. We can't. We're not mentally there right now." And for whatever reason, that information didn't make it up to the company commander. All he heard was, "2nd Platoon refuses to go." So he insisted that they come. They still refused. So volunteers went out to talk with them, and then he got the whole situation. In the meantime, it was called a mutiny, which is probably a bigger word than should be used for it, but that's what the battalion called it.
And eventually, what they did was they separated the platoon. They said, you know, "You guys aren't acting well together anymore, so we're going to split you up, and we're going to have you work with other platoon sergeants, other squad leaders, and see if we can turn things around this way." But they also punished them, in a sense, by flagging them and saying that they couldn't get promotions and they couldn't get their awards for two months. So there was a feeling that there had to be punishment for these soldiers refusing to go on a mission, but there was also understanding that the guys may have acted properly in this case.
AMY GOODMAN: Kelly Kennedy, I think what is so profound about this story is the refusal of the men to go out. Were there women, by the way, in this unit?
KELLY KENNEDY: No, it was all infantry.
AMY GOODMAN: The refusal of these men to go out, because they were afraid they would commit a massacre. Explain that.
KELLY KENNEDY: Yeah. They're--I need to say this: they are good guys. I mean, I saw them take care of each other. I saw them take care of Iraqis.
When the IED, the roadside bomb, went off, it was so close to one of the Iraqi police stations that they should have been able to see somebody burying that. It was right in front of somebody's house, and nobody said anything. Nobody said to these guys, "Listen, there's a bomb here. We're worried about you," even though they had been going out and patrolling and doing what they were supposed to be doing, in their minds. So when that IED went off and killed their five friends, they're in--you have to understand, they've been living together for a year like brothers in the basement of this old palace. And it's--they're right on top of each other and going out and taking care of each other on the battlefield, daily firefights. And so, they're closer probably than anyone could be. And when they lost their five men, they--I think they gave up on the Iraqi people. If the Iraqi people weren't willing to fight for them, then what was the point? And they were so angry. They just wanted to go out and take out the whole city. They didn't understand why they couldn't finish up what they call the war, and the whole idea of counterinsurgency is that you're supposed to be building relationships, but they're trying to build relationships with people who obviously aren't that concerned about them. So this idea of a massacre was just--they were just so angry, they could barely contain it anymore.
And yesterday on All Things Considered (NPR), Daniel Zwerdling explored the topic of PTSD and noted the number of veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan and being discharged without all their health benefits which means receiving treatment for PTSD is very dificult which is why there is a "call on the nation's leaders to declare an amnesty" and "restore full benefits to all troops who were discharged for misconduct or other behaivor after they returned from combat if they were also diagnosed with mental health problems such as PTSD." Ruth noted Zwerdling yesterday. And the December 17th snapshot contains links to the Army Times series.
12/21/2007
12/20/2007
glen ford, paul street, blogging
Democratic leadership has once again caved in to Bush on war spending, after last month shunting aside Congressman Dennis Kucinich's bill to impeach Dick Cheney. Speaker Nancy Pelosi's rationale - shared by Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers - is that impeachment is a diversion from all the great works that the Democrats want to accomplish in this and the next Congress. But of course, they have accomplished very little on the domestic front, and nothing on the peace front. They almost seem to enjoy their whippings - like suburban, weekend masochists in a red-light district. If this were not so - if Democratic leadership really wanted to gum up the works of war, and rail to high heaven against Bush and Cheney's crimes - they could do so even without a working majority. One can only conclude that Democratic leadership believes that allowing Bush to keep his war going, and permitting Bush and Cheney to pile up felony upon felony against the Constitution, is good for Democrats. From a moral standpoint, that puts the mutinous spies and generals who dared to buck their president on Iran heads and shoulders above the Democratic so-called "opposition" in Congress.
that's from glen ford's 'When Spies and Generals Do More for Peace Than Democrats' (black agenda report) and you can read or listen online. i wanted to open with that because mike e-mailed it to me. i also wanted to include something from paul street's 'Note to Liberals: The Right Does Not "Hate Government"' (dissident voice) and see my notes after:
How interesting in that regard that Moulitsas -- a former Republican who speaks with pride of his three year "service" (1989-1992) in the US Army (see Tapper, "Inside the Mind") -- is upset that the Iraq occupation has not been handled by competent experts but by ineffective government operatives. Like the ill-fated Kerry campaign of 2004, Moulitsas -- who tells ABC that Daily {Toilet Scrubber] "support[s] every Democrat who runs for office" and who praises George Bush Senior's invasion of Mesopotamia for "contain[ing] Iraq and with a minimum loss of life" (tell it to the survivors of the thousands of surrendered Iraqi troops the US slaughtered from the skies on the infamous "Highway of Death") — seems to think that American government should have been more effective in its illegal imperial takeover of another sovereign state.
1st, i've called it 'the daily toilet scrubber.' as a woman, you can be damn sure that site doesn't get noted here. there was the cheesecake nonsense, there was the 'women's studies' rant and there's the fact that he tries to destroy abortion rights. there's also the fact (as many african-american sites note) he was apparently c.i.a. right when he was starting the daily toilet scrubber. so i don't want to even be seen as plugging the daily toilet scrubber.
but i liked paul street's article and i was glad he brought up the fact that henry hyde's little protege was a republican. (to steal from demi in st. elmo's fire, 'i always knew that he was a republican!') many years ago, ron would take on the nonsense but he's with raw story now and doesn't blog anymore so he's too busy and probably not interested in it. but he uncovered a great deal that's only resonated as the years have since passed.
but the toilet scrubbers (c.i. co-coined that with a member of congress in georgetown and we all use the phrase now) aren't about democracy and they aren't about equality.
i also have another reason for disliking the toilet scrubber. a kid wrote him about a problem directly related to his site and toilet scrubber didn't stand up for the kid. i was still absorbing ron's stuff and also felt awful for the kid, so i e-mailed him about the same thing. he played coward and silent with both of us.
they're the toilet scrubbers because they thought they were crashing the gate and, as c.i. pointed out, they're entering around back, through the servant's entrance which led the congress member (male) to say, 'they are "the daily . . ."' with c.i. finishing, 'toilet scrubbers!' the new book will probably destroy what's left of the shine (it's pretty much gone) and that's from friends still in p.r.
i heard about that today on several phone calls and thought i had a gossip scoop. i call c.i. and c.i. says, 'yeah, and ____.' i should have known i couldn't scoop c.i. ':)'
i was forwarded a copy & paste not that long ago (from something several months old) where a woman was posting about the issue of sexism and that toilet scrubbing crowd (scrubbing bubbles?) ended up trashing the woman and then toilet scrubber himself comes on and starts trashing her and makes clear he doesn't give a damn about feminism or women's rights. so his site doesn't get mentioned here. i've left his last name in paul street's excerpt so people will know who street is talking about.
he was going to be king of all media and that really didn't work out. he's going into print and that will last for a tiny bit but he really can't be on radio (other than air america which kisses his ass because they have enough problems already) or tv because of that squeaky voice. maybe he could use the tom cruise squeak suppressor gadget that tom started insisting be used on all of his movies starting with far & away. (for which he also wore a rug!)
a woman e-mailed today to say she'd like yesterday's post and to say that she stopped blogging 3 and 1/2 months ago. she said she gave links out and all and no 1 ever linked to her.
i wrote her back and told her i didn't know about her site when it was active (or before she e-mailed) and she wrote back that she didn't know my site then.
but she was depressed and although i won't fight her battles sorry but i've done that for too many mud flaps only to have them burn me - 'stick up for me, rebecca! we're in this together! and let's trade links!' and then i trade links and stick up for them and they never linked. they'd usually (out of guilt) e-mail a few weeks later and say 'thank you' and tell me that they had to let it 'die down' and then they'd link to me.
so i knew what the woman was talking about.
i know exactly what she's talking about.
a lot of people who e-mail you and say, 'let's do a link swap!' and they never do.
i've never e-mailed any 1 and asked for a link swap.
but i've gotten a ton of them and i've linked and all but once didn't get crap back.
that's just how it is.
but the thing is you don't need links.
you really don't.
you do need to write regularly.
there's a guy who had a hedra (single-white-female) like obsession with c.i. and was just screaming in e-mails (to all of us) about how he didn't get enough attention and blah, blah, blah. and he didn't blog. i mean blog if you want to be read. you don't have to do it every day. you can blog just 1 time a week. if you always blog on that 1 day, people will know to check it out.
but people get sick of going to a site and seeing nothing new.
so i asked her about that and she didn't have a schedule and she didn't blog regularly and she would go 2 weeks without blogging sometimes.
and all of that stuff does hurt you. if you write something people like (and the world's varied enough that we should all be able to write something some people will like), they will want to read you again. and if they check back and check back and you never have any new posts, they're going to move on to something else.
so you can hurt yourself that way.
but that's tip 2.
tip 1 is don't believe a damn promise any 1 makes you in an e-mail.
they never keep it in most cases.
tip 3 is that you don't need any 1 but yourself.
if you write stuff, some 1's going to read it. if you write stuff, you'll also get better at it (which doesn't mean you won't have bad days - i do all the time) and that will help you.
but you need to grasp going in that no 1's going to help you.
if you think, 'oh the net's so wonderful and every 1 loves you,' you are sadly mistaken.
the net is about people being out for themselves.
ron, to mention him again, always was arguing at his site for the left to be smarter and talking about how the right uses links to build up an entire movement. the left doesn't do that.
they do 'purges' of blogrolls. the 1s who were at the top a few years ago (many of whom are sinking) weren't interested in helping others.
and they weren't interested in diversity.
it's a bunch of white men who link to their friends.
and every now and then, they'll go, 'where are the woman bloggers.'
and the women who get in the club (only because there has been so much criticism of the sexism) usually aren't representative of women.
they don't use their voices to cover things that aren't already being covered by men and they don't have distinct voices that are any different than what the men already write.
the worst thing you can do is be a begger.
there's a guy (the 1 who attacked c.i. for calling dobson 'focus on the fool') who appears to have stopped blogging - thank you! - and every day he'd do a post about how ___ (big name male blogger) 'is really hitting it on the head.' it was so disgusting and i'd visit the site just to laugh at him. he got a few links (before the purge) just for being a suck-up, links on a blogroll, but none of them ever did a post where they said, 'hey go check out ___.'
he was trying so hard to fit in.
don't try to fit in.
don't try to be any 1 else.
if you're going to have an audience, do you really want to pretend day after day?
i mean, you may be blogging for a year or more. do you want to pretend every day? or do you want to suck up every day?
i was lucky - and i think others in the community will agree with this - because i had c.i. as a model. c.i. didn't need fame. c.i. didn't need money. c.i. didn't need approval. (and was honestly offended when there was an on air mention from npr in the site's 1st months.)
c.i. could do the 'katrina' pieces, those bits of fluff. (and that's what npr noted. c.i. said at the time, 'i knew it was crap but i had to get something posted.')
but if you really want to use your voice, you need to use it.
you can't do that sucking up.
but you can find an audience by telling your truth.
people don't want to read and say, 'oh that is so nice.' we have enough run-of-the-mill columnists around in papers.
people want truth. if you're telling your truth, you will get an audience.
i'm not sure how big it will be or how much it will grow or how fast, but you will get 1.
at third, jim's got a how-to planned for the last edition and that's going to go into more depth. it's going to be all of us talking about the lessons we learned in online life.
from the beginning of discussions of that piece (we probably talk about it at least 6 times a year), my thing has been 'people lie to you in e-mails.'
and that's because when i started i used to get all these women asking to trade links. and they'd write these wonderful e-mails filled with compliments.
they'd get their link from me and then they wouldn't link.
when elaine filled in for me in the summer of 2005, she pulled every 1 of those women off my links. i should have done that myself but i really was hurting over it at the time.
so take the e-mails with a grain of salt. and if some 1 wants to trade links, my advice is write them back and ask when they would be linking to you?
if they say 'tomorrow' or whatever e-mail that you've added them to your links and you will be checking on that day and if you're not added you will pull them.
or tell them, 'add me and i'll add you.'
i really think every 1 should try blogging. just so you'll know what it's like and see if you like it. you might want to blog and then do it and decide you hate it. or you might do it and find out that you like it.
but if you keep up at it, you will find an audience.
my other tip would be don't let your audience be used. there are a lot of people out there who want to promote their sites, or their books, or whatever.
they'll write you to try and reach your audience. if you don't believe in their whatever, don't promote it.
there are people who write me all the time and i blow them off.
there's an npr like program - pri? - that wants to be linked like crazy but it's government propaganda and i've explained repeatedly that i'm not linking. they continue to e-mail me.
so stuff like that is stuff to keep in mind.
i told the woman that i wished she'd written me when she was thinking about packing it in. she seems to regret the decision and i would've told her (i did today) what i've written here.
her big shock was how the 1s she had been a fan of and would note never linked to her even if they e-mailed her to say 'thanks for the kind words.'
that's just the way it is.
and you learn the lesson and move on.
let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'
Thursday, December 20, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces another death, Jamie Leigh Jones testified yesterday but look who can't cover it, the refugee crisis continues and more.
Starting with war resistance. Joe McMorrow (Western Catholic Reporter) notes Sophie Scholl and Franz Jagerstatter (who both resisted the Nazi regime in Germany) and how the Catholic Church in Germany remained silent and McMorrow builds on that to call out: "The general indifference by Canadian Catholics to the plight of American war deserters who have fled to Canada in recent years rather than fight in Iraq is evidence that selective conscientious objection to war is still viewed as somehow not a valid Catholic moral, position. This despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of Catholic moral theologians agree with these deserters: the Iraq war is unjust; destertion, in a situation where there are no other alternatives, is preferable to participation in an unjust war. The war in Iraq is conservatively estimated to have taken the lives of over 100,000 civilians and violates every traditional criterion used to justify war: the invasion of Iraq is not defensive, is not declared by a lawful authority, is not a last resort, does not sufficiently distinguish between civilian and military participants, and is not likely to create more good than the harm it is inflicting. Yet, the plight of American deserters who have fled to Canada for refuge has not drawn a word of attention from the Canadian Conference of Cahtolic Bishops (CCCE)."
The Canadian Parliament has the power to let war resisters stay 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. Both War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist are calling for actions from January 24-26.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes 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, Carla 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 event:
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. I would assume that this is fairly obvious but I would have assumed wrong: IVAW is asking that there be no anti-war rallies, marches, etc. called for the national level during that time period and that, since the Investigation is based in DC, that no "local" anti-war actions be planned for that period in DC. The illegal war started on March 19, 2003 so that's two days after the event. The 19th falls on a Wednesday. If there are other actions held during that period, we won't be noting them. This is something that was in planning stages for some time, something that a lot of people have worked very hard on and it's been announced for sometime. IVAW has carved out these dates and we will note the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation announcement in every snapshot leading up to this event. We won't be noting any other actions that take place during this time period. I don't believe any one group leads and I certainly don't believe the peace movement should attempt to hide behind the military (is there any room left with the White House and Democratic leadership already crowded around back there?). But this is a major event that's required intense planning and organizing and they gave more than enough notice ahead of time that everyone should have been aware of the event. Those days should belong to the Investigation. And the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation is a public event. So, in terms of mobilization, if any group or organization wants to mobilize, they can can mobilize people to Investigation which will include the testimonies of those who have served as well as people from Iraq and Afghanistan who have survived the illegal war.
