hillary's got a plan for afghanistan, where's bambi? oh, i forgot, he never chaired his subcommittee on that. maybe sammy powers and sarah sewell can tutor him at some point. he has a number of creepy losers with him. like timmy roemer - the man apparently born without a nose or is needle-nose a look?
this is from bloomberg news:
Hillary Clinton scored more than just three presidential primary victories this week. She also helped freeze a movement of top Democrats set to call on her to concede to rival Barack Obama.
A group of uncommitted ``superdelegates'' were ready to make a show of support for Obama by trying to pressure Clinton to give up, said Tim Roemer, a former congressman who's rounding up backers for Obama. Now, after her wins in Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island, many will still back Obama without calling on Clinton to quit, he said.
you're surprised by that only if you don't realize how conservative (and ineffective) timmy is. bambi's got a lot of losers in his group.
an e-mail today asked me what the biggest mistake i'd made recently was? i thought about it and thought maybe something with the baby (i am learning as i go here) but then decided, no, it was praising robert parry. as he slimes women over and over to run with his boy posse, i think that's the mistake i regret most. he's a nothing. he'll fade shortly. and it will be his own fault. that's too bad because i did enjoy his books. note the past tense of the verb.
this is from another outlet via cbs news:
Four lonesome television cameramen lounged on folding chairs, read newspapers and idly chatted on cell phones in the sprawling marble lobby of the federal courthouse here, hoping to catch the players in the just-underway trial of former Barack Obama fundraiser Antoin “Tony” Rezko.
The scene was quite a contrast from the circus atmosphere they recalled in the same lobby during the early stages of two other recent high-profile trials -- those of former Illinois Gov. George Ryan and newspaper magnate Conrad Black. In each case, about three times as many TV cameramen jockeyed for position with sound men, photographers and reporters, with another media gaggle waiting outside. “We were tripping all over each other,” one of the cameramen recalled Tuesday, the second day of jury selection in the Rezko trial.
[. . .]
He has pleaded not guilty to charges he solicited campaign cash, including $10,000 for Obama’s 2004 Senate campaign, and bribes in exchange for help doing business with the state of Illinois. Though the trial likely will get more coverage if Obama’s name is invoked as expected, few following the case dispute that, so far at least, the media spotlight on Rezko’s case -- and his relationship with Obama -- has been less than white hot.
[. . .]
In some respects, though, the case is becoming something of a proxy for the intense media-bias battle being waged behind the scenes in Obama’s struggle with Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination.
The trial comes as the national media are increasingly grappling with the question -- raised by everyone from Clinton to media critics and “Saturday Night Live” comedians -- of whether Obama has gotten less press scrutiny.
Though Obama has not been implicated in any wrongdoing in the Rezko case, the trial could yield new details about his ties to the Chicago businessman and political fundraiser who also helped him buy a home. Fresh information about their relationship could trip up Obama in what has been a remarkably rapid ascent in national politics. Or Obama could hurdle it, as he has other controversies.
Much could depend on the tenor and intensity of the media coverage, which likely won’t become clear until opening arguments begin Thursday.
Obama professes to be unconcerned that the trial will reveal anything that could sully his carefully crafted image as a post-Abramoff-era crusader for ethics in government and politics. Still, his campaign sent an aide Monday to monitor the start of the trial.
[ . . .]
In fact, a Nexis search of major world newspapers Tuesday yielded 2,568 hits for the words “Clinton” and “Hsu” versus only 426 for the words “Obama” and “Rezko.” Expanding the search to include all media outlets, the Clinton/Hsu query produced more than 3,000 hits, while Obama/Rezko turned up 1,741.
cute the way bambi's gotten a pass for a decade's old album cover being created.
it's still tony rezko time. this is from mark brown's 'Obama still owes answers on house deal' (chicago sun-times):
This had the effect of allowing his campaign to prepare precise, careful answers, but it also deprived us of the opportunity to ask logical follow-up questions and to press him for clarification. We've been going round and round ever since as our reporters developed their own stories on the Obama-Rezko relationship.
One such follow-up question just occurred to me the other day as I reread Obama's original submission, in which he was asked to explain why the previous owners had dropped their asking price on the house he purchased while Rezko paid full price for the adjoining lot.
"It was our understanding that the owners had received, from another buyer, an offer for $625,000 and that therefore the Rezkos could not have offered or purchased that lot for less," the senator wrote in November 2006.
I must have missed that at the time. Then why, I wonder, did the sellers accept the Rezkos' offer of $625,000 if it only matched the offer they already had on the table? Or was it no longer on the table?
answer the questions, bambi.
while robert parry celebrates womens history month by bashing women, ann lewis offers 'Hillary Celebrates Women's History Month' (hillary blog):
"Women's History Month is a time to reflect on the progress that women have made in our country, and also recognize that the journey is not over," said Hillary Clinton. "During this campaign, I have renewed my commitment to addressing challenges that women and families face across the country. I am honored to have support from so many women in this election, and I will continue to work hard for their votes."
As a lawyer, advocate, First Lady, and senator, Hillary has fought for issues important to women here at home and around the world for decades. Hillary's historic statement at the United Nations Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995 that "women's rights are human rights" still echoes worldwide. As Senator, she enacted legislation to designate the Kate Mullany House, home to one of America's first women labor leaders, a National Historic Site and introduced legislation to create a Women's History Trail in upstate New York, home of the first Women's Rights Convention in Seneca Falls, New York, the launching site of the 72-year struggle for women's suffrage.
Hillary knows that women still earn less than men for doing the same work. That's why she has championed legislation to increase women's economic empowerment, such as the Paycheck Fairness Act, which would help close the pay gap that costs families an average of $4,000 a year. Hillary's legislation will increase penalties for violating the Equal Pay Act, provide women with more information about their rights, and create voluntary guidelines to show employers how to evaluate jobs and eliminate unfair disparities. As First Lady, Hillary worked to expand access to microcredit to help women in developing countries start their own businesses.
Hillary has also fought to ensure that women get to make the most personal of life decisions, and that they have access to the full range of reproductive health care. She spearheaded an effort to provide greater access to family planning, contraception, and full sex education, and waged a three-year, ultimately successful battle to convince the Food and Drug Administration to approve Plan B, emergency contraception, for over-the-counter use. She strongly opposed the nominations of John Roberts and Samuel Alito, calling them the greatest threat to Roe v. Wade in history.
As President, Hillary will continue to champion the causes that she has fought for her whole life, and that matter to women. She'll make a major commitment to early child development programs, including home visiting for all at-risk new moms, expanded quality child care, and guaranteed access to pre-K. She'll enact affordable health care for everyone that will put a priority on making sure families get access to the screenings and prevention initiatives they need to stay healthy, and catch disease early when it does strike. She'll launch a major campaign to recruit and retain excellent teachers, double the college tax credit, and require colleges to lock in tuition rates years in advance so families can plan. She'll set a big goal of making paid parental and caregiving leave available to every parent by 2016; expand the Family and Medical Leave Act to employees of business with 25 employees or more; and make 7 sick days a year available to every full-time worker. And she'll protect Social Security and create 401(k)s with a generous federal match for every worker to ensure that families have a secure retirement.
let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:
Thursday, March 6, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, two bombings in Baghdad result in mass deaths, in the US Gary Ackerman attempts to tutor the adminstration on the Constitution and why it matters while Barbara Lee focuses on the issue of permanent bases, and more.
Starting with war resistance. IVAW chair Camilo Mejia told his story in Road from Ar Ramadi: The Private Rebellion of Staff Sergeant Mejia. He is the first Iraq War veteran to refuse to continue serving in the illegal war. Frank Houston (Miami New Times) notes that Querido Camilo (Dear Camilo) plays tonight (9:15 pm at Bill Cosford Cinema, University of Miami) and tomorrow (9:15 pm at Regal Cinemas South Beach) as part of the Miami International Film Festival and notes, "Querido Camilo tells Mejia's story from the perspective of friends and family members, sketching in his background with snapshots, interviews, and narrated letters that begin in 1995, when Mejia arrived in the United States from Nicaragua. 'I thought it would be more fun, more beautiful. But it's really very different,' Mejia says of the United States in an interview with filmmakers Julio Molina and Daniel Ross Mix. They explore military enlistment as a last resort for the working class, especially immigrants."
Agustin Aguayo is another war resister who served in Iraq and today Aguayo and his wife Helga Aguayo will be speaking at UCLA Riverside, in the Interdisciplinary Building at 6:00 pm while yesterday he took part in a debate on the illegal war at Paso Robles High School. Amber Lee (KSBY -- link has text and video) reports that it is "the second year in a row" that the school has "decided to hold a war debate forum to give students the opportunity to decide about the military." Aguayo explains, "You know you can't really tell anyone what to do but you can share some knowledge with them."
Meanwhile Americans Against the War-France announces their support for the US war resisters in Canada. War resisters who went to Canada need the coverage right now. They were dealt a serious set-back when the Canadian Supreme Court refused to hear the appeals of Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey. Today, Canada's Parliament remaining the best hope for safe harbor war resisters have, you can make your voice heard by the Canadian parliament which has the ability to pass legislation to grant war resisters the right to remain in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (http://us.f366.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (http://us.f366.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (http://us.f366.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=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. That is the sort of thing that should receive attention but instead it's ignored.There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).Meanwhile IVAW has a DC action this month: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 & AfghanistanMarch 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation. Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." IVAW's co-chair Adam Kokesh will, of course, be participating and he explains why at his site, "But out of a strong sense of duty, some of us are trying to put our experiences to use for a good cause. Some of us couldn't live with ourselves if weren't doing everything we could to bring our brothers and sisters home as soon as possible. The environment may be unking, but that is why I will be testifying to shooting at civilians as a result of changing Rules of Engagement, abuse of detainees, and desecration of Iraqi bodies. It won't be easy but it must be done. Some of the stories are things that are difficult to admit that I was a part of, but if one more veteran realizes that they are not alone because of my testimony it will be worth it." The hearings will be broadcast throughout at the Iraq Veterans Against the War home page an on KPFA March 14th and 16th with Aimee Allison (co-host of the station's The Morning Show and co-author with David Solnit of Army Of None) and Aaron Glantz hosting and the KPFA live stream will also be available at Glantz' War Comes Home.
Congress held several hearings today and we're noting two. Background for the first, Reuters reported this morning, "The U.S. military has authority to conduct combat operations in Iraq beyond the end of this year, even though a United Nations mandate for force ends then, a State Department official said on Wednesday. David Satterfield, the State Department's coordinator for Iraq, said Congress had authorized U.S. combat in Iraq back in 2002, and the Bush administration did not believe it needed to seek 'explicit additional authorization' from Congress for U.S. combat beyond the end of this year." Karen DeYoung (Washington Post) reported that "[t]he Bush administration yesterday adavanced a new argument for why it does not require congressional approval to strike a long-term security agreement with Iraq, stating that Congress had already endorsed such an initiative through its 2002 resolution . . . Rep. Gary L. Ackerman (D-N.Y.), whose questions at a House hearing Tuesday elicted the administration statement, described it as an 'open-ended, never-ending authority for the administration to be at war in Iraq forever with no limitations.' The conditions of 2002 no longer exist, he said." This afternoon the US House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on Middle East and South Asia held a hearing that David Satterfield again showed up for (but couldn't really answer anymore than on Tuesday) as did Mary Beth Long the Asst. Secretary of Defense for International Affairs.
Satterfield attempted repeatedly to claim everything was a hypothetical and refuse to answer. A lively exchange took place between Gary Ackerman and Satterield. Asked specific questions, Satterfield declared, "I will respond more formally to that question subsequent to this hearing" leading Ackerman to ask, "When will we hold that hearing?" At another point Satterfield attempted to hide by declaring, "I'm not a constitutional expert" leading Ackerman to respond, "Neither is anyone else" in the administration "apparently."
The basic principles here (outlined many times before) is whether or not Bully Boy and Nouri al-Maliki can enter into a treaty without Congressional/Parliamentary approval. The constitutions for both the United States and Iraq say "NO!" But that hasn't stopped the White House from attempting to circumvent the US Constitution. As Ackerman noted when Satterfield repeatedly declared questions "hypotheticals," "The Constitution is a document. It is not a hypothetical." Her futher noted, "The problem with the administration is that it thinks the Constituion is optional." Ackerman noted that everything was undefined -- now and in the lead-up to the illegal war. He noted that now Iraq was apparently a 'threat' to the US in some of the vague responses from Satterfield and that "threat" seems to change from moment to moment leading Satterfield to snap "No, Mister Chairman," the administration has clearly defined threats. Ackerman asked, "Is it this adminstration's belief that you have ongoing authorization in perpetuity?" and "Is Iraq about to attack the United States?" Ackerman noted that it appeared the White House had redefined the mission in Iraq so that "as long as there is trouble in Iraq" the US must remain in "a never ending process".
As the committee told Sattefield, it appeared he arrived with an attitude of he would talk about what he wanted to and not answer the questions posed. In a milder but still comical moment, Mary Beth Long attempted to compare the agreement Bully Boy and al-Maliki are trying to impose with agreements the US has with Belize. Bill Delahunt noted that nothing with Belize talks "about search and destroy actions" such as what takes place in Iraq and Long had to admit that they didn't. US House Rep Rosa DeLauro was brought into the meeting with the approval of other committee members (she's not a member of the subcommitte) and she noted that this wasn't a "typical" SOFA agreement and that "we should not rush to approve" it, that it is in the best interests of both countries not to rush. As Satterfield continued to obsfucate, DeLauro noted that, "We're not going to get any straight answers on this." While Rep Bill Delahunt had noted earlier -- when Satterfield again attempted to propose a closed door briefing -- "The American people deserve to hear what you have to say." The hearing ended with Ackerman having extracted the promise that Satterfield would have answers to the questions asked no later than three p.m. Friday.
This morning the Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations of the House Committee on Appropriations met. Early on Nita M. Lowery, the chair, noted the ongoing "attacks on doctors, engineers and technocrats" in Iraq and how these were "the very people needed to run the country." They were hearing the testimony of John Negroponte, the Deputy Secretary of State. Or what passed for it. He had no answers. But he did agree with Lowrey that Jordan was an ally of the US. He had no answer to her question about what happens "when the force levels" in Iraq "drop to pre-surge levels? Can the areas be held?" He referred that to David Petraeus April dog & pony show. "What percent" of areas "are led by the Iraqi forces and not US troops" was another answer Lowrey wanted. He hedged, she repeated the question. "I don't know the answer to that question," Negroponte said. "But what I would say about this is that Iraqi forces are becoming more capable whether or not they can lead operations. I think it is important that they have an increased capacity." He thinks that's important? They're "becoming more capable"? Five years into the illegal war? After training seriously started in 2004? Lowrey noted that it was "a major disappointment that we're not seeing a transfer from US forces to the Iraqis". As for reducing US forces in Iraq, Negroponte stated "That is the intent."
We are short on time so we're jumping to when Rep Barbara Lee joined the hearing and questioned Negroponte. She noted the nearly 4,000 US forces dead in the illegal war, the wounded and "the countless Iraqi civilians" as well as the fact that the Iraq War has "created a generation of future enemies" and "the $500 billion the American taxpayers have already spent on this occupation" when money is needed at home. Then she noted Bully Boy's signing statements and how "on six occassions now, the president has signed legislation that prevents permanent military bases in Iraq" but then come the signing statements. "How successful," Lee wondered, "is your department's diplomatic process" with that going on and "How can you communicate then that the US has no interest in permanent bases?"
Negroponte: We don't seek permanent bases and I think we've been clear about that all along.
Lee: Then why would the president issue a signing statement taking that out of the defense authorization.
Negroponte maintained "I know" that permanent bases are not sought. Lee brought up the treaty that Bully Boy is trying to force through and bypass Congress and that there are details in the proposed SOFA, "I believe there are plans to exempt civilian contractors from prosecution under Iraqi law so there's more to it than standard SOFA presence."
Negroponte agreed: "You're right. There will be included in these discussions that certain types of immunities and legal exemptions be granted for contractors who provide security." Lee returned to the issue of premanent bases to get him on record again that there were no plans for them.
Lee: So you can say that you do not believe that the adminstration, that their intent is to build permanent bases in Iraq.
Negroponte: We do not seek permanent military bases in Iraq.
Lee: Well I'll be sure to let the president know that.
Turning to some of today's violence . . .
Bombings?
Michael Holden (Reuters) reports that 55 people are dead from two Baghdad bombings "within a few minutes of each other in a crowded Baghdad shopping area". CBS and AP estimate 130 people were wounded and explains "Many of the victims were teens or young adults, and four were women, police and officials at three hospitals said." Borzou Daragahi (Los Angeles Times) quotes eye witness Kareem Abdullah, "I ran outside to see what was going on, only to have the second blast going off. I could see fire and smoke. I saw people thrown to the ground. I couldn't tell if they were unconscious or dead." CNN states it was a bombing and then "a sucide bomber" exploding immediately after. Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that as well (a bombing followed by "suicide bomber" and adds a Baghdad bombing this morning that "hit a civilian Kia minibus" resulted in 1 death and five people wounded, a Diyala Province roadside bombing that claimed the life of 1 police officer and left four Iraqi soldiers wounded and a Mosul car bombing that wounded four people. Reuters notes a Hilla minibus bombing that left two people wounded.
Shootings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a police officer was shot dead "in downtown old Basra city".
Corpses?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses discovered in Baghdad, 1 corpse was discovered in Arbil and a woman's corpse was discovered outside Basra. Reuters notes that yesterday 3 corpses were discovered in Mosul.
Rosa DeLauro was brought on -- with committe approval "Clearly this is much more than the typical staus force agreement and we should not rush to approve" this "it is in both of our nation's interests"
Turning to US presidential elections. Glen Ford (Black Agenda Report and link has text and audio) observes, "There was only a remnant of a movement left in the United States, before Barack Obama's phenomenal rise. Black and white progressives claim they are prepared to resume agitation after Obama's election -- that they will rev up the movement once again if they discover the new president turns out to be what he has repeatedly promised to be: a corporate Democrat committed to imperial policies abroad, who shuns any analysis or demand that does not conform to his own 'race neutral' -- in practice, 'race blind' -- domestic policies. If progressives truly believe they can turn mass, grassroots politics on and off, like a switch, they are delusional. Large groups of human beings don't act that way. Barack Obama's honeymoon will surely last for years, no matter what crises he mishandles or provokes. Blacks and progressives have neutered themselves." Meanwhile Kimberly Wilder (On the Wilder Side) posts the results for the Massachusetts Green primary (held Super Duper Tuesday) and the results are Ralph Nader with 744 votes, Cynthia McKinney with 474 votes, Write-ins with 273, No Preference with 194, Kat Swift with 60 votes, Jared Ball with 42 votes, Kent Mesplay with 39 votes and Elaine Brown with 38 votes. Both Ball and Brown dropped out of the race before the primary last month. On Tuesday, Cynthia McKinney's campaign site notes, Minnesota's Green Party held a straw poll at their caucus and "McKinney led the state's straw polling with 62% of the votes, with 50 out of 67 senate districts reporting." Indybay Independent Media notes that McKinney will take part in an Oakland, California event tonight, Speaking Fierce ("An Evening of Art, Spoken Word, Humor and Music, Celebrate International Women's Day") starting at seven tonight, First Congregational Church (2501 Harrison St at 27th). Meanwhile Alex Domingos (The Retriever Weekly) weighs Barack Obama's campaign and feels it comes up DLC and so concludes:
Cynthia McKinney is the first African American female congresswomen elected . . . [from] Georgia and an ex-Democrat running for the Green Party. As a six-term member of congress she amassed a consistent voting record. She voted against the Iraq War, but more importantly voted against the Gulf War in 1991. It's not enough to just be against the Iraq War, meaningful change is a candidate against all wars of imperialism. She has also voted against funding the war despite the false assertions by other Democrats that somehow that would translate to troops with no armor or weapons in battle. McKinney introduced articles for impeachment against George Bush and passed legislation preventing the sale of weapons to human right abusers. Isn't that change you can believe in?"
As noted Ralph Nader won the Mass Green Party primary. Nader is not campaigning for the national Green Party nomination. [See discussion here.] Whitney Zack writes the Salt Lake Tribune, "As a pro-peace voter, I am delighted that Ralph Nader is running for president as an independent. Sens. Clinton, Obama and McCain all voted to fund the occupation and war in Iraq. Nader has consistently opposed the war and the waste of our tax dollars there. Pro-peace voters should not be fooled by Barack Obama. Since becoming a senator in 2005, he has voted to approve every war appropriation the Republicans have requested." Marissa Babin (The Harvard Independent) observes, "Nader's presidential bids have drawn attention to the problems of third-party candidates in a plurality voting system. Instant runoff voting provides citizens with more choices than plurality voting and is more efficient than two-round elections. Instead of criticizing Nader's decision to run, the American people should take a closer look at how our two-party system restricts voters' options and hinders democracy. American should give instant runoff voting a chance." Ralph Nader announced his choice of a running mate last week: Matt Gonzalez. Luke Thomas (Fog City Journal) reports Gonzalez has left the Green Party due to potential ballot issues across the country and Gonzales states, "I have enormous respect for the Greens but I don't want to create additional hurdles for the campaign by remaining in the party. I expect to work in tandem with future Green campaigns, and remain committed to alternatives to the two-party system." At the Nader 2008 Blog the campaign announces donations of $300,000 in approximately one month and the goal of raising $10 million in 2008 while explaining the campaign is: "To give the American people a choice. For single payer. For cutting the bloated military budget. For solar energy first, not nuclear power. For reversing U.S. policy in the Middle East. For implementing a broad progressive agenda." Still on US presidential politics, the all time embarrasment Paul Rogat Loeb has the nerve to show up (at Common Dreams -- aka No Woman Left Unstoned) today to ask "Did Clinton Win Ohio on a Lie?" Paul's ready to suck up every word he can from War Hawk Stephen Harper because all Ugly Paul has to offer is LIES. As Ruth pointed out Monday, Liar Loeb showed up on Uprising Radio to lie because that's all he has to offer. He claimed he was a supporter of John Edwards. That was the 'trick' (try "deciet") he used to pimp Barack. He was, in fact, a Barack Obama supporter from the start as well as a John Edwards supporter. He lied. He always lies. Meanwhile Walter Shapiro (Salon) and Ken Silverstein (Harper's magazine) both explain why the Democratic primaries should continue and the party and the country is not on the verge of collapse simply because the race continues. All the Nervous Nells out there need to take a deep breath and grasp that (a) the race continues and (b) efforts to stop the race from continuing are no different than efforts to stop the count in Florida 2000. Since winning Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island on Tuesday night, Hillary Clinton's campaign has raised four million dollars. Today the Clinton campaign issued a press release noting: "Senator Obama lost Ohio and Texas because voters had doubts about his ability to serve as Commander-in-chief and steward of the economy. But instead of addressing those concerns, how is Senator Obama responding? By attacking Senator Clinton. With one of his top foreign policy advisers acknowledging yesterday that he is not ready to take the 3 am call and one of his principal supporters in Texas unable to name a single legislative accomplishment, Senator Obama's time would be better spent making the case for why he can do the most important job in the world just three years out of the stae senate. Sen. Obama's decision to go explicitly negative suggests that he is unable to make an affirmative case for his candidacy beyond ad hominem attacks. Why isn't he discussing the hearings that he held on the Foreign Affairs subcommittee that he chairs? Why isn't he talking about his travel through Latin America? Why isn't he briefing the public on his comprehensive plan to address the foreclosure crisis now? Why isn't he stumping on his universal plan health care plan? Because he can't and so he is advancing a campaign strategy premised on process and personal attacks."
3/06/2008
3/05/2008
some realities
The Red States: The central strategic argument of the Obama campaign is flawed. Senator Obama argues that his success in Democratic primary contests held in long-time Red States means he will carry those states in a general election. In reality, there are no "Red States" in a Democratic primary -- there are only Democratic voters who live in Republican states and represent a small percentage of the general election population.
Of the eleven core Republican states that have gone to the polls, Sen. Obama has won ten: Utah, Idaho, Nebraska, North Dakota, Alabama, Alaska, Kansas, South Carolina, Georgia, and Louisiana. John Kerry lost each of these states by fifteen points or more.
The last time a Democratic nominee won Utah, Idaho, Nebraska, North Dakota, Kansas, and Alaska in the general election was 1964.
Even if Obama is "transcendent," as his campaign has argued, the historic electoral trends and the current political environment suggest that translating those primary wins into November success will be close to impossible.
In short: Hillary is better positioned to carry the battle ground states that Democrats need to win in November and Obama’s victories in deep red states do not .
that's from harold ickes and mark penn's 'The Path to the Presidency' (bloghillary at hillaryclinton.com) and i wanted to note that for a number of reasons including that it offers some basic realities. there's also the fact that i (barely) know harold. if i saw him across a room, i would walk over and say 'hello' because i know him (loosely) for years and years via c.i. mark penn, i do not know. but he's the other reason i wanted to note the above.
if you're a regular reader, you know i was in public relations. you know i made my money and got the hell out. so i've found it very interesting to hear all this talk (especially at the useless nation magazine) about how mark penn was satan incarnate. i didn't work on government projects and mainly worked on products. (a brief period, when i lived in california, was on entertainment). so i've been working all my contacts from that other life to find out what is the deal with mark penn?
what i've heard from people i trust is that (a) he's not evil. his company has worked with clients that i wouldn't if i were still in business. big deal. an argument can be made that some of the food products i worked on contributed to the obesity of america. public relations is public relations and we each pick what we're going to handle and what we aren't. sometimes we take accounts to pay the bills. i do not support some of the work that penn's firm has done but i was in the field and know it's not as simple as panhandle media keeps making it out to be.
i heard glowing reports about mark penn's kindness (that's men and women). he's some 1 who is said to be generous with compliments to people at other agencies. not in a 'raid' them way because at least 2 people telling me about that part of penn run their own agencies. there was no ulterior benefit to penn praising some work that they had done.
in public relations, a lot of people do not go out of their way to praise the competition. public relations is all about illusion. you're making something desirable. you have to sell yourself as well to stay in business - make yourself the 1 to go to. as a result, there's not a lot of back slapping and praise as a rule in the business from outside any agency.
my chief concern was did penn's agency work on selling the illegal war? not that any 1 i spoke with knew. the agency - not penn - had a business relationship with blackwater. that mercenary company is better known today than when the contract was signed. i'm really not sure that many p.r. companies would have turned it down. some would have on principle (if i were still working, i would have). but the fact of the matter is that they were called 'contractors' not just by the press but also by the people. the shift to mercenaries (which is what they are) has been a public awakening for many.
so mark penn's in p.r. and has been made out to be satan. that's not the story i got back from friends still in the industry.
i was waiting on 1 more call before noting that here. (a call from a trusted friend whose friendship goes back many years.) that came this afternoon and i saw the above and thought it was the perfect time to note it.
if the nation magazine or democracy now wants to play offended and claim that mark penn's prolonged the illegal war, they might need to 1st check out their own actions because they haven't done anything to stop the illegal war in years.
it was c.i. writing at the common ills that called out the myth of the great return at the start of november, all through november and in december. where was the nation magazine? silent. where was democracy now? silent. as c.i. pointed out around thanksgiving (either right before or right after) the myth was effecting opinion on the illegal war and the polls were showing that. but democracy now and the nation couldn't be bothered with addressing those lies. so i think it's a bit much for them to hop on their huffy bikes over mark penn.