Today on Democracy Now!, Amy Goodman noted, "On Capitol Hill, Justice Department officials are coming under criticism for refusing to attend a hearing on allegations of rape ans sexual assault of female contactors in Iraq. A former employee has sued Halliburton and its former subsidiary KBR after she says she was gang-raped by employees of the company in Baghdad. The alleged victim, Jamie Leigh Jones, accuses the company and the U.S. government of covering up the crime." Feminist Wire Daily summarizes: "Jones filed a lawsuit against her former employers, Halliburton and its then-subsidiary KBR in May, stating that she was drugged and gang-raped by a group of her co-workers in the KBR camp in the Green Zone in Iraq in 2005. In her testimony, Jones stated that her experience while working for contractors in Iraq was not an isolated incident, reports the Associated Press. Representative Ted Poe, R-TX, who was contacted for help by Jones's father while she was held in Iraq by her co-workers after the attack, also testified that several women have now come forward with allegations of sexual harassment and assault while employed by Halliburton's former subsidiary, KBR. As of yet, no charges have been brought against Jones's alleged attackers. According to ABC News, legal experts say they might never even have to stand trial: A loophole in US law effectively leaves contractors working in Iraq out of the jurisdiction of US courts." [Feminist Daily News Wire's item is also up at Feminist Majority Foundation.] On yesterday's House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security, Maddy Sauer (ABC News) points out that DoJ "refused to send a representative to answer questions from Congress today on the investigations into allegations of rape and sexual assault on female American contractors." Rebecca Carr (Cox News via The Plains Dealer) observes, "Glaring at the empty seat assigned to an absent Justice Department official, Rep. Louie Gohmert, Republican of Texas, vowed to 'move Justice in the right direction.' Gohmert told Jones she is giving a voice to other victims of rape." Barbara H. Peterson (OpEdNews) considers the meanings of these events: "Is the United States taking a step backwards in the area of women's rights? It would seem so. Violence against American women goes un-prosecuted, and women who have suffered violence remain traumatized with no justice in sight." CNN quotes Rep Poe declaring, "We need a new sheriff in Iraq to enforce federal laws." We also a need a US State Department that provides the oversight it is supposed to. AP notes that Rep Poe "says three women -- including Tracy Barker, who submitted written testimony of her account and was at the hearing -- contacted him" -- three women who have also been assaulted. The Secretary of State is Condi Rice. She heads the State Department and she assumed those duties January 26, 2005 which means she was in the charge of the department that was supposed to be overseeing contractors when the assaults on Jones and Barker took place. Tracy Barker was harassed by contractors, true, but she was assaulted by an employee of the State Department -- Ali Mokhtare -- an employee who, as of 20/20's report last Friday was still employed by the State Department. It's not as if the State Department's a model department. Warren P. Strobel (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that Charles Williams, who was in charge of oversight for the department's embassy construction in Iraq just became "the third senior State Department official to depart amid failures in managing the burgeoning U.S. diplomatic presence in Iraq. The department's inspector general and head of diplomatic presence in Iraq." Barker's statement was noted in yesterday's snapshot and maybe the fact that she submitted her statement in writing is why some of the press ignored her today? Jones testified in public. Flip through the New York Times today to find that report.
It's not there.
Jane Fonda speaking in January of this year (here for video, here for text)
Last month, in the Washington Post, there was a heart-breaking article by Nancy Trejos about the women's lives in Iraq. The headline was, "Women Lose Ground in the New Iraq. Once They Were Encouraged to Study and Work; Now Life Is 'Just Like Being in Jail'." The article was on page A12. If the female half of the world were visible and powerful, that article would have been the lead story, on the front page and above the fold.
And to return to the Abeer Al-Janabi's tragic story.
The U.S. Army wants us to believe that what happened to Abeer was just another tale of a few bad apples. One of the soldiers allegedly responsible -- the pupropted ringleader, private Steven Green, of Midland, Texas -- had a criminal record, and a history of drug abuse and emotional problems. Once, the army would have rejected him. But in 2005, desperate for recruits, they dismissed his dangerous past by granting him a so-called "moral waiver," and accepted him into their ranks.
On the first point, and Jamie Leigh Jones would be on the front page of today's New York Times (instead of not even noted) while on the second point, US soldiers carried out a criminal conspiracy to gang-rape and murder Abeer Qassim Hamza and to murder her parents, Qassim Hamza Raheem and Fakhriya Taha Muhsasen, and her five-year-old sister Hadeel Qassim Hamza on March 12, 2006. Brian De Palma's brilliant film Redacted is work of fiction inspired by Abeer. Dan Geist (IPS) examines the film, "Brian De Palma's new movie 'Redacted' is a fictional take on the overseas exploits of another youthful resident of the city, one who Midland days are not touted by the local Chamber of Commerce. The real-life character whose deeds inspired the film is Steven Dale Green. Still shy of his twentieth birthday, he had already racked up a record of alcohol and drug abuse that included three misdemeanor convictions. Meanwhile, two years after Bush had declared a United States victory in its latest war, the U.S. Army was experiencing a severe recruitment shortfall. More liberal, embracing attitudes naturally gained sway in the hiring office. Thus it was that the newly anointed Private First Class Green arrived in another oil-rich country, Iraq, in the autom of 2005. There, if the acounts of his fellow soldiers are to be credited, this younger son of Midland left his mark on history as well. Steven Green is alleged to be the primary insitgator of the Mahmudiyah atrocity, a slightly altered version of which forms the centrepiece of 'Redacted'. One afternoon in March 2006, a group of U.S. soldiers based in that suburb of Baghdad, well lubricated by whiskey-and-energy-drink cocktails, stormed the home of 14-year-old Abeer Qasim Hamza al-Janabi. As two soldiers took turns raping the girl, her parents and five-year-old sister were shot dead in another room, allegedly by Green. According to the testimony of the other soldiers involved, Green proceeded to rape Abeer and kill her. One of his associates then poured kerosene on her body, which was set ablaze. Following a tip from another man in their unit, four soldiers were arrested for their roles in the crme and a fifth for failing to report it. Green was discharged from the Army on psychiatric grounds before his participation came to light. The two men who first raped Abeer -- Sergeant Paul Cortez and Specialist James Barker -- ultimately confessed and are now serving prison sentences that will last a minimum of 10 and 20 years, respectively, perhaps much longer. Their roles are merged in one 'Redacted' character, B.B. Rush."
In some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad car bombing claimed 3 lives and left twenty-eight people injured. Reuters notes, "A suicide bomber wearing a belt packed with explosives struck a recruiting station for neighbourhood patrols in the twon of Kannan in restive Diyala province. Police said 13 volunteers were killed and 10 wounded. The U.S. military said a U.S. soldier was killed and 10 U.S. soldiers were wounded." Hammooudi informs that the "neighborhood patrols" were the "Sahwa (awakening)" council -- the attack continues a trend. Tina Susman (Los Angeles Times) quotes an official who explains, "There was a meeting with U.S. forces at the time of the attack, when the suicide attacker aws able to get inside before exploding himself."
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 person was shot dead in Baquba and, also in Baquba, an armed clash resulted in 2 deaths.
Corpses?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses discovered in Baghdad. Tina Susman (Los Angeles Times) notes a US military statement released today on the discovery (apparently between the eighth of December and the eleventh but who knows) of 26 corpses in Muqdadiya.
Turning to the refugee crisis. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees notes, "Popular Arab Iraqi musician Naseer Shamma on Tuesday launched a fund-raising campaign that he hopes will raise millions of dollars to help Iraqi refugees in major host countries such as Syria and Jordan" and quotes Shamma declaring, "I did not know before today that there are many layers [of Iraqi refugees] under the poverty line. UNHCR has done its share but it is time now for the Arab people to do their share and support Iraqi refugees." Over 4 million Iraqi refugees have been created by the illegal war (that's internally and externally displaced Iraqis). Of course some aren't in Iraq technically and some aren't in another country technically. Miret El Naggar (McClatchy Newspapers) reports, "Hundreds of Palestinian refugees who've been forced out of thier homes in Iraq are stranded in a remote stretch of the Syrian desert, where they're living in tents that offer little shelter against blinding sandstorms and the biting cold of winter nights, according to humanitarian aid workers and refugees. Syrian authorities have barred the Palestinians from leaving the Tanaf refugee camp near the border with Iraq. Journalists aren't allowed to visit." On all Iraqi refugees, Church World Service notes, "Despite recent reports their homes, it is reportedly a small percentage and those returning face an uncertain future given continuing violence and widespread humanitarian needs. As well, authorities in Iraq, Syria and Jordan have begun restricting movement of civilians, raising concerns about the ability to flee dangerous areas." Cara Buckley (New York Times) examines Maha Hashim and Afraah Kadhom and their families are two of the refugees Buckley examines. Both women tell similar details -- monies ran out in Syria, return to Baghdad . . . to nothing. There is no work, there is no place to live. A truck bombing destroyed Hashim's home and she (and her children) live in an uncle's apartment, Kadhom's is gone. Bombed. Rubble. Hashim's husband was a police officer. He was shot dead in 2006. Kadhom's "father and four brothers were killed two years ago" in a home invasion. On employment, Ali al-Fahdily (IPS) quotes Mohammad al-Dulaymi explaining, "To survive in Iraq under U.S. occupation, there are only two jobs; police and garbage collection. Unemployment is leading many Iraqis to join the security forces despite the risk invovled."
Finally, on the heels of Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism latest study noting the effects of Operation Happy Talk, FAIR has issued an analysis (which sounds similar to some of the points Peter Hart was making last Thursday and Friday) entitled "War Is Over -- Say the Pundits" (here for Common Dreams, here for FAIR):
To hear many in the mainstream media tell it, the Iraq War is of diminishing importance to American voters. But the evidence for such a shift in the electorate is thin at best--suggesting that journalists and pundits are really the ones who would rather not talk about Iraq as we head into an election year.The New York Times offered a glimpse of this argument in a November 25 piece headlined "As Democrats See Security Gains in Iraq, Tone Shifts." The article suggested that "leading Democratic presidential candidates" were having trouble acknowledging "success" in Iraq while still opposing the war: "But the changing situation suggests for the first time that the politics of the war could shift in the general election next year, particularly if the gains continue." This was carried further a few days later by the Washington Post (11/28/07), where it was reported that the "debate at home over the Iraq war has shifted significantly," a phenomenon that "has strategists in both parties reevaluating their assumptions about how the final year of the Bush presidency and the election to succeed him will play out." The Post suggested that the "evolving public attitudes reflect, or perhaps explain, a turn in Washington as well." The suggestion that Washington might be reacting to subtle changes in public opinion is a curious one; if public sentiment were truly guiding policy, then U.S. troops would have long been on their way out.
that's from glen ford's 'When Spies and Generals Do More for Peace Than Democrats' (black agenda report) and you can read or listen online. i wanted to open with that because mike e-mailed it to me. i also wanted to include something from paul street's 'Note to Liberals: The Right Does Not "Hate Government"' (dissident voice) and see my notes after:
How interesting in that regard that Moulitsas -- a former Republican who speaks with pride of his three year "service" (1989-1992) in the US Army (see Tapper, "Inside the Mind") -- is upset that the Iraq occupation has not been handled by competent experts but by ineffective government operatives. Like the ill-fated Kerry campaign of 2004, Moulitsas -- who tells ABC that Daily {Toilet Scrubber] "support[s] every Democrat who runs for office" and who praises George Bush Senior's invasion of Mesopotamia for "contain[ing] Iraq and with a minimum loss of life" (tell it to the survivors of the thousands of surrendered Iraqi troops the US slaughtered from the skies on the infamous "Highway of Death") — seems to think that American government should have been more effective in its illegal imperial takeover of another sovereign state.
1st, i've called it 'the daily toilet scrubber.' as a woman, you can be damn sure that site doesn't get noted here. there was the cheesecake nonsense, there was the 'women's studies' rant and there's the fact that he tries to destroy abortion rights. there's also the fact (as many african-american sites note) he was apparently c.i.a. right when he was starting the daily toilet scrubber. so i don't want to even be seen as plugging the daily toilet scrubber.
but i liked paul street's article and i was glad he brought up the fact that henry hyde's little protege was a republican. (to steal from demi in st. elmo's fire, 'i always knew that he was a republican!') many years ago, ron would take on the nonsense but he's with raw story now and doesn't blog anymore so he's too busy and probably not interested in it. but he uncovered a great deal that's only resonated as the years have since passed.
but the toilet scrubbers (c.i. co-coined that with a member of congress in georgetown and we all use the phrase now) aren't about democracy and they aren't about equality.
i also have another reason for disliking the toilet scrubber. a kid wrote him about a problem directly related to his site and toilet scrubber didn't stand up for the kid. i was still absorbing ron's stuff and also felt awful for the kid, so i e-mailed him about the same thing. he played coward and silent with both of us.
they're the toilet scrubbers because they thought they were crashing the gate and, as c.i. pointed out, they're entering around back, through the servant's entrance which led the congress member (male) to say, 'they are "the daily . . ."' with c.i. finishing, 'toilet scrubbers!' the new book will probably destroy what's left of the shine (it's pretty much gone) and that's from friends still in p.r.
i heard about that today on several phone calls and thought i had a gossip scoop. i call c.i. and c.i. says, 'yeah, and ____.' i should have known i couldn't scoop c.i. ':)'
i was forwarded a copy & paste not that long ago (from something several months old) where a woman was posting about the issue of sexism and that toilet scrubbing crowd (scrubbing bubbles?) ended up trashing the woman and then toilet scrubber himself comes on and starts trashing her and makes clear he doesn't give a damn about feminism or women's rights. so his site doesn't get mentioned here. i've left his last name in paul street's excerpt so people will know who street is talking about.
he was going to be king of all media and that really didn't work out. he's going into print and that will last for a tiny bit but he really can't be on radio (other than air america which kisses his ass because they have enough problems already) or tv because of that squeaky voice. maybe he could use the tom cruise squeak suppressor gadget that tom started insisting be used on all of his movies starting with far & away. (for which he also wore a rug!)
a woman e-mailed today to say she'd like yesterday's post and to say that she stopped blogging 3 and 1/2 months ago. she said she gave links out and all and no 1 ever linked to her.
i wrote her back and told her i didn't know about her site when it was active (or before she e-mailed) and she wrote back that she didn't know my site then.
but she was depressed and although i won't fight her battles sorry but i've done that for too many mud flaps only to have them burn me - 'stick up for me, rebecca! we're in this together! and let's trade links!' and then i trade links and stick up for them and they never linked. they'd usually (out of guilt) e-mail a few weeks later and say 'thank you' and tell me that they had to let it 'die down' and then they'd link to me.
so i knew what the woman was talking about.
i know exactly what she's talking about.
a lot of people who e-mail you and say, 'let's do a link swap!' and they never do.
i've never e-mailed any 1 and asked for a link swap.
but i've gotten a ton of them and i've linked and all but once didn't get crap back.
that's just how it is.
but the thing is you don't need links.
you really don't.
you do need to write regularly.