1 of the reasons i started my own p.r. business was because i didn't want to be told what kind of accounts i had to take. we did well more often than not. but there were many times when i would worry in the early years that i'd made a big mistake. i look at this differently than the likes of panhandle media which begs for money. when you actually have to make money, when you're responsible for paying people and they and their families are depending on whether or not the business stays afloat, there's a difference - a purity level that you may not be able to maintain that lives up to the 'noble' principles of panhandle media.
i turned down my share of accounts. but there were times when i was tempted. i wouldn't have represented blackwater. but not because of panhandle media which did a really poor job on blackwater. (if you'll remember, there was the period where they couldn't decide if blackwater was a good or bad thing.) i would have turned them down because i'd heard about them from c.i. but i'm fully aware that there was what i'll call confusion over them in real time and i'm not going to slam an agency for 1 account.
especially when the other campaign gets a pass. david axlerod is called obama's 'karl rove' and we're supposed to love that. our own karl rove! oh goody! that's what i always wanted for the democratic party, for them to stoop to the g.o.p.'s level.
(that was sarcasm.)
i'm really surprised harold ickes is with hillary's campaign because i really thought he was in pursue your own dream time. i'm not insulting him for that. (i'm there myself.) the fact that he's gone to work on hillary's campaign says a lot.
and the points they are making in the post above are solid 1s.
at 1 point, before becoming dnc chair, howard dean (and others) were floating a method by which dems could win a national presidential election by avoiding completely the states that tend to go republican every race. that was a strategy that was supposed to be considered.
when he became dnc chair, he said (as he had in his presidential campaign) that he wanted to make every state competative and i'm all for that. but i also think we use our pre-existing knowledge.
with the work of howard dean and others, we may see more states turn democratic this year. that would be great. but we need to be looking at the states that vote democratic in the past. we should be seeing who can carry the states that give the electoral college wins. that's the point ickes and penn are making and it's 1 to remember. not the smoke & mirrors about bambi's supposed huge turnout.
'he's packing them in at rallies!' is always the cry. but that doesn't translate into votes which means we need to seriously wonder at some point whether some of the crowds he pulls in at rallies (but not in the voting booths) are the result of some sort of circus-like attraction?
we're supposedly wanting to see a non-republican in the white house, we're not trying to pick a candidate who can spearhead national tent revival tours for the next 4 years. it's something to remember.
let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'
Wednesday, March 5, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the White House makes a presidential endorsement and then adds a slap, Senator Crazy Goes To Baghdad underwhelmed but it's gearing up for a sequel, the US military acknowledges that 'maybe' there's a ransom involved in the kidnapping of an Archbishop, Hillary Clinton wins primaries in Rhode Island, Ohio and California, and more.
Starting with war resistance. Alexis Alexander tells Rebekah Dillon (Ithica Times), "The peace movement needs to team closely with G.I. war resisters and support them in getting their stories out to the general public." Alexander and several other voices of resistance Dillon speaks with are correct on many points (wrong? whining about a non-existant draft is just wasting everyone's time) but Alexander's point and the others go to the media and no one makes that connection in the article. Alexander rightly states that the peace movement needs to work on getting the stories of war resisters out. But why do they need to work on that?
Because the stories are important, yes. But anyone paying attention in 2007 saw the AP, Reuters and many daily papers (some national, some regional) as well as many TV programs (national like Nightline, as well as regional) cover stories. Where was the coverage not coming from? Take Ehren Watada who is the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy to the Iraq War. Even MTV covered it. (And the coverage did have an effect.) But where was Panhandle Media? CNN covered it, where was Panhandle Media?
It's a question people need to be asking. When CNN covered it on one of their program, they had on three guests. One was a CO, one was Mommy's Pantyhose (spewing his usual hate) and the third? Who was the third guest, brought on to discuss this important issue, does anyone remember? It was Amy Goodman.
CNN was covering it because the court-martial was gearing up and Pacifica's Amy Goodman who has an hour program Monday through Friday entitled Democracy Now! was brought on to CNN as a guest to discuss Watada. (Paula Zahn also featured Watada himself in a separate segment that broadcast.) Wow. That might be a clue that the story is important. Certainly Aaron Glantz was in Tacoma before the court-martial started and reporting. But where was Amy Goodman? Not only did she not go to Washington for the court-martial (which ended in a mistrial over the objection of defense attorneys), she wasn't interested.
Now when Sarah Olson was pimped as the story of the Watada court-martial (by Norman Solomon and everyone else including Phil Donahue -- who did not know the basics about Watada as evidenced by that embarrassing column he wrote where he seemed to think Watada had gone AWOL -- Watada reported for duty every day at the base -- something he continues to do), Goody could gas bag with the best of them. Olson MIGHT have to testify! That was a story. When Olson didn't have to testify, it was the end of the interest in the leadup to the court-martial. After it was over (it ran three days -- Monday through Wednesday), Goody would air a report Truthout did on Thursday. After it was over. Olson was not the story. Olson wasn't even a human interest story. She was a reporter who wouldn't say whether she would testify or not but wanted the whole damn world to be up in arms that she was even asked to testify. She wanted the world to stand up while she refused to take a stand herself (by saying whether or not she'd testify).
Now that was Ehren Watada, one of the best known war resisters. And Democracy Now! wasn't interested in his court-martial. Amy Goodman was more than happy to go on CNN and talk about Watada . . . while not covering his court-martial on her own program. Do you see the problem or are we all going to continue to pretend it didn't happen? James Burmeister self-checked out in 2007 and went to Canada. In June and July he was telling Canadian media about the "kill teams" -- how the US military had teams whose job it was to lay out US property in the open in Iraq for the purpose of shooting Iraqis who picked any of it up. In the fall the Washington Post would report on that story. Panhandle Media could have had the story if they'd bothered to cover war resisters. Burmeister was not covered. Eli Israel, while stationed in Iraq, refused to serve. That's a 2007 story. Where was Panhandle Media's coverage of that? He needed coverage, the military was threatening to come down hard on him. He was refusing while in Iraq. It was news. But not to Panhandle Media. A large number of war resisters stepped out in 2007 and only In These Times covered them. Not The Nation, not The Progressive and certainly not Democracy Now! A viewer or listener of Democracy Now! could easily think that no new war resisters have emerged since the summer and fall of 2006 because that's the last time Goodman elected to interview any.
Alexander is not wrong about the need to get the stories of war resisters out there. But we need to look seriously at why that need exists. The Washington papers, AP, Reuters and AFP were covering the Watada court-martial (others were as well). Where was Panhandle Media during it? It was important enough that CNN invited Amy Goodman on to speak about the topic and she was more than happy to go on CNN. But with the five hours of air time she controls a week, there were other things to do.
The stories do need to be out there. They make a huge difference. But we need to get honest about what has taken place. The Nation no longer uses the term "war resister" in print (though "coward" can and did pop up). The problem is not Real or Big Media which has its faults (to the extreme), the problem goes to Panhandle Media. The Ithica Times notes that it seems like there was more action agains the illegal war and more people against it before it started. Well there was certainly more coverage before it started. But the American public gets obsessed with what's emphasized.
That's how you see a craze for an OJ trial, for example. Our media critics from Little Media have been happy to talk about the tabloid-ization of the news in Big Media. They clearly feels it has an impact. Their argument (a solid one) goes that it steers people away from the stories that matter with distraction. But what has Panhandle Media offered in the last two years? If the Iraq War doesn't seem "important" to some people, take a look at Panhandle Media in the summer of 2006 when they ignored Iraq stories like the gang-rape and murder -- by US soldiers -- of Abeer. They were pushing the elections in Mexico and telling you about the nationwide riots that were going to take place and blah, blah, blah. It never happened. So they moved on to Lebanon. And they ignored Iraq for basically the entire summer. They have not picked their one-time interest back up from the floor. War resisters do matter and their stories do have an impact. But it's not enough to say that the stories need to 'get out.' It also requires looking at who is getting them out.
Agustin Aguayo (who will be speaking this Thursday (March 6th), he and his wife Helga Aguayo will be speaking at UCLA Riverside, in the Interdisciplinary Building at 6:00 pm) is taking his fight for CO status to the US Supreme Court. Where's the coverage of that? Where's the coverage of any of it in our 'brave' and 'independent' media? It's not enough to say these stories need to 'get out.' It requires noting who is not 'getting' them 'out.' The American public is more opposed to the illegal war now than before it started. It is the failure of Panhandle Media to regularly cover it that promotes distractions. Until that is confronted, keep expecting to hear these airy claims of "We need to get the message out" over and over without any change taking place. As they did in 2007 with no coverage (In These Times is an exception), war resisters are still going public this year. And Panhandle Media is still ignoring them.
When we're all ready to confront that reality, we may see a greater interest in the illegal war across the board. The protests that took place for war resisters in Canada are another example. They took place in the US and in Canada. Goodman didn't cover them. One action took place in NYC but even that didn't make it as a segment. After they were over -- having offered no heads up to them ahead of time -- Goody would rush with a quick mention of these national and international protests in a brief headline. She would also be wrong about when they took place in the US. But when no one's calling you out on the 'coverage' you ARE NOT offering, you can get away with that.
War resisters who went to Canada need the coverage right now. They were dealt a serious set-back when the Canadian Supreme Court refused to hear the appeals of Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey. Today, Canada's Parliament remaining the best hope for safe harbor war resisters have, you can make your voice heard by the Canadian parliament which has the ability to pass legislation to grant war resisters the right to remain in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use. That is the sort of thing that should receive attention but instead it's ignored.There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).Meanwhile IVAW has a DC action this month: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 & AfghanistanMarch 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation. Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." IVAW's co-chair Adam Kokesh will, of course, be participating and he explains why at his site, "But out of a strong sense of duty, some of us are trying to put our experiences to use for a good cause. Some of us couldn't live with ourselves if weren't doing everything we could to bring our brothers and sisters home as soon as possible. The environment may be unking, but that is why I will be testifying to shooting at civilians as a result of changing Rules of Engagement, abuse of detainees, and desecration of Iraqi bodies. It won't be easy but it must be done. Some of the stories are things that are difficult to admit that I was a part of, but if one more veteran realizes that they are not alone because of my testimony it will be worth it." The hearings will be broadcast throughout at the Iraq Veterans Against the War home page an on KPFA March 14th and 16th with Aimee Allison (co-host of the station's The Morning Show and co-author with David Solnit of Army Of None) and Aaron Glantz hosting and the KPFA live stream will also be available at Glantz' War Comes Home.KPFA's Aimee Allison and Aaron Glantz will be covering it. Anyone else? Possibly not. If you listened to Democracy Now! today, apparently there was no news on Iraq. An Iraqi helicopter went missing yesterday (we noted it in the snapshot) and crashed in a sandstorm. 7 Iraqis died in the crash and 1 US service member. It's not mentioned. None of it gets covered. In some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports two Baghdad bombings that left two people wounded, fuel truck bombings that wounded two fire fighters, a Baghdad bombing that wounded two more civilians, the deaths of 2 US collaborators in Salahuddin Province via a car bombing attack on an "Awakening" council, a Sinjar bombing that left one person wounded, a Nineveh Province bombing that wounded five people and a Diyala Province bombing that wounded a member of an "Awakening" council.
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a truck driver shot dead in Baghdad, a Baghdad dry-by shooting that wounded one person, Dr. Abdul Sattar Tahir Sharif was shot dead in Kirkuk and, dropping back to Tuesday night, a home invasion in al Bastamli village resulted in a husband and wife being shot to death and their three children wounded.
Kidnappings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 truck drivers from Syria were kidnapped in Baghdad.
Corpses?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 corpses discovered in Baghdad 3 in Mosul.
Staying with abductions, Archbishop Paulos Faraj Raho was kidnapped Friday. As noted in yesterday's snapshot, Asia News reports, "The men who have the fate of Msgr. Paulos Faraj Rahho, Chaldean Archbishop of Mosul in their hands since February 29th last, have raised the ransom and dictated 'political conditions' for his release, according to AsiaNews sources in Iraq, close to mediators who are negotiating his safe return. Late yesterday afternoon another phone call was made. The group which holds the bishop hostage, used Msgr. Rahoo's mobile phone to communicate, but has still given no proof of his wellbeing. 'It almost seems as if his release -- anonymous sources in Mosul tell -- is of secondary importance in their demands and the conditions which they have imposed greatly complicate matters, leading us to think that they are not just simple criminals interested in money'. Concern is increasing for the 67 year-old hostage who suffers ill health, for which he needs daily treatment." Aid to the Church in Need has issued a press release stating the ransom is one million in US dollars and their source is Bishop Anreas Abouna in Baghdad who explained to them, "The people who are dealing with the kidnappers have told them it is impossible to afford the ransom. The mediators asked to hear the voice of the archbishop but they weren't allowed." Today, Reuters reports that US Maj-Gen Mark Hertling has declared that there might be a ransom (might be?) and that the Archbishop "could easily be killed, and that would be really unfortunate." Unfortunate are half-assed statements from Hertlin.