there's a guy who had a hedra (single-white-female) like obsession with c.i. and was just screaming in e-mails (to all of us) about how he didn't get enough attention and blah, blah, blah. and he didn't blog. i mean blog if you want to be read. you don't have to do it every day. you can blog just 1 time a week. if you always blog on that 1 day, people will know to check it out.
but people get sick of going to a site and seeing nothing new.
so i asked her about that and she didn't have a schedule and she didn't blog regularly and she would go 2 weeks without blogging sometimes.
and all of that stuff does hurt you. if you write something people like (and the world's varied enough that we should all be able to write something some people will like), they will want to read you again. and if they check back and check back and you never have any new posts, they're going to move on to something else.
so you can hurt yourself that way.
but that's tip 2.
tip 1 is don't believe a damn promise any 1 makes you in an e-mail.
they never keep it in most cases.
tip 3 is that you don't need any 1 but yourself.
if you write stuff, some 1's going to read it. if you write stuff, you'll also get better at it (which doesn't mean you won't have bad days - i do all the time) and that will help you.
but you need to grasp going in that no 1's going to help you.
if you think, 'oh the net's so wonderful and every 1 loves you,' you are sadly mistaken.
the net is about people being out for themselves.
ron, to mention him again, always was arguing at his site for the left to be smarter and talking about how the right uses links to build up an entire movement. the left doesn't do that.
they do 'purges' of blogrolls. the 1s who were at the top a few years ago (many of whom are sinking) weren't interested in helping others.
and they weren't interested in diversity.
it's a bunch of white men who link to their friends.
and every now and then, they'll go, 'where are the woman bloggers.'
and the women who get in the club (only because there has been so much criticism of the sexism) usually aren't representative of women.
they don't use their voices to cover things that aren't already being covered by men and they don't have distinct voices that are any different than what the men already write.
the worst thing you can do is be a begger.
there's a guy (the 1 who attacked c.i. for calling dobson 'focus on the fool') who appears to have stopped blogging - thank you! - and every day he'd do a post about how ___ (big name male blogger) 'is really hitting it on the head.' it was so disgusting and i'd visit the site just to laugh at him. he got a few links (before the purge) just for being a suck-up, links on a blogroll, but none of them ever did a post where they said, 'hey go check out ___.'
he was trying so hard to fit in.
don't try to fit in.
don't try to be any 1 else.
if you're going to have an audience, do you really want to pretend day after day?
i mean, you may be blogging for a year or more. do you want to pretend every day? or do you want to suck up every day?
i was lucky - and i think others in the community will agree with this - because i had c.i. as a model. c.i. didn't need fame. c.i. didn't need money. c.i. didn't need approval. (and was honestly offended when there was an on air mention from npr in the site's 1st months.)
c.i. could do the 'katrina' pieces, those bits of fluff. (and that's what npr noted. c.i. said at the time, 'i knew it was crap but i had to get something posted.')
but if you really want to use your voice, you need to use it.
you can't do that sucking up.
but you can find an audience by telling your truth.
people don't want to read and say, 'oh that is so nice.' we have enough run-of-the-mill columnists around in papers.
people want truth. if you're telling your truth, you will get an audience.
i'm not sure how big it will be or how much it will grow or how fast, but you will get 1.
at third, jim's got a how-to planned for the last edition and that's going to go into more depth. it's going to be all of us talking about the lessons we learned in online life.
from the beginning of discussions of that piece (we probably talk about it at least 6 times a year), my thing has been 'people lie to you in e-mails.'
and that's because when i started i used to get all these women asking to trade links. and they'd write these wonderful e-mails filled with compliments.
they'd get their link from me and then they wouldn't link.
when elaine filled in for me in the summer of 2005, she pulled every 1 of those women off my links. i should have done that myself but i really was hurting over it at the time.
so take the e-mails with a grain of salt. and if some 1 wants to trade links, my advice is write them back and ask when they would be linking to you?
if they say 'tomorrow' or whatever e-mail that you've added them to your links and you will be checking on that day and if you're not added you will pull them.
or tell them, 'add me and i'll add you.'
i really think every 1 should try blogging. just so you'll know what it's like and see if you like it. you might want to blog and then do it and decide you hate it. or you might do it and find out that you like it.
but if you keep up at it, you will find an audience.
my other tip would be don't let your audience be used. there are a lot of people out there who want to promote their sites, or their books, or whatever.
they'll write you to try and reach your audience. if you don't believe in their whatever, don't promote it.
there are people who write me all the time and i blow them off.
there's an npr like program - pri? - that wants to be linked like crazy but it's government propaganda and i've explained repeatedly that i'm not linking. they continue to e-mail me.
so stuff like that is stuff to keep in mind.
i told the woman that i wished she'd written me when she was thinking about packing it in. she seems to regret the decision and i would've told her (i did today) what i've written here.
her big shock was how the 1s she had been a fan of and would note never linked to her even if they e-mailed her to say 'thanks for the kind words.'
that's just the way it is.
and you learn the lesson and move on.
let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'
Thursday, December 20, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces another death, Jamie Leigh Jones testified yesterday but look who can't cover it, the refugee crisis continues and more.
Starting with war resistance. Joe McMorrow (Western Catholic Reporter) notes Sophie Scholl and Franz Jagerstatter (who both resisted the Nazi regime in Germany) and how the Catholic Church in Germany remained silent and McMorrow builds on that to call out: "The general indifference by Canadian Catholics to the plight of American war deserters who have fled to Canada in recent years rather than fight in Iraq is evidence that selective conscientious objection to war is still viewed as somehow not a valid Catholic moral, position. This despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of Catholic moral theologians agree with these deserters: the Iraq war is unjust; destertion, in a situation where there are no other alternatives, is preferable to participation in an unjust war. The war in Iraq is conservatively estimated to have taken the lives of over 100,000 civilians and violates every traditional criterion used to justify war: the invasion of Iraq is not defensive, is not declared by a lawful authority, is not a last resort, does not sufficiently distinguish between civilian and military participants, and is not likely to create more good than the harm it is inflicting. Yet, the plight of American deserters who have fled to Canada for refuge has not drawn a word of attention from the Canadian Conference of Cahtolic Bishops (CCCE)."
The Canadian Parliament has the power to let war resisters stay 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. Both War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist are calling for actions from January 24-26.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes 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, Carla 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 event:
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. I would assume that this is fairly obvious but I would have assumed wrong: IVAW is asking that there be no anti-war rallies, marches, etc. called for the national level during that time period and that, since the Investigation is based in DC, that no "local" anti-war actions be planned for that period in DC. The illegal war started on March 19, 2003 so that's two days after the event. The 19th falls on a Wednesday. If there are other actions held during that period, we won't be noting them. This is something that was in planning stages for some time, something that a lot of people have worked very hard on and it's been announced for sometime. IVAW has carved out these dates and we will note the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation announcement in every snapshot leading up to this event. We won't be noting any other actions that take place during this time period. I don't believe any one group leads and I certainly don't believe the peace movement should attempt to hide behind the military (is there any room left with the White House and Democratic leadership already crowded around back there?). But this is a major event that's required intense planning and organizing and they gave more than enough notice ahead of time that everyone should have been aware of the event. Those days should belong to the Investigation. And the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation is a public event. So, in terms of mobilization, if any group or organization wants to mobilize, they can can mobilize people to Investigation which will include the testimonies of those who have served as well as people from Iraq and Afghanistan who have survived the illegal war.
Today on Democracy Now!, Amy Goodman noted, "On Capitol Hill, Justice Department officials are coming under criticism for refusing to attend a hearing on allegations of rape ans sexual assault of female contactors in Iraq. A former employee has sued Halliburton and its former subsidiary KBR after she says she was gang-raped by employees of the company in Baghdad. The alleged victim, Jamie Leigh Jones, accuses the company and the U.S. government of covering up the crime." Feminist Wire Daily summarizes: "Jones filed a lawsuit against her former employers, Halliburton and its then-subsidiary KBR in May, stating that she was drugged and gang-raped by a group of her co-workers in the KBR camp in the Green Zone in Iraq in 2005. In her testimony, Jones stated that her experience while working for contractors in Iraq was not an isolated incident, reports the Associated Press. Representative Ted Poe, R-TX, who was contacted for help by Jones's father while she was held in Iraq by her co-workers after the attack, also testified that several women have now come forward with allegations of sexual harassment and assault while employed by Halliburton's former subsidiary, KBR. As of yet, no charges have been brought against Jones's alleged attackers. According to ABC News, legal experts say they might never even have to stand trial: A loophole in US law effectively leaves contractors working in Iraq out of the jurisdiction of US courts." [Feminist Daily News Wire's item is also up at Feminist Majority Foundation.] On yesterday's House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security, Maddy Sauer (ABC News) points out that DoJ "refused to send a representative to answer questions from Congress today on the investigations into allegations of rape and sexual assault on female American contractors." Rebecca Carr (Cox News via The Plains Dealer) observes, "Glaring at the empty seat assigned to an absent Justice Department official, Rep. Louie Gohmert, Republican of Texas, vowed to 'move Justice in the right direction.' Gohmert told Jones she is giving a voice to other victims of rape." Barbara H. Peterson (OpEdNews) considers the meanings of these events: "Is the United States taking a step backwards in the area of women's rights? It would seem so. Violence against American women goes un-prosecuted, and women who have suffered violence remain traumatized with no justice in sight." CNN quotes Rep Poe declaring, "We need a new sheriff in Iraq to enforce federal laws." We also a need a US State Department that provides the oversight it is supposed to. AP notes that Rep Poe "says three women -- including Tracy Barker, who submitted written testimony of her account and was at the hearing -- contacted him" -- three women who have also been assaulted. The Secretary of State is Condi Rice. She heads the State Department and she assumed those duties January 26, 2005 which means she was in the charge of the department that was supposed to be overseeing contractors when the assaults on Jones and Barker took place. Tracy Barker was harassed by contractors, true, but she was assaulted by an employee of the State Department -- Ali Mokhtare -- an employee who, as of 20/20's report last Friday was still employed by the State Department. It's not as if the State Department's a model department. Warren P. Strobel (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that Charles Williams, who was in charge of oversight for the department's embassy construction in Iraq just became "the third senior State Department official to depart amid failures in managing the burgeoning U.S. diplomatic presence in Iraq. The department's inspector general and head of diplomatic presence in Iraq." Barker's statement was noted in yesterday's snapshot and maybe the fact that she submitted her statement in writing is why some of the press ignored her today? Jones testified in public. Flip through the New York Times today to find that report.
It's not there.
Jane Fonda speaking in January of this year (here for video, here for text)
Last month, in the Washington Post, there was a heart-breaking article by Nancy Trejos about the women's lives in Iraq. The headline was, "Women Lose Ground in the New Iraq. Once They Were Encouraged to Study and Work; Now Life Is 'Just Like Being in Jail'." The article was on page A12. If the female half of the world were visible and powerful, that article would have been the lead story, on the front page and above the fold.
And to return to the Abeer Al-Janabi's tragic story.
The U.S. Army wants us to believe that what happened to Abeer was just another tale of a few bad apples. One of the soldiers allegedly responsible -- the pupropted ringleader, private Steven Green, of Midland, Texas -- had a criminal record, and a history of drug abuse and emotional problems. Once, the army would have rejected him. But in 2005, desperate for recruits, they dismissed his dangerous past by granting him a so-called "moral waiver," and accepted him into their ranks.
On the first point, and Jamie Leigh Jones would be on the front page of today's New York Times (instead of not even noted) while on the second point, US soldiers carried out a criminal conspiracy to gang-rape and murder Abeer Qassim Hamza and to murder her parents, Qassim Hamza Raheem and Fakhriya Taha Muhsasen, and her five-year-old sister Hadeel Qassim Hamza on March 12, 2006. Brian De Palma's brilliant film Redacted is work of fiction inspired by Abeer. Dan Geist (IPS) examines the film, "Brian De Palma's new movie 'Redacted' is a fictional take on the overseas exploits of another youthful resident of the city, one who Midland days are not touted by the local Chamber of Commerce. The real-life character whose deeds inspired the film is Steven Dale Green. Still shy of his twentieth birthday, he had already racked up a record of alcohol and drug abuse that included three misdemeanor convictions. Meanwhile, two years after Bush had declared a United States victory in its latest war, the U.S. Army was experiencing a severe recruitment shortfall. More liberal, embracing attitudes naturally gained sway in the hiring office. Thus it was that the newly anointed Private First Class Green arrived in another oil-rich country, Iraq, in the autom of 2005. There, if the acounts of his fellow soldiers are to be credited, this younger son of Midland left his mark on history as well. Steven Green is alleged to be the primary insitgator of the Mahmudiyah atrocity, a slightly altered version of which forms the centrepiece of 'Redacted'. One afternoon in March 2006, a group of U.S. soldiers based in that suburb of Baghdad, well lubricated by whiskey-and-energy-drink cocktails, stormed the home of 14-year-old Abeer Qasim Hamza al-Janabi. As two soldiers took turns raping the girl, her parents and five-year-old sister were shot dead in another room, allegedly by Green. According to the testimony of the other soldiers involved, Green proceeded to rape Abeer and kill her. One of his associates then poured kerosene on her body, which was set ablaze. Following a tip from another man in their unit, four soldiers were arrested for their roles in the crme and a fifth for failing to report it. Green was discharged from the Army on psychiatric grounds before his participation came to light. The two men who first raped Abeer -- Sergeant Paul Cortez and Specialist James Barker -- ultimately confessed and are now serving prison sentences that will last a minimum of 10 and 20 years, respectively, perhaps much longer. Their roles are merged in one 'Redacted' character, B.B. Rush."
In some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad car bombing claimed 3 lives and left twenty-eight people injured. Reuters notes, "A suicide bomber wearing a belt packed with explosives struck a recruiting station for neighbourhood patrols in the twon of Kannan in restive Diyala province. Police said 13 volunteers were killed and 10 wounded. The U.S. military said a U.S. soldier was killed and 10 U.S. soldiers were wounded." Hammooudi informs that the "neighborhood patrols" were the "Sahwa (awakening)" council -- the attack continues a trend. Tina Susman (Los Angeles Times) quotes an official who explains, "There was a meeting with U.S. forces at the time of the attack, when the suicide attacker aws able to get inside before exploding himself."
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 person was shot dead in Baquba and, also in Baquba, an armed clash resulted in 2 deaths.
Corpses?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses discovered in Baghdad. Tina Susman (Los Angeles Times) notes a US military statement released today on the discovery (apparently between the eighth of December and the eleventh but who knows) of 26 corpses in Muqdadiya.