He wasn't the only one trying to get out his talking points today. At the Pentagon today, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Michael Mullen (Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) held a joint-press conference. Sounding like he was prepping to take over the John McCain role in Senator Crazy Goes To Baghdad, Mullen went on and on about his recent 'walks' in Iraq and -- apparently they have no new script -- "there shops were open, people were out, life was coming back." For those who have forgotten the original, Senator Crazy Goes to Baghdad opened April 1, 2007. On April 2, 2007, Flashpoints' Robert Knight panned the would-be blockbuster noting:
And finally there was yet another major American deployment Sunday in a Baghdad market where Senator John McCain engaged on a walking tour to promote the Bush administration's current escalation in Iraq. McCain, in defiance of various independent reports that Iraq's daily death toll actually increased last month, nevertheless declared that the so-called 'surge' was "making progress" and that Americans were "not getting the full picture of what is happening in Iraq"; however a zoom out from McCain's photo op shows that he was actually surounded by orbiting F16 fighter planes, three Black Hawk attack helicopters, 2 Apache gun ships, more than 100 US troops, snipers and armed vehicles, a flak jacket and personal body armour. The presidential contender and Congressional comedian concluded his celebration of April Fool's Day by declaring with a straight face that "There are neighborhoods in Baghdad where you and I could walk through those neighborhoods today. These and other indicators and reasons for cautious optimism about the effects of the new strategy."
Michael Mullen's attempt at emerging starlet in a summer blockbuster probably won't take any better than Senator Crazy's attempt did. Like Senator Crazy, Mullen wasn't just breezing through, he was heavily guarded/protected. The lesson appears to be that, one month shy of a year later, if you have US troops accompanying you in large numbers, you can safely walk around two tiny areas of Iraq. Mullen's announced he was against any timetable for withdrawal (putting him at odds not only with the people of the US but Iraq as well) but did remember that the military is under civilian control in the United States by nothing that the next president, "whoever that might be, he or she will make that decision and we'll move accordingly."
Whomever the next US president will be. At the White House today, the Bully Boy met with Senator Crazy to offer his glowing endorsement which did not include, but probably should have, "The American people have had a power-hungry fool for nearly 8 years, why not someone insane?" Instead the Bully Boy dismissed notions of "change" by noting he ran on that in 2000 but obviously not in 2004 and declared of McCain, "He's a President, and he's going to be the President who will bring determination to defeat an enemy, and a heart big enough to love those who hurt." Senator Crazy is apparently running on the "Love It Away (So Cheer Up)" platform -- who knew he was an Ashford & Simpson fan? Bully Boy declared, to questions about a possible McCain running mate (McCain sewed up the nomination in yesterday's primaries), "People don't vote for Vice Presidents --- as much as I hate to say that for those who have been candidates for Vice President --- they're going to vote for who gets to sit inside that Oval Office and make decisions on how to protect the country and keep taxes low and how to have a culture that respects the dignity of every human being." Having used Dick Cheney's experience to shore up his own lack of it, Bully Boy still needs to pretend that didn't matter. He's lived in the Land of Delusion for some time. On the day Bully Boy was giving his endorsement of McCain, White House flack Dana Perino was declaring, "But there are differences that we have with Senator McCain. There's no doubt about that. That's plain for everybody to see." Ah, a 'unity' campaign.
On the Democratic side, Senator Barack Obama won the state of Vermont yesterday. Senator Hillary Clinton was said to need either Ohio or Texas victories. Some argued she needed both. Clinton won Ohio and Texas as well as Rhode Island yesterday. The Obama team is attempting to spin those wins as unimportant and are now whining about how they were behind a month ago in Texas. The polls had Obama with a lead at various points over the last weeks. As his campaign repeatedly noted, he had record crowds turning out to see him . . . They just didn't turn out in record numbers to vote. Or maybe it's an indication that he should focus not on a presidential campaign but on inspirational workshops across the country? Barack was the front runner before polls closed on Tuesday. He lost three states -- two of them huge states (Ohio and Texas). Falling back now on "We were behind at one point" is beyond stupid. The Obama campaign's Melissa Harris-Lacewell, aka Professional Lie Face, was no PBS's The Charlie Rose Show yesterday (before the results from Texas were in) and she floated the threat that if Obama is not GIVEN the nomination by the Democratic Party, African-American voters will walk. Harris-Lacewell does not speak for all African-American voters but if she wants to pretend she does and float that card, the DNC will factor in the Latino turnout so far this year which has been huge and the fact that Latinos are the emerging minority population in this country in terms of size demographics. It's not a card the Obama campaign can play and should Obama not secure the nomination, it's not a card that the candidate himself would play. Harris-Lacewell likes to play pit-bull for the campaign (while not disclosing that she's working for the campaign) and someone in the Obama campaign needs to yank her leash pretty quick. If Obama's seen by his White Republicans and Independents flocking to Democratic primaries and caucuses to support him as making any kind of a race-based argument, his support (however great or small it is) will dry up real quick among those factions. To stem the damage already done by Melissa Harris-Lacewell's threat (which is an unrealistic one), the Obama campaign should immediately issue a statement and, if they don't, the press should begin asking the campaign whether they support Harris-Lacewell's threat or not. While all other commentators noted the very weak and discomforting concession speech Obama gave (before the Texas vote was known), Harris-Lacewell insisted the speech was fine and the only problem was that the "inter-racial" backdrop that's usually on stage behind Obama was not present when he was speaking. Props make the man?
The next primary focused on is in Pennsylvania and that state's governor, Ed Rendell, issued the following statement today:
"Last night made clear that there has been a momentum shift in this race. Despite being outspent two-to-one, despite Sen. Obama benefiting from outside political funds, and despite all of the glowing press coverage he received leading up to March 4th, voters ultimately chose Senator Clinton. I am confident that Hillary is heading into Pennsylvania with momentum and a new energy.
"The people of Pennsylvania are focused on the two largest issues facing our nation - the state of our economy and national security. On both counts, Pennsylvanians understand how important it is to elect someone who is truly ready to become President and Commander-in-Chief. Hillary is ready to lead our nation, returning us to both prosperity and peace.
"We look forward to making our voice heard in the coming days and playing our part in determining the Democratic nominee. And when we do, the people of Pennsylvania will send a clear message -- we want a President who is ready, not one we hope will one day be ready."
On Monday, Barack was pressed on his campaign's communications with the Canadian government (that the remarks in last week's debate about NAFTA were just for-show for the American public and nothing for the Canadian government -- which supports NAFTA -- to worry about) and on his decades long friendship with Antoin "Tony" Rezko whose federal trial is beginning. Obama ended the press conference quickly and in a huff. As Andrew Stephen (New Statesman) observes today, "What remains to be seen is whether this was just a bad week for Obama and a good one for Clinton. Most worrying for Obama's supporters is that he wilted under the pressures of a routine, albeit hostile, press conference. If he is so fragile that he can be rattled by questioning from a handful of Chicago reporters (who have his measure by now) can he survive pressures in the White House? There is a growing acknowledgement that he has been accorded a uniquely easy ride by the media, and that is changing; Rezko's trial will now proceed and his lawyers say they want to call Obama as a witness, a prospective nightmare for him."
Of the eleven core Republican states that have gone to the polls, Sen. Obama has won ten: Utah, Idaho, Nebraska, North Dakota, Alabama, Alaska, Kansas, South Carolina, Georgia, and Louisiana. John Kerry lost each of these states by fifteen points or more.
The last time a Democratic nominee won Utah, Idaho, Nebraska, North Dakota, Kansas, and Alaska in the general election was 1964.
Even if Obama is "transcendent," as his campaign has argued, the historic electoral trends and the current political environment suggest that translating those primary wins into November success will be close to impossible.
In short: Hillary is better positioned to carry the battle ground states that Democrats need to win in November and Obama’s victories in deep red states do not .
that's from harold ickes and mark penn's 'The Path to the Presidency' (bloghillary at hillaryclinton.com) and i wanted to note that for a number of reasons including that it offers some basic realities. there's also the fact that i (barely) know harold. if i saw him across a room, i would walk over and say 'hello' because i know him (loosely) for years and years via c.i. mark penn, i do not know. but he's the other reason i wanted to note the above.
if you're a regular reader, you know i was in public relations. you know i made my money and got the hell out. so i've found it very interesting to hear all this talk (especially at the useless nation magazine) about how mark penn was satan incarnate. i didn't work on government projects and mainly worked on products. (a brief period, when i lived in california, was on entertainment). so i've been working all my contacts from that other life to find out what is the deal with mark penn?
what i've heard from people i trust is that (a) he's not evil. his company has worked with clients that i wouldn't if i were still in business. big deal. an argument can be made that some of the food products i worked on contributed to the obesity of america. public relations is public relations and we each pick what we're going to handle and what we aren't. sometimes we take accounts to pay the bills. i do not support some of the work that penn's firm has done but i was in the field and know it's not as simple as panhandle media keeps making it out to be.
i heard glowing reports about mark penn's kindness (that's men and women). he's some 1 who is said to be generous with compliments to people at other agencies. not in a 'raid' them way because at least 2 people telling me about that part of penn run their own agencies. there was no ulterior benefit to penn praising some work that they had done.
in public relations, a lot of people do not go out of their way to praise the competition. public relations is all about illusion. you're making something desirable. you have to sell yourself as well to stay in business - make yourself the 1 to go to. as a result, there's not a lot of back slapping and praise as a rule in the business from outside any agency.
my chief concern was did penn's agency work on selling the illegal war? not that any 1 i spoke with knew. the agency - not penn - had a business relationship with blackwater. that mercenary company is better known today than when the contract was signed. i'm really not sure that many p.r. companies would have turned it down. some would have on principle (if i were still working, i would have). but the fact of the matter is that they were called 'contractors' not just by the press but also by the people. the shift to mercenaries (which is what they are) has been a public awakening for many.
so mark penn's in p.r. and has been made out to be satan. that's not the story i got back from friends still in the industry.
i was waiting on 1 more call before noting that here. (a call from a trusted friend whose friendship goes back many years.) that came this afternoon and i saw the above and thought it was the perfect time to note it.
if the nation magazine or democracy now wants to play offended and claim that mark penn's prolonged the illegal war, they might need to 1st check out their own actions because they haven't done anything to stop the illegal war in years.
it was c.i. writing at the common ills that called out the myth of the great return at the start of november, all through november and in december. where was the nation magazine? silent. where was democracy now? silent. as c.i. pointed out around thanksgiving (either right before or right after) the myth was effecting opinion on the illegal war and the polls were showing that. but democracy now and the nation couldn't be bothered with addressing those lies. so i think it's a bit much for them to hop on their huffy bikes over mark penn.
1 of the reasons i started my own p.r. business was because i didn't want to be told what kind of accounts i had to take. we did well more often than not. but there were many times when i would worry in the early years that i'd made a big mistake. i look at this differently than the likes of panhandle media which begs for money. when you actually have to make money, when you're responsible for paying people and they and their families are depending on whether or not the business stays afloat, there's a difference - a purity level that you may not be able to maintain that lives up to the 'noble' principles of panhandle media.
i turned down my share of accounts. but there were times when i was tempted. i wouldn't have represented blackwater. but not because of panhandle media which did a really poor job on blackwater. (if you'll remember, there was the period where they couldn't decide if blackwater was a good or bad thing.) i would have turned them down because i'd heard about them from c.i. but i'm fully aware that there was what i'll call confusion over them in real time and i'm not going to slam an agency for 1 account.
especially when the other campaign gets a pass. david axlerod is called obama's 'karl rove' and we're supposed to love that. our own karl rove! oh goody! that's what i always wanted for the democratic party, for them to stoop to the g.o.p.'s level.
(that was sarcasm.)
i'm really surprised harold ickes is with hillary's campaign because i really thought he was in pursue your own dream time. i'm not insulting him for that. (i'm there myself.) the fact that he's gone to work on hillary's campaign says a lot.
and the points they are making in the post above are solid 1s.
at 1 point, before becoming dnc chair, howard dean (and others) were floating a method by which dems could win a national presidential election by avoiding completely the states that tend to go republican every race. that was a strategy that was supposed to be considered.
when he became dnc chair, he said (as he had in his presidential campaign) that he wanted to make every state competative and i'm all for that. but i also think we use our pre-existing knowledge.
with the work of howard dean and others, we may see more states turn democratic this year. that would be great. but we need to be looking at the states that vote democratic in the past. we should be seeing who can carry the states that give the electoral college wins. that's the point ickes and penn are making and it's 1 to remember. not the smoke & mirrors about bambi's supposed huge turnout.
'he's packing them in at rallies!' is always the cry. but that doesn't translate into votes which means we need to seriously wonder at some point whether some of the crowds he pulls in at rallies (but not in the voting booths) are the result of some sort of circus-like attraction?
we're supposedly wanting to see a non-republican in the white house, we're not trying to pick a candidate who can spearhead national tent revival tours for the next 4 years. it's something to remember.
let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'
Wednesday, March 5, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the White House makes a presidential endorsement and then adds a slap, Senator Crazy Goes To Baghdad underwhelmed but it's gearing up for a sequel, the US military acknowledges that 'maybe' there's a ransom involved in the kidnapping of an Archbishop, Hillary Clinton wins primaries in Rhode Island, Ohio and California, and more.
Starting with war resistance. Alexis Alexander tells Rebekah Dillon (Ithica Times), "The peace movement needs to team closely with G.I. war resisters and support them in getting their stories out to the general public." Alexander and several other voices of resistance Dillon speaks with are correct on many points (wrong? whining about a non-existant draft is just wasting everyone's time) but Alexander's point and the others go to the media and no one makes that connection in the article. Alexander rightly states that the peace movement needs to work on getting the stories of war resisters out. But why do they need to work on that?