Turning to the refugee crisis. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees notes, "Popular Arab Iraqi musician Naseer Shamma on Tuesday launched a fund-raising campaign that he hopes will raise millions of dollars to help Iraqi refugees in major host countries such as Syria and Jordan" and quotes Shamma declaring, "I did not know before today that there are many layers [of Iraqi refugees] under the poverty line. UNHCR has done its share but it is time now for the Arab people to do their share and support Iraqi refugees." Over 4 million Iraqi refugees have been created by the illegal war (that's internally and externally displaced Iraqis). Of course some aren't in Iraq technically and some aren't in another country technically. Miret El Naggar (McClatchy Newspapers) reports, "Hundreds of Palestinian refugees who've been forced out of thier homes in Iraq are stranded in a remote stretch of the Syrian desert, where they're living in tents that offer little shelter against blinding sandstorms and the biting cold of winter nights, according to humanitarian aid workers and refugees. Syrian authorities have barred the Palestinians from leaving the Tanaf refugee camp near the border with Iraq. Journalists aren't allowed to visit." On all Iraqi refugees, Church World Service notes, "Despite recent reports their homes, it is reportedly a small percentage and those returning face an uncertain future given continuing violence and widespread humanitarian needs. As well, authorities in Iraq, Syria and Jordan have begun restricting movement of civilians, raising concerns about the ability to flee dangerous areas." Cara Buckley (New York Times) examines Maha Hashim and Afraah Kadhom and their families are two of the refugees Buckley examines. Both women tell similar details -- monies ran out in Syria, return to Baghdad . . . to nothing. There is no work, there is no place to live. A truck bombing destroyed Hashim's home and she (and her children) live in an uncle's apartment, Kadhom's is gone. Bombed. Rubble. Hashim's husband was a police officer. He was shot dead in 2006. Kadhom's "father and four brothers were killed two years ago" in a home invasion. On employment, Ali al-Fahdily (IPS) quotes Mohammad al-Dulaymi explaining, "To survive in Iraq under U.S. occupation, there are only two jobs; police and garbage collection. Unemployment is leading many Iraqis to join the security forces despite the risk invovled."
Finally, on the heels of Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism latest study noting the effects of Operation Happy Talk, FAIR has issued an analysis (which sounds similar to some of the points Peter Hart was making last Thursday and Friday) entitled "War Is Over -- Say the Pundits" (here for Common Dreams, here for FAIR):
To hear many in the mainstream media tell it, the Iraq War is of diminishing importance to American voters. But the evidence for such a shift in the electorate is thin at best--suggesting that journalists and pundits are really the ones who would rather not talk about Iraq as we head into an election year.The New York Times offered a glimpse of this argument in a November 25 piece headlined "As Democrats See Security Gains in Iraq, Tone Shifts." The article suggested that "leading Democratic presidential candidates" were having trouble acknowledging "success" in Iraq while still opposing the war: "But the changing situation suggests for the first time that the politics of the war could shift in the general election next year, particularly if the gains continue." This was carried further a few days later by the Washington Post (11/28/07), where it was reported that the "debate at home over the Iraq war has shifted significantly," a phenomenon that "has strategists in both parties reevaluating their assumptions about how the final year of the Bush presidency and the election to succeed him will play out." The Post suggested that the "evolving public attitudes reflect, or perhaps explain, a turn in Washington as well." The suggestion that Washington might be reacting to subtle changes in public opinion is a curious one; if public sentiment were truly guiding policy, then U.S. troops would have long been on their way out.
12/19/2007
the strong women (and thank god we have them!)
wow! what a day for women online.
lainie, you do me proud. if you haven't read elaine's 'Only women & countries get 'discovered',' do so now. i was getting the baby down (i hope for the night) when flyboy came in and said, 'you need to call elaine.' he was so serious that i was freaking out and thinking something had happened to her. i was going through about a 100 things. i reach her and open with, 'what's wrong!' (i flew to the phone when flyboy told me i needed to call her.)
she said, 'huh?'
turns out flyboy had seen her ' Only women & countries get 'discovered''. i hadn't. i'd been with the baby. so as soon as i knew she was neither hurt nor dying, i told her i'd read it and call right back.
elaine, elaine, you do me proud and shame me.
elaine does curse. not all the time. not like me. but she's not a prude.
when she curses, she's pissed.
(it's work safe - elaine's used '*' in place of some letters.)
so that's the first sign that she's ticked.
i love her opening (it's a comment c.i. made this weekend). it's true. only women and countries are 'discovered.' no 1 ever says it about men unless they're teeny boppers or pin ups. they get older, they get 'respected' and it's not '___ discovered paul newman in ...'
but women aren't people, don't you know, we're objects. and apparently we're nothing unless a man discovers us.
that was the point of c.i.'s remark and elaine quotes c.i. from this weekend and then lets it rip. go elaine.
i'm ticked off and i do know who wrote it.
come on, you know me, i pestered elaine for 20 minutes before she told me who wrote that crap-ass e-mail about elaine and c.i.'s feature.
and she's right, if you're not smart enough to read it, you're not smart enough to criticize it.
can you believe that?
can you believe that some 1 would write 'i heard about' and blah blah blah so let me respond?
what a moron.
flyboy said check out mike so hold up while i go check out mike.
read mike's 'Torture, Dave Lindorff, Dave Zirin' as well.
but it really is stupid for ___ to e-mail and whine about something he hasn't even read (or says he hasn't.) get a life.
what was ___ e-mailing about?
"Ike Turner (Ava and C.I. feature)" - ava and c.i. wrote that sunday. it blows holes in the 'ike needs to be considered for the 'good' things he did' argument. sleazy, piece of trash, good for nothing, piece of scum who beat women.
try to hide that any way you want but that's all he was.
as elaine points out, we both were wanting to write about that piece of scum last week and didn't. we were so glad that jim talked ava and c.i. into tackling it.
and guess what, boys, women feel that way. i heard about it from the women at t's salon last week. t printed up ava and c.i.'s column and has it posted this week because the ike nonsense was such a huge to do last week.
women get it, boys, you are the 1s with a problem.
you are the 1s rushing to defend an abuser.
you are ridiculous and you make yourselves look ridiculous when you defend ike turner.
you also make it very clear to women exactly what you think of us.
in this instance, because you loved ike's guitar playing, that's more important than the fact that he regularly beat up women.
guitar playing? beat up women?
the importance you place on 1 of the 2 sends a message.
maybe you should all just wear a sign that says 'i don't think women are important. i think guitars matter more than women. i will defend a torturer as long as his victims are "just" women'?
maybe you should.
you're disgusting.
you're all disgusting pigs, every 1 of you who defends ike turner.
the fact that you're so shocked and offended by what ava and c.i. wrote explains just how needed it was that they write about it.
remember, women, we're not as important as a guitar.
our battered bodies are less important than a guitar.
well, we're just 'objects' so why the hell not?
i mean a guitar's an object so why shouldn't overgrown boys be able to pick their favorite objects: women or guitars?
i'm sick of the crap.
elaine was pissed and probably wouldn't have written about it but she thinks it will get back to c.i. (we both know c.i. won't read the e-mail and will take the attitude of 'don't bore me with it.') but we think the man who made an ass out of himself might e-mail c.i.
and c.i. knows this guy. so c.i. - who is a very fair person - will spend several days tossing it around and thinking about it.
elaine wrote that as end run around a pig.
she's laid it out very clearly and c.i. (who really will take any criticism offered - negative at least - and explore it to see if it has validity - and i don't mean for an hour, i mean c.i. will review it and review it for days) doesn't need to consider it now.
when ava and c.i. write together or c.i. writes alone, c.i.'s calling on the muses (that's what i say). c.i. is terminally unsuited the common ills. any 1 would tell you that. c.i. does not give quick responses on new topics. c.i. likes to explore it, think about it, weigh it, etc.
even with making mulitple calls in the morning before posting anything, c.i.'s still not ready to let go of it. if you logged into the common ills, you'd find more drafts than posts because that's just c.i.
so when c.i.'s writing for the site, it's (my opinion based on what i've observed), 'i've got to be strong, i've got to hit hard. i've got to do it for ellen and molly who aren't with us now. i've got to do it for all the women who are no longer with us.'
i know that pressure is there. and that c.i. feels it.
we have lost a lot of strong voices and a lot of the women we're left with are useless or making themselves useless. (hint: if you're a woman on the left and you penned an 'i like mike huckabee' piece, you are useless.)
professionally (c.i. doesn't work now, there's no time, iraq's been the focus since 2003), when c.i. creates, it's the same thing there too. c.i. explores and explores and is never ready until everything's been explored. c.i. goes deep.
and yet c.i. will joke and say things like 'i'm shallow.' but c.i. digs in deep professionally.
and now with the online stuff, c.i. has really had to go an entirely different way and find another avenue to judge it by.
(and c.i. hates everything that's gone up. and if you don't get that - and a number of members never do - it's because c.i.'s just not ready to let any of it go. time means it goes up regardless.)
so the judgement is (again, my opinion) did i hit hard? did i raise something important? did i try to use my voice effectively? did i waffle or did i hit hard?
a lot of women aren't hitting hard.
i look at naomi wolf and am shocked and amazed. i've talked about her with c.i. repeatedly trying to figure out what happened?
naomi wolf is on fire and writing amazing stuff these days.
c.i. says it's because she's out in the world. she's going around and talking to people and that's different than just hanging out with your own set. c.i. says it comes from the fact that naomi's interacting and if she were just in d.c. hanging with her friends or whatever she might not grasp how much danger the country's in.
whatever it is, naomi is a brave voice. i liked her early stuff but she started losing me before the pregnancy book. and i honestly didn't think i'd ever be interested in her as a writer again.
but that woman is on fire.
she is just so brave and so brilliant these days that it stuns me.
and that's what we need.
we need to be using our voices like that.
we need to be calling out and we need to be fearless.
we are living scary times and we need to reject the fear.
that's a point i think you can find in another amazing book, susan faludi's the terror dream.
i think there are men who get it, by the way. i listen to michael ratner and michael smith each monday and they get it. but there are so many people who seem to think that if we just get a democrat into the white house, any democrat at all, everything will be great automatically.
that's not going to be enough. that's not enough even if dennis kucinich gets into the white house. (yes, i saw online that his brother passed away. if he has a comment on it, i'll note it. but that's a family issue and i'm not interested in providing links to it. he has my sympathies and unless he speaks of it, i'm not interested in noting it.)
there is so much work that's needed. and an election isn't going to solve it.
there are women who are columnists and still writing like it's 1994. as if an illegal war isn't going on, as if the constitution isn't being violated, as if illegal spying isn't taking place, as if the white house hasn't made torture a policy.
we have strayed so far in this american nightmare of the last 7 years that getting back to where we were (forget fixing things) is going to take a lot of work. just doing that will require more than an election.
and look at jamie leigh jones and tracy barker. two american women went to iraq to work and the state department that is supposed to be overseeing contractors provided no supervision. both women were sexually assaulted. jaime lee jones was gang-raped. the men who assaulted jaime lee and tracy faced on consequences. what the hell does condi rice do besides work out with bully boy?
see that's why we don't need queen bees. we need women in power, yes. but a woman who believes in helping other women, not a woman who just wants a title.
what kind of message does it send that the state department, headed by a woman, doesn't give a damn about what happens to women?
tracy barker was assaulted not by a contractor but by an employee of the state department. and he even admitted to the assault. but he didn't lose his job.
what the hell kind of a department is condi rice running?
and take a look at what both women had to put up with in terms of the work place environment where they were leered at, faced cat calls, porn all over the work place.
and the state department didn't object?
where was the oversight?
that environment should have never been in place. the state department should have seen it (they were over the contractors) and they should have said, 'no, take those pornographic pictures of women having sex with animals off the damn office wall.'
they didn't do that.
was it because they didn't know about it? if so, they weren't doing their jobs.
was it because they didn't care?
wouldn't surprise me. condi doesn't seem to care about much.
maybe she didn't use her power because she didn't want to be a 'drag.' she didn't want to 'spoil the fun.'
what's the point in a woman being in charge if she's not going to stand up for other women?
condi rice should have known what was going on. she should have known and she should have made it clear to every 1 serving under her that it wasn't tolerated.
she obviously didn't do that or contractors wouldn't think they could sexually harass the women they worked with, or that they could post porn in the office or that they could do any number of things that they've done.
jaime leigh might not have been gang-raped if the state department (headed by condi) had done their job and said, 'uh-uh, that's not how you're going to run a work place on the tax payer's dollar. you're going to have to abide the same laws you would in the united states.'
instead no 1 gave a damn. and jaime leigh was gang-raped and you can be sure other women were assaulted and raped as well.
with both women, the response was 'don't talk to any 1 about this.' both women were assaulted and the confined - tracy to her own quarters and jaime leigh was imprisoned in a trailer.
jamie leigh was assaulted so badly that she's had to have surgery. she was talking about how she had to sleep in a sport's bra because of her injuries that still need surgery.
any woman got how badly she must have been hurt.
guys might not have.
but no woman wants to sleep in a bra.
a sports bra is even more restrictive.
it's not like wearing boxers or jockeys to bed.
grab an ace bandage and wrap your penis to your body and then try to sleep if you want to get some idea of what it's like to wear a bra to bed and you're not a woman.
jaime leigh was so brave in her testimony (i believe tracy just had a statement she sent in, i didn't see her testify). my heart really went out to her because she was trying to be so brave and not break down. she did a wonderful job of explaining what had happened to her.
kbr wants her to go to arbitration because arbitration won't include a public record.
kbr should have to go into open court. and congress needs to hold real hearings.
not the 1 thing today.
they need justice in there saying why they didn't pursue charges and they need the state department in there explaining exactly what oversight they were providing. (answer: none.)
we need a full investigation and we need answers. this isn't 'okay' and that the state department thought it was just demonstrates condi rice is a complete fool and provides no leadership at all. this is a disgrace and we need hearings.
the other strong voice today? i read c.i.'s 1st entry and thought, 'wonderful.' then i read the 2nd a little later. i was wrong. the 2nd was the must read. it's 'Abeer.' i read it and i knew that was hell to write. i know where c.i. has to, what place to reach, to tackle those topics and write like that. (when the editorial is not working at all at third and we're all tired, jim will get c.i. in the place and the editorial will end up working. it requires c.i. peeling off every layer and being a naked, exposed, raw nerve. there is no covering, there is no protective layer. it's like opening a vein and letting it bleed.)
so i would really recommend that to you. i know c.i. well enough to know there was an avenue in there hinted at but not taken. so i'd also urge you to check out the third estate sunday review this weekend because, if there's time, i know c.i.'s got another aspect to bring up.
there wasn't time this morning because ava, c.i. and kat had to speak. and c.i. will go so far and only so far when there's a speaking thing after. c.i. will cry and wipe the tears away and keep writing but to go as deep as c.i. would like to on that topic, it would be beyond tears and c.i. would need a few hours to pull it together.
that goes back to my point about c.i. going deep. c.i. couldn't write about jake kovco without going deep. c.i. found out everything about jake kovco (he's the australian soldier killed under mysterious circumstances in iraq - i believe in april 2006) possible. a friend in australia (with a paper that was quoted at length during the kovco inquiry) sent c.i. a photo of jake kovco that got pinned on the wall during the inquiry. c.i. would stare at that photo and try to figure jake out. (this was after i miscarried and i was at c.i.'s forever, if you'll remember.) that smile, jake kovco's smile, finally became the entry point. and once c.i. had an understanding of the smile, c.i. was able to go to the place needed to be the strong voice for jake kovco (and for his family). it's like that with the war resisters. some of them c.i. knows, but some of them c.i. doesn't. it doesn't matter, c.i. has to get a way in, an avenue to understanding. and once it is there, c.i. can write like that. with abeer it was just scary because c.i. really got into what it was like to be a 14-year-old girl and have foreigners stationed in your neighborhood, have them leering at you and touching you, have them watching you, all before the gang-rape and murder took place.
i cry sometimes if i'm writing about something personal. like when my grandmother was sick and i was thinking of how old she is and how i'm the only 1 my age who still has a living grandparent. but that's with people i know. i mean i feel for bilal hussein (the ap photographer wrongly held by the u.s. military) but i'm not trying to comprehend what it must be like and i'm not trying to go into that as deep as i can.
or with jaime leigh. i felt for her today. but i was listening and wondering what would make it into the snapshot. i told flyboy, 'c.i.'s going to cut off right there.' and when we read the snapshot, that was where c.i. cut off. i knew c.i. could only go so far on the ledge with that.
c.i. will go to the edge and beyond time permitting. and i think that's why we all respond to what c.i. writes. it's not written in a detached manner. it's not from a distance far removed. c.i. gets up close and personal. and it really amazes me. and i know how draining it is so it amazes me even more.
whenever i hear neil young's 'i'm living with war' i always think of c.i. because c.i. can't just flip through the paper and write up an entry. c.i. has to live with it.
so those were the moments of bravery today and there's a link in the snapshot to video of jaime leigh's testimony so check that out.
let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'
Wednesday, December 19, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, sexual assault victims of American contractors tell their story, Steven D. Green finally gets a court date, Operation Happy Talk's effects are noticed and more.
Starting with war resistance. We're noting s3nn5 video online, whic is one of the PSAs in support of war resisters in Canada, entitled "Let them stay: US war resisters in Canada (2 of 3)" and we're focused on Ryan Johnson, Jeremy Hinzman and Clifford Cornell.
Ryan Johnson: The contract, when you go to sign your contract, it's about 30 pages long. And you go, 'Okay, I want to flip through this real quick.' And the sergeant that's helping you with your contract and stuff, they say, 'No, you don't have time to read it. I'll just tell you what each page basically says that you're -- or what the contract basically says. And he just goes, 'Well the contract basically says that you're going to be signed up for four years and after that, you have four years of call-back basically -- if there's a military action we can call you back. At the end of the contract, it says that everything in this contract that we have promised, as in the army, 'can be changed at any time without your notice. And, uh, it also states in there that everything I promised is non-negoitable so I have to serve my four years no matter what.
Jeremy Hinzman: I did break a contract. I signed up for four years, I didn't stay for four years. But a contract is two ways. It's two people agreeing to certain terms and conditions and the army didn't live up to it's to its terms and conditions. It-it's not defending the Constitution of the United States . . .
Ryan Johnson: Most units, just like mine, are saying they aren't going to accept any Conscientious Objector claims. You can apply but you won't be granted.
Clifford Cornell: My first sergeant who's my higher supervisor, he got up in front of a formation and basically told us there was like two guys who applied for [CO] status. He got up there and told us those two guys who applied for it and that he didn't want anyone else to apply for it because we was going to Iraq whether we liked it or not.
Ryan Johnson: There is I think when I left there was 15 other people that went AWOL from my unit alone So I mean if you look at how many units are deploying in any given time, if there's five or fifteen or twenty from that unit that go AWOL, that's a lot of people going AWOL. Being AWOL in the States, it's impossible to do and actually like have a real life. I mean you have a choice to going back to jail or living underground for the rest of your life. That's what choices you have unless you go to Canada. That's the only other options that I know of.
The Canadian Parliament has the power to let war resisters stay 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. Both War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist are calling for actions from January 24-26.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes 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, Carla 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 event:
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 15th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.
Turning to the US Senate. Yesterday, Senator Russ Feingold declared, "The issue I heard most about this year as I traveled around the state was anger over the President' war in Iraq and Congress' inability to end it. If those of us in Congree who want to end this war don't take every opportunity to push back against this administration, we will be just as responsible for keeping our troops in Iraq." The statement came on the day the issue of funding the illegal war rose again, "just days after the Senate authorized another $189 billion dollars in war funding," as Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) noted. Feingold proposed an amendment to the bill on funding (link has text and audio):
The amendment is one I have offered before and I will not hesitate, if I must, to offer again and again and again. I'd add the 17 cosponsors is the greatest number we've ever had for this amendment. It requires the President to begin safely redeploying U.S. troops from Iraq within 90 days of enactment, and requires redeployment to be completed within 9 months. At that point, with the bulk of our troops safely out of Iraq, funding for the war would be ended, with four narrow exceptions: providing security for U.S. government personnel and infrastructure; training the Iraqi Security Forces; providing training and equipment to U.S. servicemen and women to ensure their safety and security and conducting targeted operations, limited in duration and scope, against members of al Qaeda and other affiliated international terrorist organizations.
Some of my colleagues complain that we have spent too much time debating Iraq this year. They'd rather be talking about issues. Well, we have a lot of important priorities here, but nothing is more important to me or my constituents than ending this disastrous war. As I do every year, I held a townhall meeting in every county in Wisoncsin this year. That's 72 meetings, for those of you who aren't from the Badger state. I heard a lot from my constituents at these meetings about health care and education. But the number one issue I heard about was foreign affairs, particularly the war in Iraq. Let me tell you, they weren't asking why Congress is spending so much time on this issue. They weren't asking us to give the President more time for his so-called surge. Like Americans all across the country, they want an end to this war and they want to know what's stopping us.
The Senate needs to address the concerns and demands of our constitutents, who more than a year ago voted for a change in congressional leadership in large measure because of the debacle in Iraq. But we have yet to follow through and end this misguided war, before more Americans are injured and killed. And we are about to adjourn for the year and let the war drag on even longer.
As Goodman noted, none of the senators who are campaigning for the Democratic Party's 2008 presidential nomination were present for the vote. (Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd and Barack Obama.) The vote was 24 in favor and 71 opposed with no Republican crossing over to vote in favor. Independent Bernie Sanders voted in favor of the Feingold amendment. Carl Levin, a Democrat, did not. Along with the four Democrats on the campaign trail who didn't vote, Dianne Feinstein also didn't vote. Levin proposed a toothless timetable (non-binding) which would not-demand or require troops out of Iraq in a year. CNN reports that 50 voted in favor and 45 against. Here's how the 'purpose' of the Levin amendment was worded: "To express the sense of Congress on the transition of the missions of United States Forces in Iraq to a more limited set of missions as specified by the President on September 13, 2007." Yes, it really was that weak. With both amendments stripped from the bill, the bill passed. "A critical victory," was how Manu Raju (The Hill) described it, for the White House when the vote was 70 in favor of funding and 25 against leading Raju to observes, "Ultimately, Democratic leaders declined to levy pressure on their caucus to block the latest round of unfettered Iraq money." Goodman noted it is "a $555 billion omnibus spending bill that includes another $70 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan."
What Feingold proposed was not "TROOPS HOME NOW!" and, in fact, isn't significantly different from much of what Clinton, Obama and John Edwards (not a senator anymore, he didn't miss the vote) have pushed at various times (especially Obama and Clinton). Levin's was just a joke. He explained to the Senate that "our amendment expresses the sense of the Congress that we should have a goal for the removal of most of our forces in a reasonable time mainly as a way of telling the Iraqi leaders they must accept responsibility for their own future. Our amendment expresses the sense of the Congress. It is not legally binding, but it puts us on record, and it sends a message. It says it is the sense of" blah, blah, blah, nonsense. It didn't pass. It wouldn't have done a damn thing if it had. He wasted everyone's time with something that didn't take a stand (the amendment itself did not take a stand, I'm not referring to the vote) and something that, in his own words, was "not legally binding" because he wanted to be "on record". He's on record now. As someone who did not vote for Feingold's amendment (which would not have ended the illegal war) and as someone who is so foolish that he grandstands in the Senate with a non-proposal.
Moving over to the US House of Representatives. Today the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security held a hearing on the sexual assaults of Jamie Lee Jone and Tracy Barker while working in Iraq. Barker [PDF format warning] submitted a statement to the committee where she noted that "under the direct supervision of Crystal Daniels and Byron Marcee, I was exposed to physical threats, verabl abuse, and sexually explicit conversations on a daily basis" and "[n]othing was done to resolve the sexually hostile work environment or investigate the complaints" but "[d]espite the promise of confidentiality under the HDRP" ", Kara Hall, a human resources supervisor received several of my complaints and forwarded them to Marcee and Daniels. As a result, Daniels and Marcee retaliated against me by escalating the abusive behavior and screaming at me for filing the formal complaints with human resources. After filing yet another complaint, Wesley Lane, a human resources supervisor, called me in to her office and informed that Daniels and Marcee had filed a report complaining of my job performance. While in Hall's office, I was not permitted to leave or call anyone. Lane followed me into the bathroom and watched me as I urinated. When I asked her why she was doing this she said it was to keep me from calling Houston again, or anyone else, to report the abuse. Hall then instructed me to return to my living container and remain there for three days, I was not permitted to speak with anyone, and if I was seen outside, I would be fired." Iraq or not, US corporations operate under US laws. And what Barker's describing are serious violations. She was moved to the Basra compound where "I was assigned to a shared office space with Sherman Richardson. Richardson had hung pictures of prostitutes and animals having sex with one other on his office walls and he often talked about how he took his Rest and Relaxtion time in Thailand where he would hire prostitutes. Other male employees would visit Richardson in the office to seek information on how to obtain a prostitute while on R&R." Let's be clear that this is paid for with US tax dollars. The work environment that wouldn't be allowed in the US (and shouldn't have been allowed in Iraq) was paid for with US tax dollars. Basra Camp contained no HR personnel and she took her complaints to the camp manager Craig Grabien who 'dealt' with them apparently by sexually harassing Barker "on a daily basis by insisting that I sleep with him because he was camp manager and he could provide benefits in exchange for sexual favors." Complaining to the hotline did not good and, in fact, only caused Grabien to increase his sexual harassment. Barker explains the physical assualt by an employee (still an employee) of the US State Department: "On June 23, 2005, I accompanied U.S. Department of State employee, Ali Mokhtare, to his living quarters to complete a work order for an alleged faulty air conditioner and to discuss employment opportunities within the U.S. State Dept. Once we arrived, Mokhtare said the air conditioner was working fine. I immediately felt uncomfortable expressed that I was going to leave. Mokhtare said he wanted to explain the war to me and a story about a 'Filipino woman.' As Mokhtare began to talk about the war, he poured two drinks of Jack Daniels and Coke and offered me one. I declined but eventually took the drink in my hand anyway. Mokhtare then began to talk about a Filipino woman in Saudi Arabia who was repeatedly raped by a prince, and although she reported it to the police, no one believed her and the prince continued to rape her. Finally, the woman became so distraught she committed suicide by jumping out of a window. In the midst of telling this story, Mokhtare grabbed my breasts and tried to kiss me on the mouth. I screamed 'No!' and escaped Mokhtare's hold and began to run toward the door. Mokhtare grabbed hold of me again, put his hands around my throat and tried to force his lips on my mouth and against the back of my hand; I pushed him away, escaped his hold, and ran from the living quarters. Mokhtare followed after me screaming in Arabic as I ran in the direction of my living quaters." Barker immediately reported the assualt and was told, by Grabien, that the State Dept's Diplomatic Security would investigate. Barker turned over a statement to them and asked for protection but was told by Grabien and the State Dept's Brian Hathaway "to just avoid Mokhtara." Barker explains that when Mokhtare was interviewed, he initally refused to talk but opened up in a second interview with the State Dept's Diplomatic Security: "During the interview, Mokhtare admitted to the agents he inappropriately grabbed my breast and attempted to kiss me. He also admitted to telling me the story of a Filipino woman who was raped by a prince in Saudi Arabia. Mokhtare's story was exactly as I had explaiend to agent Hathaway, he even goes so far as to admit his actions were 'inappropriate' and he 'made a mistake'." He committed assault and he damn well knew better. Barker continues: "According to the agents notes, when they confronted him about an inconsistent statement he made regarding his alcohol consumption he became agitated and angry." Now pay attention because as bad as it all is it just continues. As you pay attention remember that woman, Condi Rice, heads the State Dept. Barker explains that she brought her clothes, as ordered, worn the night of the attack (slacks, a shirt and a vest) so that Hathaway could photograph them and then Grabien stated she had to wear the outfit "the following day . . . so that Hathaway could determine whether it was sexually provocative to men." What the hell kind of a department is Condi Rice mis-running? That's Tracy Barker. Videos of the hearing are here.
Jamie Leigh Jones was gang-raped by employees of Halliburton/KRB and then held in a container to keep her from talking. "I went to support Operation Iraqi Freedom in the Green Zone in Baghdad, Iraq on July 25, 2005. Upon arrival at Camp Hope, I was assigned to an all male barrack." Though she complained, nothing was done, she was verbally harassed. On her fourth day, she was offered, by fellow employees, drinks and one told her not to worry "I saved all my Ruffies for Dubai." Jones, "I thought he was joking and felt safe with my co-workers." She was drugged, she was gang-raped. She complained to KBR and a rape kit was taken. The doctor "confirmed that I had been penetrated both vaginally and anally and that I was, quote: 'quite torn up down there'. She indicated that based upon the damages to my genitalia, it was apparent that I had been raped." Jones had to pause there before continuing, "The KBR security then took me to a trailer and locked me in a room with two armed guards outside my door. I was imprisoned in the trailer for approximately a day. One of the guards finally had mercy and let me use a phone. I called my dad who contacted Congressman Ted Poe who took actions to get me out of the country. I believe he saved my life. I was later interviewed by Halliburton-KBR supervisors and it was made clear to me that I had essentially two choices: '(1) Stay and get over it or (2) Stay with no guarantee of a job in Iraq or Houston.' Because of the severity of my injuries, I elected to go home despite the obvious threat of being fired." In the US, Jones sought treatment, physical and mental, and Halliburton required her to see a doctor whose first question was: "Are you going to sue Halliburton?" Jones explains that when asked that question, she and her mother walked out of the office. In May 2007, the State Department phones to say that there was no rape kit or photographs. When Jones insisted the kit and photos existed, a few things turned up with most of it missing. Jones explains, "I have had reconstructive surgery on my breasts and pectoral muscles due to disfigurement caused by the brutal attack. I am still waiting for a follow up surgery because I am still not back to normal." Jones noted that "there has been no prosecution after two and a half years." Nor did the State Department employee who assaulted Barker get fired. The question goes to Condi Rice who appears either totally ignorant of what's going on in her department or just doesn't care. The Justice Department's response? While the State Dept apparently gives away money with no supervious and isn't concerned about incidents that they are aware of, the Justice Dept is supposed to prosecute assaults. What do they say? They refused to attend the hearings. We're neither quoting from or linking to the nonsense that Brian A. Benczkowski (Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General) sent (via letter) to the committee. Rep John Conyers is the chair of the House Judiciary Committee. He asked, "Does anyone in this room feel it is acceptable for an American citizen like Ms. Jones to be drugged, raped and falsely imprisoned? Does anyone think it is appropriate that almost 2 1/2 years after the incident, there has not been a single prosecution in the case? Does anybody believe it is appropriate that the DOJ victims' rights ombudsman summarily rejected Ms. Jones complaint 6 months ago, and she was not even seen by a federal prosecutor until October? This is no small matter given that there are some 180,00 civilian contractor employees in Iraq, including more than 21,000 Americans, plus additional security contractor employees. And there are other troubling reports of similar sexual assaults against contractor employees." DoJ is clearly not doing their job but, repeating, Rice's department was over the contractors and it's time Rice faced some serious questions about exactly what she sees as women's 'role' in the combat zone because by doing nothing (the two incidents took place on her watch, no doubt many took place on Colin Powell's as well) she sends a message that these assaults are tolerated.