Because the stories are important, yes. But anyone paying attention in 2007 saw the AP, Reuters and many daily papers (some national, some regional) as well as many TV programs (national like Nightline, as well as regional) cover stories. Where was the coverage not coming from? Take Ehren Watada who is the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy to the Iraq War. Even MTV covered it. (And the coverage did have an effect.) But where was Panhandle Media? CNN covered it, where was Panhandle Media?
It's a question people need to be asking. When CNN covered it on one of their program, they had on three guests. One was a CO, one was Mommy's Pantyhose (spewing his usual hate) and the third? Who was the third guest, brought on to discuss this important issue, does anyone remember? It was Amy Goodman.
CNN was covering it because the court-martial was gearing up and Pacifica's Amy Goodman who has an hour program Monday through Friday entitled Democracy Now! was brought on to CNN as a guest to discuss Watada. (Paula Zahn also featured Watada himself in a separate segment that broadcast.) Wow. That might be a clue that the story is important. Certainly Aaron Glantz was in Tacoma before the court-martial started and reporting. But where was Amy Goodman? Not only did she not go to Washington for the court-martial (which ended in a mistrial over the objection of defense attorneys), she wasn't interested.
Now when Sarah Olson was pimped as the story of the Watada court-martial (by Norman Solomon and everyone else including Phil Donahue -- who did not know the basics about Watada as evidenced by that embarrassing column he wrote where he seemed to think Watada had gone AWOL -- Watada reported for duty every day at the base -- something he continues to do), Goody could gas bag with the best of them. Olson MIGHT have to testify! That was a story. When Olson didn't have to testify, it was the end of the interest in the leadup to the court-martial. After it was over (it ran three days -- Monday through Wednesday), Goody would air a report Truthout did on Thursday. After it was over. Olson was not the story. Olson wasn't even a human interest story. She was a reporter who wouldn't say whether she would testify or not but wanted the whole damn world to be up in arms that she was even asked to testify. She wanted the world to stand up while she refused to take a stand herself (by saying whether or not she'd testify).
Now that was Ehren Watada, one of the best known war resisters. And Democracy Now! wasn't interested in his court-martial. Amy Goodman was more than happy to go on CNN and talk about Watada . . . while not covering his court-martial on her own program. Do you see the problem or are we all going to continue to pretend it didn't happen? James Burmeister self-checked out in 2007 and went to Canada. In June and July he was telling Canadian media about the "kill teams" -- how the US military had teams whose job it was to lay out US property in the open in Iraq for the purpose of shooting Iraqis who picked any of it up. In the fall the Washington Post would report on that story. Panhandle Media could have had the story if they'd bothered to cover war resisters. Burmeister was not covered. Eli Israel, while stationed in Iraq, refused to serve. That's a 2007 story. Where was Panhandle Media's coverage of that? He needed coverage, the military was threatening to come down hard on him. He was refusing while in Iraq. It was news. But not to Panhandle Media. A large number of war resisters stepped out in 2007 and only In These Times covered them. Not The Nation, not The Progressive and certainly not Democracy Now! A viewer or listener of Democracy Now! could easily think that no new war resisters have emerged since the summer and fall of 2006 because that's the last time Goodman elected to interview any.
Alexander is not wrong about the need to get the stories of war resisters out there. But we need to look seriously at why that need exists. The Washington papers, AP, Reuters and AFP were covering the Watada court-martial (others were as well). Where was Panhandle Media during it? It was important enough that CNN invited Amy Goodman on to speak about the topic and she was more than happy to go on CNN. But with the five hours of air time she controls a week, there were other things to do.
The stories do need to be out there. They make a huge difference. But we need to get honest about what has taken place. The Nation no longer uses the term "war resister" in print (though "coward" can and did pop up). The problem is not Real or Big Media which has its faults (to the extreme), the problem goes to Panhandle Media. The Ithica Times notes that it seems like there was more action agains the illegal war and more people against it before it started. Well there was certainly more coverage before it started. But the American public gets obsessed with what's emphasized.
That's how you see a craze for an OJ trial, for example. Our media critics from Little Media have been happy to talk about the tabloid-ization of the news in Big Media. They clearly feels it has an impact. Their argument (a solid one) goes that it steers people away from the stories that matter with distraction. But what has Panhandle Media offered in the last two years? If the Iraq War doesn't seem "important" to some people, take a look at Panhandle Media in the summer of 2006 when they ignored Iraq stories like the gang-rape and murder -- by US soldiers -- of Abeer. They were pushing the elections in Mexico and telling you about the nationwide riots that were going to take place and blah, blah, blah. It never happened. So they moved on to Lebanon. And they ignored Iraq for basically the entire summer. They have not picked their one-time interest back up from the floor. War resisters do matter and their stories do have an impact. But it's not enough to say that the stories need to 'get out.' It also requires looking at who is getting them out.
Agustin Aguayo (who will be speaking this Thursday (March 6th), he and his wife Helga Aguayo will be speaking at UCLA Riverside, in the Interdisciplinary Building at 6:00 pm) is taking his fight for CO status to the US Supreme Court. Where's the coverage of that? Where's the coverage of any of it in our 'brave' and 'independent' media? It's not enough to say these stories need to 'get out.' It requires noting who is not 'getting' them 'out.' The American public is more opposed to the illegal war now than before it started. It is the failure of Panhandle Media to regularly cover it that promotes distractions. Until that is confronted, keep expecting to hear these airy claims of "We need to get the message out" over and over without any change taking place. As they did in 2007 with no coverage (In These Times is an exception), war resisters are still going public this year. And Panhandle Media is still ignoring them.
When we're all ready to confront that reality, we may see a greater interest in the illegal war across the board. The protests that took place for war resisters in Canada are another example. They took place in the US and in Canada. Goodman didn't cover them. One action took place in NYC but even that didn't make it as a segment. After they were over -- having offered no heads up to them ahead of time -- Goody would rush with a quick mention of these national and international protests in a brief headline. She would also be wrong about when they took place in the US. But when no one's calling you out on the 'coverage' you ARE NOT offering, you can get away with that.
War resisters who went to Canada need the coverage right now. They were dealt a serious set-back when the Canadian Supreme Court refused to hear the appeals of Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey. Today, Canada's Parliament remaining the best hope for safe harbor war resisters have, you can make your voice heard by the Canadian parliament which has the ability to pass legislation to grant war resisters the right to remain in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use. That is the sort of thing that should receive attention but instead it's ignored.There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).Meanwhile IVAW has a DC action this month: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 & AfghanistanMarch 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation. Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." IVAW's co-chair Adam Kokesh will, of course, be participating and he explains why at his site, "But out of a strong sense of duty, some of us are trying to put our experiences to use for a good cause. Some of us couldn't live with ourselves if weren't doing everything we could to bring our brothers and sisters home as soon as possible. The environment may be unking, but that is why I will be testifying to shooting at civilians as a result of changing Rules of Engagement, abuse of detainees, and desecration of Iraqi bodies. It won't be easy but it must be done. Some of the stories are things that are difficult to admit that I was a part of, but if one more veteran realizes that they are not alone because of my testimony it will be worth it." The hearings will be broadcast throughout at the Iraq Veterans Against the War home page an on KPFA March 14th and 16th with Aimee Allison (co-host of the station's The Morning Show and co-author with David Solnit of Army Of None) and Aaron Glantz hosting and the KPFA live stream will also be available at Glantz' War Comes Home.KPFA's Aimee Allison and Aaron Glantz will be covering it. Anyone else? Possibly not. If you listened to Democracy Now! today, apparently there was no news on Iraq. An Iraqi helicopter went missing yesterday (we noted it in the snapshot) and crashed in a sandstorm. 7 Iraqis died in the crash and 1 US service member. It's not mentioned. None of it gets covered. In some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports two Baghdad bombings that left two people wounded, fuel truck bombings that wounded two fire fighters, a Baghdad bombing that wounded two more civilians, the deaths of 2 US collaborators in Salahuddin Province via a car bombing attack on an "Awakening" council, a Sinjar bombing that left one person wounded, a Nineveh Province bombing that wounded five people and a Diyala Province bombing that wounded a member of an "Awakening" council.
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a truck driver shot dead in Baghdad, a Baghdad dry-by shooting that wounded one person, Dr. Abdul Sattar Tahir Sharif was shot dead in Kirkuk and, dropping back to Tuesday night, a home invasion in al Bastamli village resulted in a husband and wife being shot to death and their three children wounded.
Kidnappings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 truck drivers from Syria were kidnapped in Baghdad.
Corpses?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 corpses discovered in Baghdad 3 in Mosul.
Staying with abductions, Archbishop Paulos Faraj Raho was kidnapped Friday. As noted in yesterday's snapshot, Asia News reports, "The men who have the fate of Msgr. Paulos Faraj Rahho, Chaldean Archbishop of Mosul in their hands since February 29th last, have raised the ransom and dictated 'political conditions' for his release, according to AsiaNews sources in Iraq, close to mediators who are negotiating his safe return. Late yesterday afternoon another phone call was made. The group which holds the bishop hostage, used Msgr. Rahoo's mobile phone to communicate, but has still given no proof of his wellbeing. 'It almost seems as if his release -- anonymous sources in Mosul tell -- is of secondary importance in their demands and the conditions which they have imposed greatly complicate matters, leading us to think that they are not just simple criminals interested in money'. Concern is increasing for the 67 year-old hostage who suffers ill health, for which he needs daily treatment." Aid to the Church in Need has issued a press release stating the ransom is one million in US dollars and their source is Bishop Anreas Abouna in Baghdad who explained to them, "The people who are dealing with the kidnappers have told them it is impossible to afford the ransom. The mediators asked to hear the voice of the archbishop but they weren't allowed." Today, Reuters reports that US Maj-Gen Mark Hertling has declared that there might be a ransom (might be?) and that the Archbishop "could easily be killed, and that would be really unfortunate." Unfortunate are half-assed statements from Hertlin.
He wasn't the only one trying to get out his talking points today. At the Pentagon today, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Michael Mullen (Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) held a joint-press conference. Sounding like he was prepping to take over the John McCain role in Senator Crazy Goes To Baghdad, Mullen went on and on about his recent 'walks' in Iraq and -- apparently they have no new script -- "there shops were open, people were out, life was coming back." For those who have forgotten the original, Senator Crazy Goes to Baghdad opened April 1, 2007. On April 2, 2007, Flashpoints' Robert Knight panned the would-be blockbuster noting:
And finally there was yet another major American deployment Sunday in a Baghdad market where Senator John McCain engaged on a walking tour to promote the Bush administration's current escalation in Iraq. McCain, in defiance of various independent reports that Iraq's daily death toll actually increased last month, nevertheless declared that the so-called 'surge' was "making progress" and that Americans were "not getting the full picture of what is happening in Iraq"; however a zoom out from McCain's photo op shows that he was actually surounded by orbiting F16 fighter planes, three Black Hawk attack helicopters, 2 Apache gun ships, more than 100 US troops, snipers and armed vehicles, a flak jacket and personal body armour. The presidential contender and Congressional comedian concluded his celebration of April Fool's Day by declaring with a straight face that "There are neighborhoods in Baghdad where you and I could walk through those neighborhoods today. These and other indicators and reasons for cautious optimism about the effects of the new strategy."
Michael Mullen's attempt at emerging starlet in a summer blockbuster probably won't take any better than Senator Crazy's attempt did. Like Senator Crazy, Mullen wasn't just breezing through, he was heavily guarded/protected. The lesson appears to be that, one month shy of a year later, if you have US troops accompanying you in large numbers, you can safely walk around two tiny areas of Iraq. Mullen's announced he was against any timetable for withdrawal (putting him at odds not only with the people of the US but Iraq as well) but did remember that the military is under civilian control in the United States by nothing that the next president, "whoever that might be, he or she will make that decision and we'll move accordingly."
Whomever the next US president will be. At the White House today, the Bully Boy met with Senator Crazy to offer his glowing endorsement which did not include, but probably should have, "The American people have had a power-hungry fool for nearly 8 years, why not someone insane?" Instead the Bully Boy dismissed notions of "change" by noting he ran on that in 2000 but obviously not in 2004 and declared of McCain, "He's a President, and he's going to be the President who will bring determination to defeat an enemy, and a heart big enough to love those who hurt." Senator Crazy is apparently running on the "Love It Away (So Cheer Up)" platform -- who knew he was an Ashford & Simpson fan? Bully Boy declared, to questions about a possible McCain running mate (McCain sewed up the nomination in yesterday's primaries), "People don't vote for Vice Presidents --- as much as I hate to say that for those who have been candidates for Vice President --- they're going to vote for who gets to sit inside that Oval Office and make decisions on how to protect the country and keep taxes low and how to have a culture that respects the dignity of every human being." Having used Dick Cheney's experience to shore up his own lack of it, Bully Boy still needs to pretend that didn't matter. He's lived in the Land of Delusion for some time. On the day Bully Boy was giving his endorsement of McCain, White House flack Dana Perino was declaring, "But there are differences that we have with Senator McCain. There's no doubt about that. That's plain for everybody to see." Ah, a 'unity' campaign.