Anna Driver (Reuters) notes Rep Ted Poe stated that, "The individuals who assaulted Jamie must be rounded up and tried. Nonfeasance by civilian contracting companies cannot be tolerated." Driver also notes that Conyers and Hillary Clinton "have called for action".
Staying with sexual violence. March 12, 2006, US soldiers carried out a criminal conspiracy to gang-rape and murder Abeer Qassim Hamza and to murder her parents, Qassim Hamza Raheem and Fakhriya Taha Muhsasen, and her five-year-old sister Hadeel Qassim Hamza. The conspiracy included blaming the War Crimes on 'insurgent.' Jane Fonda has noted (here for video, here for text):
Abeer was a 14-old-girl, living with her family about 50 miles south of Baghdad, trying to grow up as best she could in a country ravaged by violence and war.Until March 12, 2006, when her life was cruelly cut short. On that night, five American soldiers, dressed all in black, allegedly burst into the home where Abeer lived with her family.After spending the evening drinking whiskey mixed with energy drinks and playing cards, the soldiers must have decided to execute the crime they allegedly had been planning for weeks. According to the charges, the men took turns raping 14-year-old Abeer before shooting her. In the next room, her mother, her father, and her five-year-old sister were executed. When the men were done, they drenched the bodies in kerosene and set them on fire.Then, the prosecutors say, they went back to base and grilled up some chicken wings for dinner. It was months before this crime came to light.
.
Robin Morgan has noted, "Abeer means 'fragance of flowers.' She was 14 years old. According to a statement by one of the accused, the soldiers first noticed her at a checkpoint. On March 12, after playing cards while slugging whisky, they canged into civvies and burst into Abeer's home. They killed her mother, father and five-year-old sister and 'took turns' raping Abeer. Finally, according to the statement, they murdered her, drenched the bodies with kerosene, and set them on fire. Then the GIs grilled chicken wings." In the Article 32 hearing in August 2006, Captain Alex Pickands noted of the War Crimes of those then still serving in the military, whose defense tried to say life is hard in Iraq and boring and golly gee, gotta blow off some steam,: "Murder, not war. Rape, not war. That's what we're here talking about today. Not all that business about cold food, checkpoints, personnel assignments. Cold food didn't kill that family. Personnel assignments didn't rape and murder that 14-year-old little girl." Ryan Lenz (AP) notes that four soldiers have been convicted "in one of the war's worst atrocities" and that Steven D. Green, who was not part of the US military when the crimes became known having already discharged out, is now scheduled to be tried on "April 13, 2009, in Paducah, Ky." Lenz notes how long this has dragged on and it has. The US government issued their press release on the arrest of Green July 3, 2006. (Lenz report is also here.)
In some of today's reported violence . . . Well, only one organization really worked on that today. Want to guess which one?
Bombings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that claimed the life of 1 police officer and left three more wounded.
Shootings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a gun battle that left three people not engaged in the battle injured.
Corpses?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse discovered in Baghdad.
Meanwhile, the Center for Constitutional Rights is representing over 250 Iraqi "torture victims". Attorney Susan Burke explained to Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) today:
Well, this is actually a continuation of a lawsuit that we previously filed back in June of 2004. We had brought it as a class action after the leaking of the Taguba Report and after we had been approached by some of the victims of the Abu Ghraib torture.
And one thing I would point out is that this--CACI's conduct in this instance--CACI employees were directly involved in torturing prisoners. This is information that's known. It's information that is known to the Department of Justice. Yet, there have not been any criminal prosecutions. So when you think about the passage of time here, you have to ask: why have there been no criminal prosecutions? It's very troubling, and it's very concerning that our civil action is the only current mechanism for accountability for the private participation in the Abu Ghraib scandal. The other comment I would make is that there's a perception that it was just the Abu Ghraib scandal and that that's the only place where the torture occurred. You know, sadly, that's just not true. The same type of conduct was happening elsewhere. People were being mistreated in other facilities. And again, CACI was not in all of the facilities, but they were in a substantial number, and their employees participated.
Burke was also on to discuss with Goodman the lawsuit against the mercenary company Blackwater:
AMY GOODMAN: Explain this latest suit.
SUSAN BURKE: This is a lawsuit on behalf of the family of Ali Abbas [phon.]. This gentleman was a rug merchant, and he was gunned down for absolutely no reason, leaving behind a twenty-day-old baby daughter and family. It is again another instance in which Blackwater shooters, you know, shot first, asked questions later.
AMY GOODMAN: Explain exactly what you understand transpired on September 9.
SUSAN BURKE: What happened is that Blackwater was driving through an area and began to engage in fire. This particular gentleman was inside his rug store. He had just put his fifteen-year-old younger brother in the cab to go home. Hearing the shooting outside, he walked outside, concerned about his younger brother, because he heard the shots. So he walks out of the rug store and gets shot and killed.
AMY GOODMAN: And how did you learn about this?
SUSAN BURKE: We learned about this from the family members. What happened is, as you know, we have--we represent a fair number of Iraqis in a separate suit, so we do have offices over in Baghdad. We were approached by the family of this victim to try to bring some form of accountability to Blackwater.
On the September 16th slaughter, Democracy Now!, in a broadcast exclusive, also broadcast of footage of one witness being interviewed:
ALI KHALAF SALMAN: [translated] OK, he said: They stopped in a semicircle.
SUSAN BURKE: They…
ALI KHALAF SALMAN: [translated] The cars. One was right here, and one here, one here, one here, in a semicircle.
SUSAN BURKE: So all four were in the actual round part of the square?
ALI KHALAF SALMAN: [translated] Yes, yes. OK, he said: The man in the third car started firing his gun towards this direction, the Yarmouk direction, and he fired three to four shots randomly.
SUSAN BURKE: What did that man look like?
ALI KHALAF SALMAN: [translated] He was big, big mustache.
SUSAN BURKE: Mustache. Strong.
ALI KHALAF SALMAN: [translated] He was white. He said: Actually, he was facing the convoy. When he started shooting, I turned my back to see if there are anybody moved from the traffic towards the--he was trying to make sure that nobody was moving, actually.
SUSAN BURKE: So he turned to see if a movement had provoked the shooting?
ALI KHALAF SALMAN: [translated] Yes, exactly.
SUSAN BURKE: OK.
ALI KHALAF SALMAN: [translated] As you just said, he thought that he was shooting above the car level, but when he turned his face towards traffic, he heard this woman crying, "My son! My son!" And then he ran into that direction, and he saw her son, who was a medical student. He was all covered in blood. He said he went--when he heard the woman crying, he went towards that direction, and he tried to help the medical student who was covered in blood, help him out of the car. But the mother inside was holding tight to her son. And he raised his hand to stop--
SUSAN BURKE: Stop the shooting.
ALI KHALAF SALMAN: [translated] Stop the shooting. He was telling them, "Don't shoot, please." He said, while he raised his hand and asking them not to shoot, this time the man in the fourth car shot the mother dead. A machine gun. He said, the car was number four in line. And then, when the person in car number four, a security man, started shooting, he shot the mother dead. And the cars in front of this car, the civilian cars, actually, they spread around to the sides. I think they were scared.
And he said the doctor's car was an automatic car. Because he died behind the wheel, the car started moving by itself, because it was an automatic car, towards the square. And at this moment, they started shooting the car with big machine guns, and the car exploded.
Finally, Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism notes the effects of Operation Happy Talk. As Iraq has fallen off the radar, surprise, surprise, more people think the illegal war is going well. PEW's summary of the findings:For years, public views of the war in Iraq were increasingly negative and seemingly unlikely to change direction. But as the troop surge resulted in lower levels of violence in Iraq, public perceptions of the war improved markedly. In November, 48% of Americans said things were going very or fairly well in Iraq, up 18 points from February. However, improved public impressions of the Iraq did nothing to lift war support: 54% favored bringing the troops home as soon as possible, a proportion largely unchanged from earlier in the year.
The November 28th "Iraq snapshot" addressed the Project for Excellence in Journalism's [PDF format warning] "Journalists in Iraq: A survey of reporters on the front lines" and noted:In other findings, 62 percent say that their "editors back home" have lost interest in reports of day-to-day violence (no kidding) and the only significant increases have been in reports on contractors (79%) and "U.S. military strategy" (67%). The respondents rated the "Impact on Iraqi civilians" as the most under reported (40%) while the respondents rated "U.S. Military strategy" as the most over reported (29%).When the press loses interest (and when reporters internatlize the tastes of their bosses), reality doesn't stand much of a chance. While the violence didn't disappear, while things are not 'better' and even the myth of the Great Return has fallen apart, how are most Americans supposed to know that when the bulk of All Things Media Big and Small won't cover Iraq?
lainie, you do me proud. if you haven't read elaine's 'Only women & countries get 'discovered',' do so now. i was getting the baby down (i hope for the night) when flyboy came in and said, 'you need to call elaine.' he was so serious that i was freaking out and thinking something had happened to her. i was going through about a 100 things. i reach her and open with, 'what's wrong!' (i flew to the phone when flyboy told me i needed to call her.)
she said, 'huh?'
turns out flyboy had seen her ' Only women & countries get 'discovered''. i hadn't. i'd been with the baby. so as soon as i knew she was neither hurt nor dying, i told her i'd read it and call right back.
elaine, elaine, you do me proud and shame me.
elaine does curse. not all the time. not like me. but she's not a prude.
when she curses, she's pissed.
(it's work safe - elaine's used '*' in place of some letters.)
so that's the first sign that she's ticked.
i love her opening (it's a comment c.i. made this weekend). it's true. only women and countries are 'discovered.' no 1 ever says it about men unless they're teeny boppers or pin ups. they get older, they get 'respected' and it's not '___ discovered paul newman in ...'
but women aren't people, don't you know, we're objects. and apparently we're nothing unless a man discovers us.
that was the point of c.i.'s remark and elaine quotes c.i. from this weekend and then lets it rip. go elaine.
i'm ticked off and i do know who wrote it.
come on, you know me, i pestered elaine for 20 minutes before she told me who wrote that crap-ass e-mail about elaine and c.i.'s feature.
and she's right, if you're not smart enough to read it, you're not smart enough to criticize it.
can you believe that?
can you believe that some 1 would write 'i heard about' and blah blah blah so let me respond?
what a moron.
flyboy said check out mike so hold up while i go check out mike.
read mike's 'Torture, Dave Lindorff, Dave Zirin' as well.
but it really is stupid for ___ to e-mail and whine about something he hasn't even read (or says he hasn't.) get a life.
what was ___ e-mailing about?
"Ike Turner (Ava and C.I. feature)" - ava and c.i. wrote that sunday. it blows holes in the 'ike needs to be considered for the 'good' things he did' argument. sleazy, piece of trash, good for nothing, piece of scum who beat women.
try to hide that any way you want but that's all he was.
as elaine points out, we both were wanting to write about that piece of scum last week and didn't. we were so glad that jim talked ava and c.i. into tackling it.
and guess what, boys, women feel that way. i heard about it from the women at t's salon last week. t printed up ava and c.i.'s column and has it posted this week because the ike nonsense was such a huge to do last week.
women get it, boys, you are the 1s with a problem.
you are the 1s rushing to defend an abuser.
you are ridiculous and you make yourselves look ridiculous when you defend ike turner.
you also make it very clear to women exactly what you think of us.
in this instance, because you loved ike's guitar playing, that's more important than the fact that he regularly beat up women.
guitar playing? beat up women?
the importance you place on 1 of the 2 sends a message.
maybe you should all just wear a sign that says 'i don't think women are important. i think guitars matter more than women. i will defend a torturer as long as his victims are "just" women'?
maybe you should.
you're disgusting.
you're all disgusting pigs, every 1 of you who defends ike turner.
the fact that you're so shocked and offended by what ava and c.i. wrote explains just how needed it was that they write about it.
remember, women, we're not as important as a guitar.
our battered bodies are less important than a guitar.
well, we're just 'objects' so why the hell not?
i mean a guitar's an object so why shouldn't overgrown boys be able to pick their favorite objects: women or guitars?
i'm sick of the crap.
elaine was pissed and probably wouldn't have written about it but she thinks it will get back to c.i. (we both know c.i. won't read the e-mail and will take the attitude of 'don't bore me with it.') but we think the man who made an ass out of himself might e-mail c.i.
and c.i. knows this guy. so c.i. - who is a very fair person - will spend several days tossing it around and thinking about it.
elaine wrote that as end run around a pig.
she's laid it out very clearly and c.i. (who really will take any criticism offered - negative at least - and explore it to see if it has validity - and i don't mean for an hour, i mean c.i. will review it and review it for days) doesn't need to consider it now.
when ava and c.i. write together or c.i. writes alone, c.i.'s calling on the muses (that's what i say). c.i. is terminally unsuited the common ills. any 1 would tell you that. c.i. does not give quick responses on new topics. c.i. likes to explore it, think about it, weigh it, etc.
even with making mulitple calls in the morning before posting anything, c.i.'s still not ready to let go of it. if you logged into the common ills, you'd find more drafts than posts because that's just c.i.
so when c.i.'s writing for the site, it's (my opinion based on what i've observed), 'i've got to be strong, i've got to hit hard. i've got to do it for ellen and molly who aren't with us now. i've got to do it for all the women who are no longer with us.'
i know that pressure is there. and that c.i. feels it.
we have lost a lot of strong voices and a lot of the women we're left with are useless or making themselves useless. (hint: if you're a woman on the left and you penned an 'i like mike huckabee' piece, you are useless.)
professionally (c.i. doesn't work now, there's no time, iraq's been the focus since 2003), when c.i. creates, it's the same thing there too. c.i. explores and explores and is never ready until everything's been explored. c.i. goes deep.
and yet c.i. will joke and say things like 'i'm shallow.' but c.i. digs in deep professionally.
and now with the online stuff, c.i. has really had to go an entirely different way and find another avenue to judge it by.