On the Democratic side, Senator Barack Obama won the state of Vermont yesterday. Senator Hillary Clinton was said to need either Ohio or Texas victories. Some argued she needed both. Clinton won Ohio and Texas as well as Rhode Island yesterday. The Obama team is attempting to spin those wins as unimportant and are now whining about how they were behind a month ago in Texas. The polls had Obama with a lead at various points over the last weeks. As his campaign repeatedly noted, he had record crowds turning out to see him . . . They just didn't turn out in record numbers to vote. Or maybe it's an indication that he should focus not on a presidential campaign but on inspirational workshops across the country? Barack was the front runner before polls closed on Tuesday. He lost three states -- two of them huge states (Ohio and Texas). Falling back now on "We were behind at one point" is beyond stupid. The Obama campaign's Melissa Harris-Lacewell, aka Professional Lie Face, was no PBS's The Charlie Rose Show yesterday (before the results from Texas were in) and she floated the threat that if Obama is not GIVEN the nomination by the Democratic Party, African-American voters will walk. Harris-Lacewell does not speak for all African-American voters but if she wants to pretend she does and float that card, the DNC will factor in the Latino turnout so far this year which has been huge and the fact that Latinos are the emerging minority population in this country in terms of size demographics. It's not a card the Obama campaign can play and should Obama not secure the nomination, it's not a card that the candidate himself would play. Harris-Lacewell likes to play pit-bull for the campaign (while not disclosing that she's working for the campaign) and someone in the Obama campaign needs to yank her leash pretty quick. If Obama's seen by his White Republicans and Independents flocking to Democratic primaries and caucuses to support him as making any kind of a race-based argument, his support (however great or small it is) will dry up real quick among those factions. To stem the damage already done by Melissa Harris-Lacewell's threat (which is an unrealistic one), the Obama campaign should immediately issue a statement and, if they don't, the press should begin asking the campaign whether they support Harris-Lacewell's threat or not. While all other commentators noted the very weak and discomforting concession speech Obama gave (before the Texas vote was known), Harris-Lacewell insisted the speech was fine and the only problem was that the "inter-racial" backdrop that's usually on stage behind Obama was not present when he was speaking. Props make the man?
The next primary focused on is in Pennsylvania and that state's governor, Ed Rendell, issued the following statement today:
"Last night made clear that there has been a momentum shift in this race. Despite being outspent two-to-one, despite Sen. Obama benefiting from outside political funds, and despite all of the glowing press coverage he received leading up to March 4th, voters ultimately chose Senator Clinton. I am confident that Hillary is heading into Pennsylvania with momentum and a new energy.
"The people of Pennsylvania are focused on the two largest issues facing our nation - the state of our economy and national security. On both counts, Pennsylvanians understand how important it is to elect someone who is truly ready to become President and Commander-in-Chief. Hillary is ready to lead our nation, returning us to both prosperity and peace.
"We look forward to making our voice heard in the coming days and playing our part in determining the Democratic nominee. And when we do, the people of Pennsylvania will send a clear message -- we want a President who is ready, not one we hope will one day be ready."
On Monday, Barack was pressed on his campaign's communications with the Canadian government (that the remarks in last week's debate about NAFTA were just for-show for the American public and nothing for the Canadian government -- which supports NAFTA -- to worry about) and on his decades long friendship with Antoin "Tony" Rezko whose federal trial is beginning. Obama ended the press conference quickly and in a huff. As Andrew Stephen (New Statesman) observes today, "What remains to be seen is whether this was just a bad week for Obama and a good one for Clinton. Most worrying for Obama's supporters is that he wilted under the pressures of a routine, albeit hostile, press conference. If he is so fragile that he can be rattled by questioning from a handful of Chicago reporters (who have his measure by now) can he survive pressures in the White House? There is a growing acknowledgement that he has been accorded a uniquely easy ride by the media, and that is changing; Rezko's trial will now proceed and his lawyers say they want to call Obama as a witness, a prospective nightmare for him."
3/04/2008
hillary's back!
HILLARY Clinton is back in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination with American media calling wins for her in the Rhode Island and Ohio primaries. But just as the Democratic race gets more interesting, the Republicans' is over. Eight years after he first set out to hold the position, John McCain is officially the Republican Party's presidential candidate.
Senator McCain has had the nomination all but sown up, but internal rival Mike Huckabee's refusal to withdraw from the race has stopped Senator McCain from claiming the title. Until now. While Senator McCain has already turned his attention from Mr Huckabee to potential Democratic opponents, he can now claim the support of the entire Republican party.
If Senator Clinton takes Rhode Island and Ohio as early counts suggest, she will have broken a 12-state winning streak by rival Barack Obama.
that's from kate rose's 'Hillary Clinton's back; John McCain is Republican choice' (australia's herald-sun). that makes me so happy. let's all share a good laugh over isaiah's latest comic that went up this morning 'pinocchio obama:'
here's whiny bambi from newsday saying he might not do as well today as he had strutted around earlier claiming, 'There's no doubt that if you're being attacked everyday that it creates a sense of turbulence in the minds of people.' you think?
crap ass democracy now has schilled for him every damn day. common dreams hasn't posted a pro-hillary column in weeks and even when it last did (erica jong's), it was 1 column in a glob of pro-bambi columns. the nation has trashed hillary non-stop. the progressive has trashed hillary non-stop. buzzflash has done it. go down the list. they have all gone gunning non-stop for hillary. bambi gest 1 bad day and suddenly it's weep and whine. get over it, you big cry baby.
i think that if he can't pull off all 4 states tonight, he's not the messiah that will lead us all to the land of bi-partisanship. oops!
i think bambi lost his halo. hillary won rhode island and is predicted in ohio. i think when you've had the gravy train bambi's had and you're still fighting tooth and nail for votes, you're not the nominee.
from a public relations standpoint, he should be wiping the floor with hillary. that's not happening and you better believe that everything that came before his snit-fit on the airplane yesterday (resulting in a taste of bad publicity) is the eaisest it can be. no candidate has ever had it that easy - not even bully boy in 2000. and bambi's still losing to hillary?
some 1 needs to tell him that if it's time for some 1 to drop it, it's time for the senator who hasn't completed his 1st term to drop out.
and look, here's john nichols at the nation saying 'now it gets dangerous.' poor little limp john nichols. he thought he'd be nutting tonight over bambi's victory dance. he'd be picturing bambi's buns in a tight pair of slacks while he twisted his own nipples and moaned 'bambi, oh, bambi.' instead, hillary's still in the fight and john nichols writes an insane column because he is F**KING NUTS!'
hillary needs to drop out, nichols argues, because this is like humphrey and mcgovern in 1972. it's nothing like that you stupid f**king idiot.
it's about a real democrat (hillary) and a faux 1. it's about real democrats turning out for hillary and republicans, communists, socialists and registered independents turning out for obama.
hillary is the party's choice.
get used to it.
john nichols (worth less than 5 cents) isn't the only nation writer who's been going after hillary. there's been the airs (berman and mebler), there's been self-hating lesbian laura flanders (i'd like to know when that socialist became an america, forget democratc, since she was a citizen of england), professor patti williams, fat girl katha pollitt (who wasn't a democrat when she was attending all those socialist meetings not all that long ago), katrina vanden heuvel, richard kim (who i'll assume is a self-hating gay man) and on and on and on. every day they post their poison about hillary clinton. every damn day you visit the nation and will find at least 3 posts telling you hillary is evil.
screw those losers. when's the last time they picked a winner? let's close with c.i.'s 'iraq snapshot:'
Tuesday, March 4, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, a US service member dies in Iraq, Carl Levin wastes time in the Senate, Iraqi soldiers attack journalists and more
Starting with war resistance. Agustin Aguayo was wrongfully denied CO status. Aguayo served in Iraq and, while serving, had a spiritual awakening/strengthening that led to him refusing to even load his pistol. Instead of granting him the CO status he so obviously qualified for, the US military decided to deploy him to Iraq a second time. To demonstrate how seriously he took his beliefs, Aguayo self-checked out. Though gone for less than the 30-day rule (Aguayo turned himself in), he was prosecuted for desertion in a court-martial in Germany. (You generally have to be gone for more than 30 days to be prosecuted for desertion, otherwise the status is AWOL.) Aguayo continues to pursue his CO status. And he continues to speak out. This Thursday (March 6th) he and his wife Helga Aguayo will be speaking at UCLA Riverside, in the Interdisciplinary Building at 6:00 pm.
And outside the US, war resisters who have moved to Canada were dealt a serious set-back when the Canadian Supreme Court refused to hear the appeals of Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey. Today, Canada's Parliament remaining the best hope for safe harbor war resisters have, you can make your voice heard by the Canadian parliament which has the ability to pass legislation to grant war resisters the right to remain in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (http://us.f366.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (http://us.f366.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (http://us.f366.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=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. That is the sort of thing that should receive attention but instead it's ignored.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).
Meanwhile IVAW has a DC action this month:
In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan
March 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation. Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." IVAW's co-chair Adam Kokesh will, of course, be participating and he explains why at his site, "But out of a strong sense of duty, some of us are trying to put our experiences to use for a good cause. Some of us couldn't live with ourselves if weren't doing everything we could to bring our brothers and sisters home as soon as possible. The environment may be unking, but that is why I will be testifying to shooting at civilians as a result of changing Rules of Engagement, abuse of detainees, and desecration of Iraqi bodies. It won't be easy but it must be done. Some of the stories are things that are difficult to admit that I was a part of, but if one more veteran realizes that they are not alone because of my testimony it will be worth it." The hearings will be broadcast throughout at the Iraq Veterans Against the War home page an on KPFA March 14th and 16th with Aimee Allison (co-host of the station's The Morning Show and co-author with David Solnit of Army Of None) and Aaron Glantz hosting and the KPFA live stream will also be available at Glantz' War Comes Home.
Today Navy Admiral William J. Fallon appeared before the US Armed Services Committee and he was present to give an update/assessment on the ongoing, illegal war but the senators largely wasted the hearing by whining about the visit of Iranian president to Iraq and no one whined louder than the committee chair Carl Levin. Fallon delivered his [PDF format warning] prepared remarks which included claiming he was able "to report significant progress in security in Iraq. . . . The most significant development in Iraq over the last year has been a dramatic decrease in violence. By almost every measure, the security situation has improved significantly." Had Levin and others paid attention they could have questioned that laughable assertion. Fallon also praised the 'importance' of the "Awakening" council and claimed there were over "90,000 Iraqi men" who had signed up -- left unstated were issues involving the crimes those thugs are accused of as well as the walk-out so many of them are taking part in. But Carl Levin wanted everyone to know he did not like the fact that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad visited Iraq -- a country that borders Iran. And isn't that more important than examining what's being 'achieved' by the illegal war? Fallon was spinning wildly: "The recent passage of the 2008 National Budget, Provincial Powers, Amnesty, and de-Ba'athification laws are significant accomplishments. The Presidency Council returned the Provincial Powers Law to the Council of Representatives but with the assurance that preparations for provincial elecitons this fall should continue." Where to begin? How about the fact that the "Provincial Powers" legislation was not 'returned' -- the Presidency Council said "NO." Call it a veto, call it whatever, but it was not 'returned' as though it just needs a little fine tuning. Why Carl Levin couldn't do his damn job is a question only he can answer; however, while he spent today frothing at the mouth over Iran, it should be noted that the US State Department's deputy flack Tom Casey came off calm by contrast in a State Dept press confrence yesterday when he noted of Iran that it "has an oustanding offer on the table to negotiate with us and to work out an arrangement that allows them to have a full civilian nuclear program while assuring us that they're not using that as a diversion or cover for building a nuclear weapon." There is no proof that Iran is attempting that and there's no strong evidence that even indicates it is likely. But even raising those elements (of administration spin), Casey still came off less foaming at the mouth than did Levin.
On Ahmadinejad, Liz Sly (Chicago Tribune) reports today that, "During his visit, the first by an Iranian president since the Islamic revolution of 1979, Ahmadinejad was feted by Iraq's Shiite and Kurdish leaders. Even the Sunni vice president, Tariq al-Hashimi, turned up to greet him, though he was an hour late. In addition to the $1 billion loan, the two countries negotiated seven deals on economic and cultural cooperation. In a statement on his Web site, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani said the two sides also reached an agreement 'to secure their borders ... to prevent infiltration of terrorists and smugglers'." Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) explains, "To have Ahmadinejad safely cruise around Baghdad, the capital shut down. I walked into the office on Sunday and our newsroom was empty, nearly our entire staff didn't make it to work. Hussein, one of our Iraqi reporters, tried to take a taxi. No vehicle traffic was allowed on the roads to secure Ahmadinejad's path to President Jalal Talabani's compound." Allen Pizzey (CBS News) observes, "For a send-off, Ahmadinejad didn't get just one 'kiss for luck'; he got four, when he was welcomed by U.S.-backed Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who threw in a symbolic hug by standing impassive while the Iranian leader told a joint press conference: 'The Americans have to understand the facts of the region. Iraqi people do not like America." Joining Carl Levin in frothing at the mouth today was Lt. General Ray Odierno who met with the Bully Boy of the United States at the White House yesterday and spoke at the Pentagon today. Aamer Madhani (Baltimore Sun) quotes Odierno stating today of Iran's influence on Iraq that it was "what I worry about most." Andrew Gray (Reuters) notes that Odierno accused Iran of being behind rocket attacks in Iraq as he stated, "That's because it was being done by Iranian surrogates. And when the government of Iraq holds a meeting, there tends to be rocket attacks. Why's that? Because it's done by Iranian surrogates." Good of Carl Levin to help Odierno advance his itch for war with Iran today. He might have better used his time -- and the committee's -- by questioning the measures of 'success' because there is no progress in Iraq, there is no advance.
Violence didn't disappear, didn't vanish. The escalation Bully Boy pushed through last year -- with Dems in Congress waving through (symbolic measures do nothing) -- reduced some violence as did the cease-fire with Muqtada al-Sadr. But only in sections of Iraq. The "Awakening" Councils are fueling more tensions and Mosul's been in the US military's cross-hairs for how long now? More US troops were put on the ground in Iraq and not only did the puppet government not accomplish anything, but violence didn't go away.