(and c.i. hates everything that's gone up. and if you don't get that - and a number of members never do - it's because c.i.'s just not ready to let any of it go. time means it goes up regardless.)
so the judgement is (again, my opinion) did i hit hard? did i raise something important? did i try to use my voice effectively? did i waffle or did i hit hard?
a lot of women aren't hitting hard.
i look at naomi wolf and am shocked and amazed. i've talked about her with c.i. repeatedly trying to figure out what happened?
naomi wolf is on fire and writing amazing stuff these days.
c.i. says it's because she's out in the world. she's going around and talking to people and that's different than just hanging out with your own set. c.i. says it comes from the fact that naomi's interacting and if she were just in d.c. hanging with her friends or whatever she might not grasp how much danger the country's in.
whatever it is, naomi is a brave voice. i liked her early stuff but she started losing me before the pregnancy book. and i honestly didn't think i'd ever be interested in her as a writer again.
but that woman is on fire.
she is just so brave and so brilliant these days that it stuns me.
and that's what we need.
we need to be using our voices like that.
we need to be calling out and we need to be fearless.
we are living scary times and we need to reject the fear.
that's a point i think you can find in another amazing book, susan faludi's the terror dream.
i think there are men who get it, by the way. i listen to michael ratner and michael smith each monday and they get it. but there are so many people who seem to think that if we just get a democrat into the white house, any democrat at all, everything will be great automatically.
that's not going to be enough. that's not enough even if dennis kucinich gets into the white house. (yes, i saw online that his brother passed away. if he has a comment on it, i'll note it. but that's a family issue and i'm not interested in providing links to it. he has my sympathies and unless he speaks of it, i'm not interested in noting it.)
there is so much work that's needed. and an election isn't going to solve it.
there are women who are columnists and still writing like it's 1994. as if an illegal war isn't going on, as if the constitution isn't being violated, as if illegal spying isn't taking place, as if the white house hasn't made torture a policy.
we have strayed so far in this american nightmare of the last 7 years that getting back to where we were (forget fixing things) is going to take a lot of work. just doing that will require more than an election.
and look at jamie leigh jones and tracy barker. two american women went to iraq to work and the state department that is supposed to be overseeing contractors provided no supervision. both women were sexually assaulted. jaime lee jones was gang-raped. the men who assaulted jaime lee and tracy faced on consequences. what the hell does condi rice do besides work out with bully boy?
see that's why we don't need queen bees. we need women in power, yes. but a woman who believes in helping other women, not a woman who just wants a title.
what kind of message does it send that the state department, headed by a woman, doesn't give a damn about what happens to women?
tracy barker was assaulted not by a contractor but by an employee of the state department. and he even admitted to the assault. but he didn't lose his job.
what the hell kind of a department is condi rice running?
and take a look at what both women had to put up with in terms of the work place environment where they were leered at, faced cat calls, porn all over the work place.
and the state department didn't object?
where was the oversight?
that environment should have never been in place. the state department should have seen it (they were over the contractors) and they should have said, 'no, take those pornographic pictures of women having sex with animals off the damn office wall.'
they didn't do that.
was it because they didn't know about it? if so, they weren't doing their jobs.
was it because they didn't care?
wouldn't surprise me. condi doesn't seem to care about much.
maybe she didn't use her power because she didn't want to be a 'drag.' she didn't want to 'spoil the fun.'
what's the point in a woman being in charge if she's not going to stand up for other women?
condi rice should have known what was going on. she should have known and she should have made it clear to every 1 serving under her that it wasn't tolerated.
she obviously didn't do that or contractors wouldn't think they could sexually harass the women they worked with, or that they could post porn in the office or that they could do any number of things that they've done.
jaime leigh might not have been gang-raped if the state department (headed by condi) had done their job and said, 'uh-uh, that's not how you're going to run a work place on the tax payer's dollar. you're going to have to abide the same laws you would in the united states.'
instead no 1 gave a damn. and jaime leigh was gang-raped and you can be sure other women were assaulted and raped as well.
with both women, the response was 'don't talk to any 1 about this.' both women were assaulted and the confined - tracy to her own quarters and jaime leigh was imprisoned in a trailer.
jamie leigh was assaulted so badly that she's had to have surgery. she was talking about how she had to sleep in a sport's bra because of her injuries that still need surgery.
any woman got how badly she must have been hurt.
guys might not have.
but no woman wants to sleep in a bra.
a sports bra is even more restrictive.
it's not like wearing boxers or jockeys to bed.
grab an ace bandage and wrap your penis to your body and then try to sleep if you want to get some idea of what it's like to wear a bra to bed and you're not a woman.
jaime leigh was so brave in her testimony (i believe tracy just had a statement she sent in, i didn't see her testify). my heart really went out to her because she was trying to be so brave and not break down. she did a wonderful job of explaining what had happened to her.
kbr wants her to go to arbitration because arbitration won't include a public record.
kbr should have to go into open court. and congress needs to hold real hearings.
not the 1 thing today.
they need justice in there saying why they didn't pursue charges and they need the state department in there explaining exactly what oversight they were providing. (answer: none.)
we need a full investigation and we need answers. this isn't 'okay' and that the state department thought it was just demonstrates condi rice is a complete fool and provides no leadership at all. this is a disgrace and we need hearings.
the other strong voice today? i read c.i.'s 1st entry and thought, 'wonderful.' then i read the 2nd a little later. i was wrong. the 2nd was the must read. it's 'Abeer.' i read it and i knew that was hell to write. i know where c.i. has to, what place to reach, to tackle those topics and write like that. (when the editorial is not working at all at third and we're all tired, jim will get c.i. in the place and the editorial will end up working. it requires c.i. peeling off every layer and being a naked, exposed, raw nerve. there is no covering, there is no protective layer. it's like opening a vein and letting it bleed.)
so i would really recommend that to you. i know c.i. well enough to know there was an avenue in there hinted at but not taken. so i'd also urge you to check out the third estate sunday review this weekend because, if there's time, i know c.i.'s got another aspect to bring up.
there wasn't time this morning because ava, c.i. and kat had to speak. and c.i. will go so far and only so far when there's a speaking thing after. c.i. will cry and wipe the tears away and keep writing but to go as deep as c.i. would like to on that topic, it would be beyond tears and c.i. would need a few hours to pull it together.
that goes back to my point about c.i. going deep. c.i. couldn't write about jake kovco without going deep. c.i. found out everything about jake kovco (he's the australian soldier killed under mysterious circumstances in iraq - i believe in april 2006) possible. a friend in australia (with a paper that was quoted at length during the kovco inquiry) sent c.i. a photo of jake kovco that got pinned on the wall during the inquiry. c.i. would stare at that photo and try to figure jake out. (this was after i miscarried and i was at c.i.'s forever, if you'll remember.) that smile, jake kovco's smile, finally became the entry point. and once c.i. had an understanding of the smile, c.i. was able to go to the place needed to be the strong voice for jake kovco (and for his family). it's like that with the war resisters. some of them c.i. knows, but some of them c.i. doesn't. it doesn't matter, c.i. has to get a way in, an avenue to understanding. and once it is there, c.i. can write like that. with abeer it was just scary because c.i. really got into what it was like to be a 14-year-old girl and have foreigners stationed in your neighborhood, have them leering at you and touching you, have them watching you, all before the gang-rape and murder took place.
i cry sometimes if i'm writing about something personal. like when my grandmother was sick and i was thinking of how old she is and how i'm the only 1 my age who still has a living grandparent. but that's with people i know. i mean i feel for bilal hussein (the ap photographer wrongly held by the u.s. military) but i'm not trying to comprehend what it must be like and i'm not trying to go into that as deep as i can.
or with jaime leigh. i felt for her today. but i was listening and wondering what would make it into the snapshot. i told flyboy, 'c.i.'s going to cut off right there.' and when we read the snapshot, that was where c.i. cut off. i knew c.i. could only go so far on the ledge with that.
c.i. will go to the edge and beyond time permitting. and i think that's why we all respond to what c.i. writes. it's not written in a detached manner. it's not from a distance far removed. c.i. gets up close and personal. and it really amazes me. and i know how draining it is so it amazes me even more.
whenever i hear neil young's 'i'm living with war' i always think of c.i. because c.i. can't just flip through the paper and write up an entry. c.i. has to live with it.
so those were the moments of bravery today and there's a link in the snapshot to video of jaime leigh's testimony so check that out.
let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'
Wednesday, December 19, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, sexual assault victims of American contractors tell their story, Steven D. Green finally gets a court date, Operation Happy Talk's effects are noticed and more.
Starting with war resistance. We're noting s3nn5 video online, whic is one of the PSAs in support of war resisters in Canada, entitled "Let them stay: US war resisters in Canada (2 of 3)" and we're focused on Ryan Johnson, Jeremy Hinzman and Clifford Cornell.
Ryan Johnson: The contract, when you go to sign your contract, it's about 30 pages long. And you go, 'Okay, I want to flip through this real quick.' And the sergeant that's helping you with your contract and stuff, they say, 'No, you don't have time to read it. I'll just tell you what each page basically says that you're -- or what the contract basically says. And he just goes, 'Well the contract basically says that you're going to be signed up for four years and after that, you have four years of call-back basically -- if there's a military action we can call you back. At the end of the contract, it says that everything in this contract that we have promised, as in the army, 'can be changed at any time without your notice. And, uh, it also states in there that everything I promised is non-negoitable so I have to serve my four years no matter what.
Jeremy Hinzman: I did break a contract. I signed up for four years, I didn't stay for four years. But a contract is two ways. It's two people agreeing to certain terms and conditions and the army didn't live up to it's to its terms and conditions. It-it's not defending the Constitution of the United States . . .
Ryan Johnson: Most units, just like mine, are saying they aren't going to accept any Conscientious Objector claims. You can apply but you won't be granted.
Clifford Cornell: My first sergeant who's my higher supervisor, he got up in front of a formation and basically told us there was like two guys who applied for [CO] status. He got up there and told us those two guys who applied for it and that he didn't want anyone else to apply for it because we was going to Iraq whether we liked it or not.
Ryan Johnson: There is I think when I left there was 15 other people that went AWOL from my unit alone So I mean if you look at how many units are deploying in any given time, if there's five or fifteen or twenty from that unit that go AWOL, that's a lot of people going AWOL. Being AWOL in the States, it's impossible to do and actually like have a real life. I mean you have a choice to going back to jail or living underground for the rest of your life. That's what choices you have unless you go to Canada. That's the only other options that I know of.
The Canadian Parliament has the power to let war resisters stay 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. Both War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist are calling for actions from January 24-26.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes 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, Carla 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 event:
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 15th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.
Turning to the US Senate. Yesterday, Senator Russ Feingold declared, "The issue I heard most about this year as I traveled around the state was anger over the President' war in Iraq and Congress' inability to end it. If those of us in Congree who want to end this war don't take every opportunity to push back against this administration, we will be just as responsible for keeping our troops in Iraq." The statement came on the day the issue of funding the illegal war rose again, "just days after the Senate authorized another $189 billion dollars in war funding," as Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) noted. Feingold proposed an amendment to the bill on funding (link has text and audio):
The amendment is one I have offered before and I will not hesitate, if I must, to offer again and again and again. I'd add the 17 cosponsors is the greatest number we've ever had for this amendment. It requires the President to begin safely redeploying U.S. troops from Iraq within 90 days of enactment, and requires redeployment to be completed within 9 months. At that point, with the bulk of our troops safely out of Iraq, funding for the war would be ended, with four narrow exceptions: providing security for U.S. government personnel and infrastructure; training the Iraqi Security Forces; providing training and equipment to U.S. servicemen and women to ensure their safety and security and conducting targeted operations, limited in duration and scope, against members of al Qaeda and other affiliated international terrorist organizations.
Some of my colleagues complain that we have spent too much time debating Iraq this year. They'd rather be talking about issues. Well, we have a lot of important priorities here, but nothing is more important to me or my constituents than ending this disastrous war. As I do every year, I held a townhall meeting in every county in Wisoncsin this year. That's 72 meetings, for those of you who aren't from the Badger state. I heard a lot from my constituents at these meetings about health care and education. But the number one issue I heard about was foreign affairs, particularly the war in Iraq. Let me tell you, they weren't asking why Congress is spending so much time on this issue. They weren't asking us to give the President more time for his so-called surge. Like Americans all across the country, they want an end to this war and they want to know what's stopping us.
The Senate needs to address the concerns and demands of our constitutents, who more than a year ago voted for a change in congressional leadership in large measure because of the debacle in Iraq. But we have yet to follow through and end this misguided war, before more Americans are injured and killed. And we are about to adjourn for the year and let the war drag on even longer.
As Goodman noted, none of the senators who are campaigning for the Democratic Party's 2008 presidential nomination were present for the vote. (Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd and Barack Obama.) The vote was 24 in favor and 71 opposed with no Republican crossing over to vote in favor. Independent Bernie Sanders voted in favor of the Feingold amendment. Carl Levin, a Democrat, did not. Along with the four Democrats on the campaign trail who didn't vote, Dianne Feinstein also didn't vote. Levin proposed a toothless timetable (non-binding) which would not-demand or require troops out of Iraq in a year. CNN reports that 50 voted in favor and 45 against. Here's how the 'purpose' of the Levin amendment was worded: "To express the sense of Congress on the transition of the missions of United States Forces in Iraq to a more limited set of missions as specified by the President on September 13, 2007." Yes, it really was that weak. With both amendments stripped from the bill, the bill passed. "A critical victory," was how Manu Raju (The Hill) described it, for the White House when the vote was 70 in favor of funding and 25 against leading Raju to observes, "Ultimately, Democratic leaders declined to levy pressure on their caucus to block the latest round of unfettered Iraq money." Goodman noted it is "a $555 billion omnibus spending bill that includes another $70 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan."
What Feingold proposed was not "TROOPS HOME NOW!" and, in fact, isn't significantly different from much of what Clinton, Obama and John Edwards (not a senator anymore, he didn't miss the vote) have pushed at various times (especially Obama and Clinton). Levin's was just a joke. He explained to the Senate that "our amendment expresses the sense of the Congress that we should have a goal for the removal of most of our forces in a reasonable time mainly as a way of telling the Iraqi leaders they must accept responsibility for their own future. Our amendment expresses the sense of the Congress. It is not legally binding, but it puts us on record, and it sends a message. It says it is the sense of" blah, blah, blah, nonsense. It didn't pass. It wouldn't have done a damn thing if it had. He wasted everyone's time with something that didn't take a stand (the amendment itself did not take a stand, I'm not referring to the vote) and something that, in his own words, was "not legally binding" because he wanted to be "on record". He's on record now. As someone who did not vote for Feingold's amendment (which would not have ended the illegal war) and as someone who is so foolish that he grandstands in the Senate with a non-proposal.
Moving over to the US House of Representatives. Today the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security held a hearing on the sexual assaults of Jamie Lee Jone and Tracy Barker while working in Iraq. Barker [PDF format warning] submitted a statement to the committee where she noted that "under the direct supervision of Crystal Daniels and Byron Marcee, I was exposed to physical threats, verabl abuse, and sexually explicit conversations on a daily basis" and "[n]othing was done to resolve the sexually hostile work environment or investigate the complaints" but "[d]espite the promise of confidentiality under the HDRP" ", Kara Hall, a human resources supervisor received several of my complaints and forwarded them to Marcee and Daniels. As a result, Daniels and Marcee retaliated against me by escalating the abusive behavior and screaming at me for filing the formal complaints with human resources. After filing yet another complaint, Wesley Lane, a human resources supervisor, called me in to her office and informed that Daniels and Marcee had filed a report complaining of my job performance. While in Hall's office, I was not permitted to leave or call anyone. Lane followed me into the bathroom and watched me as I urinated. When I asked her why she was doing this she said it was to keep me from calling Houston again, or anyone else, to report the abuse. Hall then instructed me to return to my living container and remain there for three days, I was not permitted to speak with anyone, and if I was seen outside, I would be fired." Iraq or not, US corporations operate under US laws. And what Barker's describing are serious violations. She was moved to the Basra compound where "I was assigned to a shared office space with Sherman Richardson. Richardson had hung pictures of prostitutes and animals having sex with one other on his office walls and he often talked about how he took his Rest and Relaxtion time in Thailand where he would hire prostitutes. Other male employees would visit Richardson in the office to seek information on how to obtain a prostitute while on R&R." Let's be clear that this is paid for with US tax dollars. The work environment that wouldn't be allowed in the US (and shouldn't have been allowed in Iraq) was paid for with US tax dollars. Basra Camp contained no HR personnel and she took her complaints to the camp manager Craig Grabien who 'dealt' with them apparently by sexually harassing Barker "on a daily basis by insisting that I sleep with him because he was camp manager and he could provide benefits in exchange for sexual favors." Complaining to the hotline did not good and, in fact, only caused Grabien to increase his sexual harassment. Barker explains the physical assualt by an employee (still an employee) of the US State Department: "On June 23, 2005, I accompanied U.S. Department of State employee, Ali Mokhtare, to his living quarters to complete a work order for an alleged faulty air conditioner and to discuss employment opportunities within the U.S. State Dept. Once we arrived, Mokhtare said the air conditioner was working fine. I immediately felt uncomfortable expressed that I was going to leave. Mokhtare said he wanted to explain the war to me and a story about a 'Filipino woman.' As Mokhtare began to talk about the war, he poured two drinks of Jack Daniels and Coke and offered me one. I declined but eventually took the drink in my hand anyway. Mokhtare then began to talk about a Filipino woman in Saudi Arabia who was repeatedly raped by a prince, and although she reported it to the police, no one believed her and the prince continued to rape her. Finally, the woman became so distraught she committed suicide by jumping out of a window. In the midst of telling this story, Mokhtare grabbed my breasts and tried to kiss me on the mouth. I screamed 'No!' and escaped Mokhtare's hold and began to run toward the door. Mokhtare grabbed hold of me again, put his hands around my throat and tried to force his lips on my mouth and against the back of my hand; I pushed him away, escaped his hold, and ran from the living quarters. Mokhtare followed after me screaming in Arabic as I ran in the direction of my living quaters." Barker immediately reported the assualt and was told, by Grabien, that the State Dept's Diplomatic Security would investigate. Barker turned over a statement to them and asked for protection but was told by Grabien and the State Dept's Brian Hathaway "to just avoid Mokhtara." Barker explains that when Mokhtare was interviewed, he initally refused to talk but opened up in a second interview with the State Dept's Diplomatic Security: "During the interview, Mokhtare admitted to the agents he inappropriately grabbed my breast and attempted to kiss me. He also admitted to telling me the story of a Filipino woman who was raped by a prince in Saudi Arabia. Mokhtare's story was exactly as I had explaiend to agent Hathaway, he even goes so far as to admit his actions were 'inappropriate' and he 'made a mistake'." He committed assault and he damn well knew better. Barker continues: "According to the agents notes, when they confronted him about an inconsistent statement he made regarding his alcohol consumption he became agitated and angry." Now pay attention because as bad as it all is it just continues. As you pay attention remember that woman, Condi Rice, heads the State Dept. Barker explains that she brought her clothes, as ordered, worn the night of the attack (slacks, a shirt and a vest) so that Hathaway could photograph them and then Grabien stated she had to wear the outfit "the following day . . . so that Hathaway could determine whether it was sexually provocative to men." What the hell kind of a department is Condi Rice mis-running? That's Tracy Barker. Videos of the hearing are here.
Jamie Leigh Jones was gang-raped by employees of Halliburton/KRB and then held in a container to keep her from talking. "I went to support Operation Iraqi Freedom in the Green Zone in Baghdad, Iraq on July 25, 2005. Upon arrival at Camp Hope, I was assigned to an all male barrack." Though she complained, nothing was done, she was verbally harassed. On her fourth day, she was offered, by fellow employees, drinks and one told her not to worry "I saved all my Ruffies for Dubai." Jones, "I thought he was joking and felt safe with my co-workers." She was drugged, she was gang-raped. She complained to KBR and a rape kit was taken. The doctor "confirmed that I had been penetrated both vaginally and anally and that I was, quote: 'quite torn up down there'. She indicated that based upon the damages to my genitalia, it was apparent that I had been raped." Jones had to pause there before continuing, "The KBR security then took me to a trailer and locked me in a room with two armed guards outside my door. I was imprisoned in the trailer for approximately a day. One of the guards finally had mercy and let me use a phone. I called my dad who contacted Congressman Ted Poe who took actions to get me out of the country. I believe he saved my life. I was later interviewed by Halliburton-KBR supervisors and it was made clear to me that I had essentially two choices: '(1) Stay and get over it or (2) Stay with no guarantee of a job in Iraq or Houston.' Because of the severity of my injuries, I elected to go home despite the obvious threat of being fired." In the US, Jones sought treatment, physical and mental, and Halliburton required her to see a doctor whose first question was: "Are you going to sue Halliburton?" Jones explains that when asked that question, she and her mother walked out of the office. In May 2007, the State Department phones to say that there was no rape kit or photographs. When Jones insisted the kit and photos existed, a few things turned up with most of it missing. Jones explains, "I have had reconstructive surgery on my breasts and pectoral muscles due to disfigurement caused by the brutal attack. I am still waiting for a follow up surgery because I am still not back to normal." Jones noted that "there has been no prosecution after two and a half years." Nor did the State Department employee who assaulted Barker get fired. The question goes to Condi Rice who appears either totally ignorant of what's going on in her department or just doesn't care. The Justice Department's response? While the State Dept apparently gives away money with no supervious and isn't concerned about incidents that they are aware of, the Justice Dept is supposed to prosecute assaults. What do they say? They refused to attend the hearings. We're neither quoting from or linking to the nonsense that Brian A. Benczkowski (Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General) sent (via letter) to the committee. Rep John Conyers is the chair of the House Judiciary Committee. He asked, "Does anyone in this room feel it is acceptable for an American citizen like Ms. Jones to be drugged, raped and falsely imprisoned? Does anyone think it is appropriate that almost 2 1/2 years after the incident, there has not been a single prosecution in the case? Does anybody believe it is appropriate that the DOJ victims' rights ombudsman summarily rejected Ms. Jones complaint 6 months ago, and she was not even seen by a federal prosecutor until October? This is no small matter given that there are some 180,00 civilian contractor employees in Iraq, including more than 21,000 Americans, plus additional security contractor employees. And there are other troubling reports of similar sexual assaults against contractor employees." DoJ is clearly not doing their job but, repeating, Rice's department was over the contractors and it's time Rice faced some serious questions about exactly what she sees as women's 'role' in the combat zone because by doing nothing (the two incidents took place on her watch, no doubt many took place on Colin Powell's as well) she sends a message that these assaults are tolerated.
Anna Driver (Reuters) notes Rep Ted Poe stated that, "The individuals who assaulted Jamie must be rounded up and tried. Nonfeasance by civilian contracting companies cannot be tolerated." Driver also notes that Conyers and Hillary Clinton "have called for action".
Staying with sexual violence. March 12, 2006, US soldiers carried out a criminal conspiracy to gang-rape and murder Abeer Qassim Hamza and to murder her parents, Qassim Hamza Raheem and Fakhriya Taha Muhsasen, and her five-year-old sister Hadeel Qassim Hamza. The conspiracy included blaming the War Crimes on 'insurgent.' Jane Fonda has noted (here for video, here for text):
Abeer was a 14-old-girl, living with her family about 50 miles south of Baghdad, trying to grow up as best she could in a country ravaged by violence and war.Until March 12, 2006, when her life was cruelly cut short. On that night, five American soldiers, dressed all in black, allegedly burst into the home where Abeer lived with her family.After spending the evening drinking whiskey mixed with energy drinks and playing cards, the soldiers must have decided to execute the crime they allegedly had been planning for weeks. According to the charges, the men took turns raping 14-year-old Abeer before shooting her. In the next room, her mother, her father, and her five-year-old sister were executed. When the men were done, they drenched the bodies in kerosene and set them on fire.Then, the prosecutors say, they went back to base and grilled up some chicken wings for dinner. It was months before this crime came to light.
.
Robin Morgan has noted, "Abeer means 'fragance of flowers.' She was 14 years old. According to a statement by one of the accused, the soldiers first noticed her at a checkpoint. On March 12, after playing cards while slugging whisky, they canged into civvies and burst into Abeer's home. They killed her mother, father and five-year-old sister and 'took turns' raping Abeer. Finally, according to the statement, they murdered her, drenched the bodies with kerosene, and set them on fire. Then the GIs grilled chicken wings." In the Article 32 hearing in August 2006, Captain Alex Pickands noted of the War Crimes of those then still serving in the military, whose defense tried to say life is hard in Iraq and boring and golly gee, gotta blow off some steam,: "Murder, not war. Rape, not war. That's what we're here talking about today. Not all that business about cold food, checkpoints, personnel assignments. Cold food didn't kill that family. Personnel assignments didn't rape and murder that 14-year-old little girl." Ryan Lenz (AP) notes that four soldiers have been convicted "in one of the war's worst atrocities" and that Steven D. Green, who was not part of the US military when the crimes became known having already discharged out, is now scheduled to be tried on "April 13, 2009, in Paducah, Ky." Lenz notes how long this has dragged on and it has. The US government issued their press release on the arrest of Green July 3, 2006. (Lenz report is also here.)
In some of today's reported violence . . . Well, only one organization really worked on that today. Want to guess which one?
Bombings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that claimed the life of 1 police officer and left three more wounded.
Shootings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a gun battle that left three people not engaged in the battle injured.
Corpses?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse discovered in Baghdad.
Meanwhile, the Center for Constitutional Rights is representing over 250 Iraqi "torture victims". Attorney Susan Burke explained to Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) today:
Well, this is actually a continuation of a lawsuit that we previously filed back in June of 2004. We had brought it as a class action after the leaking of the Taguba Report and after we had been approached by some of the victims of the Abu Ghraib torture.
And one thing I would point out is that this--CACI's conduct in this instance--CACI employees were directly involved in torturing prisoners. This is information that's known. It's information that is known to the Department of Justice. Yet, there have not been any criminal prosecutions. So when you think about the passage of time here, you have to ask: why have there been no criminal prosecutions? It's very troubling, and it's very concerning that our civil action is the only current mechanism for accountability for the private participation in the Abu Ghraib scandal. The other comment I would make is that there's a perception that it was just the Abu Ghraib scandal and that that's the only place where the torture occurred. You know, sadly, that's just not true. The same type of conduct was happening elsewhere. People were being mistreated in other facilities. And again, CACI was not in all of the facilities, but they were in a substantial number, and their employees participated.
Burke was also on to discuss with Goodman the lawsuit against the mercenary company Blackwater:
AMY GOODMAN: Explain this latest suit.
SUSAN BURKE: This is a lawsuit on behalf of the family of Ali Abbas [phon.]. This gentleman was a rug merchant, and he was gunned down for absolutely no reason, leaving behind a twenty-day-old baby daughter and family. It is again another instance in which Blackwater shooters, you know, shot first, asked questions later.
AMY GOODMAN: Explain exactly what you understand transpired on September 9.
SUSAN BURKE: What happened is that Blackwater was driving through an area and began to engage in fire. This particular gentleman was inside his rug store. He had just put his fifteen-year-old younger brother in the cab to go home. Hearing the shooting outside, he walked outside, concerned about his younger brother, because he heard the shots. So he walks out of the rug store and gets shot and killed.
AMY GOODMAN: And how did you learn about this?
SUSAN BURKE: We learned about this from the family members. What happened is, as you know, we have--we represent a fair number of Iraqis in a separate suit, so we do have offices over in Baghdad. We were approached by the family of this victim to try to bring some form of accountability to Blackwater.
On the September 16th slaughter, Democracy Now!, in a broadcast exclusive, also broadcast of footage of one witness being interviewed:
ALI KHALAF SALMAN: [translated] OK, he said: They stopped in a semicircle.
SUSAN BURKE: They…
ALI KHALAF SALMAN: [translated] The cars. One was right here, and one here, one here, one here, in a semicircle.
SUSAN BURKE: So all four were in the actual round part of the square?
ALI KHALAF SALMAN: [translated] Yes, yes. OK, he said: The man in the third car started firing his gun towards this direction, the Yarmouk direction, and he fired three to four shots randomly.
SUSAN BURKE: What did that man look like?
ALI KHALAF SALMAN: [translated] He was big, big mustache.
SUSAN BURKE: Mustache. Strong.
ALI KHALAF SALMAN: [translated] He was white. He said: Actually, he was facing the convoy. When he started shooting, I turned my back to see if there are anybody moved from the traffic towards the--he was trying to make sure that nobody was moving, actually.
SUSAN BURKE: So he turned to see if a movement had provoked the shooting?
ALI KHALAF SALMAN: [translated] Yes, exactly.
SUSAN BURKE: OK.
ALI KHALAF SALMAN: [translated] As you just said, he thought that he was shooting above the car level, but when he turned his face towards traffic, he heard this woman crying, "My son! My son!" And then he ran into that direction, and he saw her son, who was a medical student. He was all covered in blood. He said he went--when he heard the woman crying, he went towards that direction, and he tried to help the medical student who was covered in blood, help him out of the car. But the mother inside was holding tight to her son. And he raised his hand to stop--
SUSAN BURKE: Stop the shooting.
ALI KHALAF SALMAN: [translated] Stop the shooting. He was telling them, "Don't shoot, please." He said, while he raised his hand and asking them not to shoot, this time the man in the fourth car shot the mother dead. A machine gun. He said, the car was number four in line. And then, when the person in car number four, a security man, started shooting, he shot the mother dead. And the cars in front of this car, the civilian cars, actually, they spread around to the sides. I think they were scared.
And he said the doctor's car was an automatic car. Because he died behind the wheel, the car started moving by itself, because it was an automatic car, towards the square. And at this moment, they started shooting the car with big machine guns, and the car exploded.
Finally, Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism notes the effects of Operation Happy Talk. As Iraq has fallen off the radar, surprise, surprise, more people think the illegal war is going well. PEW's summary of the findings:For years, public views of the war in Iraq were increasingly negative and seemingly unlikely to change direction. But as the troop surge resulted in lower levels of violence in Iraq, public perceptions of the war improved markedly. In November, 48% of Americans said things were going very or fairly well in Iraq, up 18 points from February. However, improved public impressions of the Iraq did nothing to lift war support: 54% favored bringing the troops home as soon as possible, a proportion largely unchanged from earlier in the year.
The November 28th "Iraq snapshot" addressed the Project for Excellence in Journalism's [PDF format warning] "Journalists in Iraq: A survey of reporters on the front lines" and noted:In other findings, 62 percent say that their "editors back home" have lost interest in reports of day-to-day violence (no kidding) and the only significant increases have been in reports on contractors (79%) and "U.S. military strategy" (67%). The respondents rated the "Impact on Iraqi civilians" as the most under reported (40%) while the respondents rated "U.S. Military strategy" as the most over reported (29%).When the press loses interest (and when reporters internatlize the tastes of their bosses), reality doesn't stand much of a chance. While the violence didn't disappear, while things are not 'better' and even the myth of the Great Return has fallen apart, how are most Americans supposed to know that when the bulk of All Things Media Big and Small won't cover Iraq?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)