One of today's biggest 'surge' cheerleaders is US Senator John McCain who is running to become the GOP's presidential nomination for the November general election. He loves the escalation. He thinks it's both amazing and a miracle. Or that's what he says. Or what he says now. Dropping back to the August 4, 2006 snapshot for this from the August 3, 2006 US Senate Armed Services Committee:
Senator John McCain: So, General Abizaid, we're moving 7,500 troops into Baghdad, is that correct? General John Abizaid: The number is closer to 3,500. [. . .] McCain: And where are these troops coming from? Abizaid: Uh, the troops, the Styker Brigade, is coming down from Mosul. McCain: From Mosul? Is the situation under control in Ramadi? Abizaid: Uh, the situation in Ramadi, is better than it was two months ago. McCain: Is the situation under control in Ramadi? Abizaid: I think the situation in Ramadi is workable. McCain: And the troops from Ramadi came from Falluja, isn't that correct? Abizaid: I can't say senator, I know that -- McCain: Well that's my information. What I' worry about is we're playing a game of whack-a-mole here. We move troops from -- It flares up, we move troops there. Everybody knows we've got big problems in Ramadi and I said, "Where you gonna get the troops?" 'Well we're going to have to move them from Falluja.' Now we're going to have to move troops into Baghdad from someplace else. It's very disturbing.
A functioning press would be asking Senator Crazy how the 'surge' is in any way different than what he was complaining about in August 2006? Answer: It isn't. There has been no peace. There has been no end to the violence. What's happened is a cease-fire and a huge addition of US troops added on the ground still couldn't stop the daily violence. Is Senator Crazy cheerleading today to be a 'good soldier' for the White House or is he unable to remember the criticism he offered in 2006?
Today Solomon Moore and Mudhafer Al-Husaini (New York Times) report: "Iraqi soldiers attacked a group of Iraqi and American journalists as they photographed the area. Five soldiers stomped on an Iraqi journalist with their combat boots as he lay on the ground, reporters there said. They said that he cried, 'Why are you doing this?' and added, 'I am an Iraqi too!' Iraqi soldiers confiscated the cameras of many Iraqi journalists at the scene. When they tried to do the same with a photographer for The New York Times, American soldiers intervened and prevented the Iraqi soldiers from arresting his bodyguard." Let's drop back to January 25, 2007 when Damien Cave and James Glanz (New York Times) reported: "One Iraqi soldier in the alley pointed his rifle at an American reporter and pulled the trigger. There was only a click, the weapon had no ammunition. The soldier laughed at his joke." Where would anyone get the idea that attacks on the press are okay? Yes, the US military has attacked the press but Iraqi thugs employed by the puppet government in Baghdad need only look to their puppet-head. Nouri al-Maliki's really lucky most Americans don't give a damn about him. If they did, the puppet would have been thrown out of office long ago because he's 'leadership' has been an absolute failure. Let's look at one of his early 'plans,' no, not the 24-point 'plan' he announced as he was being installed prime minister. Let's focus on the 4-point 'plan' and it's easy to forget that 'plan' because the press certainly did. But even when they had a little interest in it, they refused to note all four parts of the 'plan.' As noted in the October 3, 2006 snapshot, the third plank in the al-Maliki's 'peace' 'plan' was an attack on journalism and journalists. And if you drop back to a 'great day' (according to al-Maliki) you'll see that on September 7, 2006 al-Arabiya satellite network was shut down by Iraqi police on the orders of al-Maliki. The puppet's reign has been about very little but one hallmark has been the disdain (to put it mildly) for a free press. At the start of the month, Iraqi correspondents Laith and Jenan (Inside Iraq, McClatchy Newspapers) wrote that "no protections measures have taken by Iraqi government to stop this series" of jounalist killings "I thought that the Iraqi government is watching this killing series with careleness and they don't do much to protect the life of journalists except for condemning and condolences which do nothing to save the precious lives of the Iraqi journalists but today I found out that I was wrong." What had changed? Najaf announced land set aside for journalists -- for dead journalists. Meanwhile on the most recent attack, Middle East Online is recommended by Laura posting to Laith and Jenan's post and, at MEO, they note that the Iraqi soldiers' attack on a journalist took place in front of a photographer for AFP and that the country's Journalistic Freedom Observatory wants an immediate investigation after journalists "were beaten, insulted and humiliated". Reporters Without Borders notes, "Reporters and cameramen working for various Iraqi and foreign news media were beaten and insulted by Iraqi soldiers yesterday in the central Baghdad district of Al-Ghadir. Associated Press cameraman Saad Kazem Hussein told the Journalistic Freedoms Observatory that an Iraqi general ordered his troops to attack the journalists, who were photographing the scene of a bombing. 'The soldiers also fired in the air,' said an AFP phographer who was there. Four camers were confiscated, according to a third journalist who asked not to be identified." In addition, Reporters Without Borders notes, "Omar Ashti, a reporter with Hawlati, an independent weekly based in the Kurdish city of Suleimaniya (330 km north of Baghdad), was released on bail following his arrest on 10 February by security forces controlled by the Kurdish autonomous government, Reporters Without Borders learned [Monday]. He is now awaiting trial on a charge of libel in connection with an article at the end of last year in which he criticized the Kurdish government." And on a similar note the Associated Press' Bilal Hussein remains imprisoned. Bilal, a Pulitzer winning photographer, was taken into US military custody on April 12, 2006 and has been a prisoner ever since. Next week, he will have been imprisoned 23 months. Free Bilal
At the Pentagon today, Lt. General James Dubik gave a press briefing via videolink from Iraq. He was chatty and happy sharing that today was "the anniversary" of his engagment to his wife and "I did remember that it was in Hawaii". Yet when asked at what point the Iraqi military would take over their own air space, he took a lenghty pause. Possibly he was wondering how much was known about the Iraqi helicopter that went missing? Reuters notes that it crashed and 8 people died including a US service member.
In other violence reported today . . .
Bombings?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that wounded two police officer and a civilian, a Diyala Province roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 Iraqi soldier and left two more wounded. Reuters notes a Mosul roadside bombing that left five people wounded.
Shootings?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a man shot-dead outside of his Baquba home, while unknown assailants ("wearing Iraqi army uniforms") grabbed a man in Diyala Province and later disposed of his dead body, 1 police oficer and 3 bodyguards were shot dead in Basra, 2 people ("relatives of a leader of an awakening council") were shot dead in Salahuddin. Reuters notes a police officer was shot-dead outside his Mosul home.
Corpses?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses discovered in Baghdad.
Archbishop Paulos Faraj Raho was kidnapped Friday. The Arab American Institute (AAI -- via UN Observer) states, "Sadly, this incident is evidence of a grave situation faced by most Iraqis since the U.S.-led invasion. The suffering of the entire Iraqi people is widespread, defining daily life in most areas of the country. This is due to the lack of a plan to secure the peace. While all Iraqis live in fear, the circumstances facing minority populations is worse. With no political factions or large private militias to protect them, Iraq's embattled minorities are at the mercy of their environment. As the abduction of Archbishop Paulos and the murder of his colleagues show, when there is no security, there is too little mercy." Reuters reports that Nouri al-Maliki is making noises that Archbishop's release is "a top priority." But Asia News' reporting indicates that a lot more is known than al-Maliki lets on including a ransom. Asia News reports, "The men who have the fate of Msgr. Paulos Faraj Rahho, Chaldean Archbishop of Mosul in their hands since February 29th last, have raised the ransom and dictated 'political conditions' for his release, according to AsiaNews sources in Iraq, close to mediators who are negotiating his safe return. Late yesterday afternoon another phone call was made. The group which holds the bishop hostage, used Msgr. Rahoo’s mobile phone to communicate, but has still given no proof of his wellbeing. 'It almost seems as if his release -- anonymous sources in Mosul tell -- is of secondary importance in their demands and the conditions which they have imposed greatly complicate matters, leading us to think that they are not just simple criminals interested in money'. Concern is increasing for the 67 year-old hostage who suffers ill health, for which he needs daily treatment."
Maria Lauterbach is the US marine who vanished while pregnant. She was murdered. See the January 10th snapshot, the January 11th snapshot, the January 14th snapshot, the January 16th snapshot and the January 22nd snapshot. Maria's presumed murderer wasn't just anyone, he was someone she had stated raped her, stated to her commanding officers and she wasn't protected. They can argue that point all they want but Maria did accuse the man thought to have murdered her with rape and the US military didn't do anything. A hearing was coming up when she disappeared but . . . strangely . . . that didn't make the military take any more interest in him than they did prior. They treated it like it wasn't their problem. They acted as if it was Maria's problem. Jessica Pupovac (In These Times) examines the effects Maria's story is having which includes activist Susan Avila-Smith currently advising those who have experienced Military Sexual Trauma (MST) to be temporarily silent: "It breaks my heart to do that but I want to get them out alive and that's my main goal." Sgt. Myla Haider explains how investigations work (or don't) and notes, "The investigators themselves, when working on cases, tended to focus on reasons a victim could be lying. . . . [and use] tag team interviews [where] one agent after another is sent in there to 'get the truth' out of the victim. On occasion, that results in the victims becoming very upset." VETWOW is one organization that helps those with MST and Suzanne Swift is a strong example of how the US military refuses to do anything (Swift was assaulted and harassed, went through channels and was sent to 'training' on how not to be 'tempting' -- when the military refused to stop the abuse, Swift self-checked out).
Senator McCain has had the nomination all but sown up, but internal rival Mike Huckabee's refusal to withdraw from the race has stopped Senator McCain from claiming the title. Until now. While Senator McCain has already turned his attention from Mr Huckabee to potential Democratic opponents, he can now claim the support of the entire Republican party.
If Senator Clinton takes Rhode Island and Ohio as early counts suggest, she will have broken a 12-state winning streak by rival Barack Obama.
that's from kate rose's 'Hillary Clinton's back; John McCain is Republican choice' (australia's herald-sun). that makes me so happy. let's all share a good laugh over isaiah's latest comic that went up this morning 'pinocchio obama:'
here's whiny bambi from newsday saying he might not do as well today as he had strutted around earlier claiming, 'There's no doubt that if you're being attacked everyday that it creates a sense of turbulence in the minds of people.' you think?
crap ass democracy now has schilled for him every damn day. common dreams hasn't posted a pro-hillary column in weeks and even when it last did (erica jong's), it was 1 column in a glob of pro-bambi columns. the nation has trashed hillary non-stop. the progressive has trashed hillary non-stop. buzzflash has done it. go down the list. they have all gone gunning non-stop for hillary. bambi gest 1 bad day and suddenly it's weep and whine. get over it, you big cry baby.
i think that if he can't pull off all 4 states tonight, he's not the messiah that will lead us all to the land of bi-partisanship. oops!
i think bambi lost his halo. hillary won rhode island and is predicted in ohio. i think when you've had the gravy train bambi's had and you're still fighting tooth and nail for votes, you're not the nominee.
from a public relations standpoint, he should be wiping the floor with hillary. that's not happening and you better believe that everything that came before his snit-fit on the airplane yesterday (resulting in a taste of bad publicity) is the eaisest it can be. no candidate has ever had it that easy - not even bully boy in 2000. and bambi's still losing to hillary?
some 1 needs to tell him that if it's time for some 1 to drop it, it's time for the senator who hasn't completed his 1st term to drop out.
and look, here's john nichols at the nation saying 'now it gets dangerous.' poor little limp john nichols. he thought he'd be nutting tonight over bambi's victory dance. he'd be picturing bambi's buns in a tight pair of slacks while he twisted his own nipples and moaned 'bambi, oh, bambi.' instead, hillary's still in the fight and john nichols writes an insane column because he is F**KING NUTS!'
hillary needs to drop out, nichols argues, because this is like humphrey and mcgovern in 1972. it's nothing like that you stupid f**king idiot.
it's about a real democrat (hillary) and a faux 1. it's about real democrats turning out for hillary and republicans, communists, socialists and registered independents turning out for obama.
hillary is the party's choice.
get used to it.
john nichols (worth less than 5 cents) isn't the only nation writer who's been going after hillary. there's been the airs (berman and mebler), there's been self-hating lesbian laura flanders (i'd like to know when that socialist became an america, forget democratc, since she was a citizen of england), professor patti williams, fat girl katha pollitt (who wasn't a democrat when she was attending all those socialist meetings not all that long ago), katrina vanden heuvel, richard kim (who i'll assume is a self-hating gay man) and on and on and on. every day they post their poison about hillary clinton. every damn day you visit the nation and will find at least 3 posts telling you hillary is evil.
screw those losers. when's the last time they picked a winner? let's close with c.i.'s 'iraq snapshot:'
Tuesday, March 4, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, a US service member dies in Iraq, Carl Levin wastes time in the Senate, Iraqi soldiers attack journalists and more
Starting with war resistance. Agustin Aguayo was wrongfully denied CO status. Aguayo served in Iraq and, while serving, had a spiritual awakening/strengthening that led to him refusing to even load his pistol. Instead of granting him the CO status he so obviously qualified for, the US military decided to deploy him to Iraq a second time. To demonstrate how seriously he took his beliefs, Aguayo self-checked out. Though gone for less than the 30-day rule (Aguayo turned himself in), he was prosecuted for desertion in a court-martial in Germany. (You generally have to be gone for more than 30 days to be prosecuted for desertion, otherwise the status is AWOL.) Aguayo continues to pursue his CO status. And he continues to speak out. This Thursday (March 6th) he and his wife Helga Aguayo will be speaking at UCLA Riverside, in the Interdisciplinary Building at 6:00 pm.
And outside the US, war resisters who have moved to Canada were dealt a serious set-back when the Canadian Supreme Court refused to hear the appeals of Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey. Today, Canada's Parliament remaining the best hope for safe harbor war resisters have, you can make your voice heard by the Canadian parliament which has the ability to pass legislation to grant war resisters the right to remain in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (http://us.f366.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (http://us.f366.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (http://us.f366.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=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. That is the sort of thing that should receive attention but instead it's ignored.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).
Meanwhile IVAW has a DC action this month:
In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan
March 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation. Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." IVAW's co-chair Adam Kokesh will, of course, be participating and he explains why at his site, "But out of a strong sense of duty, some of us are trying to put our experiences to use for a good cause. Some of us couldn't live with ourselves if weren't doing everything we could to bring our brothers and sisters home as soon as possible. The environment may be unking, but that is why I will be testifying to shooting at civilians as a result of changing Rules of Engagement, abuse of detainees, and desecration of Iraqi bodies. It won't be easy but it must be done. Some of the stories are things that are difficult to admit that I was a part of, but if one more veteran realizes that they are not alone because of my testimony it will be worth it." The hearings will be broadcast throughout at the Iraq Veterans Against the War home page an on KPFA March 14th and 16th with Aimee Allison (co-host of the station's The Morning Show and co-author with David Solnit of Army Of None) and Aaron Glantz hosting and the KPFA live stream will also be available at Glantz' War Comes Home.
Today Navy Admiral William J. Fallon appeared before the US Armed Services Committee and he was present to give an update/assessment on the ongoing, illegal war but the senators largely wasted the hearing by whining about the visit of Iranian president to Iraq and no one whined louder than the committee chair Carl Levin. Fallon delivered his [PDF format warning] prepared remarks which included claiming he was able "to report significant progress in security in Iraq. . . . The most significant development in Iraq over the last year has been a dramatic decrease in violence. By almost every measure, the security situation has improved significantly." Had Levin and others paid attention they could have questioned that laughable assertion. Fallon also praised the 'importance' of the "Awakening" council and claimed there were over "90,000 Iraqi men" who had signed up -- left unstated were issues involving the crimes those thugs are accused of as well as the walk-out so many of them are taking part in. But Carl Levin wanted everyone to know he did not like the fact that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad visited Iraq -- a country that borders Iran. And isn't that more important than examining what's being 'achieved' by the illegal war? Fallon was spinning wildly: "The recent passage of the 2008 National Budget, Provincial Powers, Amnesty, and de-Ba'athification laws are significant accomplishments. The Presidency Council returned the Provincial Powers Law to the Council of Representatives but with the assurance that preparations for provincial elecitons this fall should continue." Where to begin? How about the fact that the "Provincial Powers" legislation was not 'returned' -- the Presidency Council said "NO." Call it a veto, call it whatever, but it was not 'returned' as though it just needs a little fine tuning. Why Carl Levin couldn't do his damn job is a question only he can answer; however, while he spent today frothing at the mouth over Iran, it should be noted that the US State Department's deputy flack Tom Casey came off calm by contrast in a State Dept press confrence yesterday when he noted of Iran that it "has an oustanding offer on the table to negotiate with us and to work out an arrangement that allows them to have a full civilian nuclear program while assuring us that they're not using that as a diversion or cover for building a nuclear weapon." There is no proof that Iran is attempting that and there's no strong evidence that even indicates it is likely. But even raising those elements (of administration spin), Casey still came off less foaming at the mouth than did Levin.
On Ahmadinejad, Liz Sly (Chicago Tribune) reports today that, "During his visit, the first by an Iranian president since the Islamic revolution of 1979, Ahmadinejad was feted by Iraq's Shiite and Kurdish leaders. Even the Sunni vice president, Tariq al-Hashimi, turned up to greet him, though he was an hour late. In addition to the $1 billion loan, the two countries negotiated seven deals on economic and cultural cooperation. In a statement on his Web site, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani said the two sides also reached an agreement 'to secure their borders ... to prevent infiltration of terrorists and smugglers'." Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) explains, "To have Ahmadinejad safely cruise around Baghdad, the capital shut down. I walked into the office on Sunday and our newsroom was empty, nearly our entire staff didn't make it to work. Hussein, one of our Iraqi reporters, tried to take a taxi. No vehicle traffic was allowed on the roads to secure Ahmadinejad's path to President Jalal Talabani's compound." Allen Pizzey (CBS News) observes, "For a send-off, Ahmadinejad didn't get just one 'kiss for luck'; he got four, when he was welcomed by U.S.-backed Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who threw in a symbolic hug by standing impassive while the Iranian leader told a joint press conference: 'The Americans have to understand the facts of the region. Iraqi people do not like America." Joining Carl Levin in frothing at the mouth today was Lt. General Ray Odierno who met with the Bully Boy of the United States at the White House yesterday and spoke at the Pentagon today. Aamer Madhani (Baltimore Sun) quotes Odierno stating today of Iran's influence on Iraq that it was "what I worry about most." Andrew Gray (Reuters) notes that Odierno accused Iran of being behind rocket attacks in Iraq as he stated, "That's because it was being done by Iranian surrogates. And when the government of Iraq holds a meeting, there tends to be rocket attacks. Why's that? Because it's done by Iranian surrogates." Good of Carl Levin to help Odierno advance his itch for war with Iran today. He might have better used his time -- and the committee's -- by questioning the measures of 'success' because there is no progress in Iraq, there is no advance.
Violence didn't disappear, didn't vanish. The escalation Bully Boy pushed through last year -- with Dems in Congress waving through (symbolic measures do nothing) -- reduced some violence as did the cease-fire with Muqtada al-Sadr. But only in sections of Iraq. The "Awakening" Councils are fueling more tensions and Mosul's been in the US military's cross-hairs for how long now? More US troops were put on the ground in Iraq and not only did the puppet government not accomplish anything, but violence didn't go away.
One of today's biggest 'surge' cheerleaders is US Senator John McCain who is running to become the GOP's presidential nomination for the November general election. He loves the escalation. He thinks it's both amazing and a miracle. Or that's what he says. Or what he says now. Dropping back to the August 4, 2006 snapshot for this from the August 3, 2006 US Senate Armed Services Committee:
Senator John McCain: So, General Abizaid, we're moving 7,500 troops into Baghdad, is that correct? General John Abizaid: The number is closer to 3,500. [. . .] McCain: And where are these troops coming from? Abizaid: Uh, the troops, the Styker Brigade, is coming down from Mosul. McCain: From Mosul? Is the situation under control in Ramadi? Abizaid: Uh, the situation in Ramadi, is better than it was two months ago. McCain: Is the situation under control in Ramadi? Abizaid: I think the situation in Ramadi is workable. McCain: And the troops from Ramadi came from Falluja, isn't that correct? Abizaid: I can't say senator, I know that -- McCain: Well that's my information. What I' worry about is we're playing a game of whack-a-mole here. We move troops from -- It flares up, we move troops there. Everybody knows we've got big problems in Ramadi and I said, "Where you gonna get the troops?" 'Well we're going to have to move them from Falluja.' Now we're going to have to move troops into Baghdad from someplace else. It's very disturbing.
A functioning press would be asking Senator Crazy how the 'surge' is in any way different than what he was complaining about in August 2006? Answer: It isn't. There has been no peace. There has been no end to the violence. What's happened is a cease-fire and a huge addition of US troops added on the ground still couldn't stop the daily violence. Is Senator Crazy cheerleading today to be a 'good soldier' for the White House or is he unable to remember the criticism he offered in 2006?
Today Solomon Moore and Mudhafer Al-Husaini (New York Times) report: "Iraqi soldiers attacked a group of Iraqi and American journalists as they photographed the area. Five soldiers stomped on an Iraqi journalist with their combat boots as he lay on the ground, reporters there said. They said that he cried, 'Why are you doing this?' and added, 'I am an Iraqi too!' Iraqi soldiers confiscated the cameras of many Iraqi journalists at the scene. When they tried to do the same with a photographer for The New York Times, American soldiers intervened and prevented the Iraqi soldiers from arresting his bodyguard." Let's drop back to January 25, 2007 when Damien Cave and James Glanz (New York Times) reported: "One Iraqi soldier in the alley pointed his rifle at an American reporter and pulled the trigger. There was only a click, the weapon had no ammunition. The soldier laughed at his joke." Where would anyone get the idea that attacks on the press are okay? Yes, the US military has attacked the press but Iraqi thugs employed by the puppet government in Baghdad need only look to their puppet-head. Nouri al-Maliki's really lucky most Americans don't give a damn about him. If they did, the puppet would have been thrown out of office long ago because he's 'leadership' has been an absolute failure. Let's look at one of his early 'plans,' no, not the 24-point 'plan' he announced as he was being installed prime minister. Let's focus on the 4-point 'plan' and it's easy to forget that 'plan' because the press certainly did. But even when they had a little interest in it, they refused to note all four parts of the 'plan.' As noted in the October 3, 2006 snapshot, the third plank in the al-Maliki's 'peace' 'plan' was an attack on journalism and journalists. And if you drop back to a 'great day' (according to al-Maliki) you'll see that on September 7, 2006 al-Arabiya satellite network was shut down by Iraqi police on the orders of al-Maliki. The puppet's reign has been about very little but one hallmark has been the disdain (to put it mildly) for a free press. At the start of the month, Iraqi correspondents Laith and Jenan (Inside Iraq, McClatchy Newspapers) wrote that "no protections measures have taken by Iraqi government to stop this series" of jounalist killings "I thought that the Iraqi government is watching this killing series with careleness and they don't do much to protect the life of journalists except for condemning and condolences which do nothing to save the precious lives of the Iraqi journalists but today I found out that I was wrong." What had changed? Najaf announced land set aside for journalists -- for dead journalists. Meanwhile on the most recent attack, Middle East Online is recommended by Laura posting to Laith and Jenan's post and, at MEO, they note that the Iraqi soldiers' attack on a journalist took place in front of a photographer for AFP and that the country's Journalistic Freedom Observatory wants an immediate investigation after journalists "were beaten, insulted and humiliated". Reporters Without Borders notes, "Reporters and cameramen working for various Iraqi and foreign news media were beaten and insulted by Iraqi soldiers yesterday in the central Baghdad district of Al-Ghadir. Associated Press cameraman Saad Kazem Hussein told the Journalistic Freedoms Observatory that an Iraqi general ordered his troops to attack the journalists, who were photographing the scene of a bombing. 'The soldiers also fired in the air,' said an AFP phographer who was there. Four camers were confiscated, according to a third journalist who asked not to be identified." In addition, Reporters Without Borders notes, "Omar Ashti, a reporter with Hawlati, an independent weekly based in the Kurdish city of Suleimaniya (330 km north of Baghdad), was released on bail following his arrest on 10 February by security forces controlled by the Kurdish autonomous government, Reporters Without Borders learned [Monday]. He is now awaiting trial on a charge of libel in connection with an article at the end of last year in which he criticized the Kurdish government." And on a similar note the Associated Press' Bilal Hussein remains imprisoned. Bilal, a Pulitzer winning photographer, was taken into US military custody on April 12, 2006 and has been a prisoner ever since. Next week, he will have been imprisoned 23 months. Free Bilal
At the Pentagon today, Lt. General James Dubik gave a press briefing via videolink from Iraq. He was chatty and happy sharing that today was "the anniversary" of his engagment to his wife and "I did remember that it was in Hawaii". Yet when asked at what point the Iraqi military would take over their own air space, he took a lenghty pause. Possibly he was wondering how much was known about the Iraqi helicopter that went missing? Reuters notes that it crashed and 8 people died including a US service member.
In other violence reported today . . .
Bombings?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that wounded two police officer and a civilian, a Diyala Province roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 Iraqi soldier and left two more wounded. Reuters notes a Mosul roadside bombing that left five people wounded.
Shootings?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a man shot-dead outside of his Baquba home, while unknown assailants ("wearing Iraqi army uniforms") grabbed a man in Diyala Province and later disposed of his dead body, 1 police oficer and 3 bodyguards were shot dead in Basra, 2 people ("relatives of a leader of an awakening council") were shot dead in Salahuddin. Reuters notes a police officer was shot-dead outside his Mosul home.
Corpses?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses discovered in Baghdad.
Archbishop Paulos Faraj Raho was kidnapped Friday. The Arab American Institute (AAI -- via UN Observer) states, "Sadly, this incident is evidence of a grave situation faced by most Iraqis since the U.S.-led invasion. The suffering of the entire Iraqi people is widespread, defining daily life in most areas of the country. This is due to the lack of a plan to secure the peace. While all Iraqis live in fear, the circumstances facing minority populations is worse. With no political factions or large private militias to protect them, Iraq's embattled minorities are at the mercy of their environment. As the abduction of Archbishop Paulos and the murder of his colleagues show, when there is no security, there is too little mercy." Reuters reports that Nouri al-Maliki is making noises that Archbishop's release is "a top priority." But Asia News' reporting indicates that a lot more is known than al-Maliki lets on including a ransom. Asia News reports, "The men who have the fate of Msgr. Paulos Faraj Rahho, Chaldean Archbishop of Mosul in their hands since February 29th last, have raised the ransom and dictated 'political conditions' for his release, according to AsiaNews sources in Iraq, close to mediators who are negotiating his safe return. Late yesterday afternoon another phone call was made. The group which holds the bishop hostage, used Msgr. Rahoo’s mobile phone to communicate, but has still given no proof of his wellbeing. 'It almost seems as if his release -- anonymous sources in Mosul tell -- is of secondary importance in their demands and the conditions which they have imposed greatly complicate matters, leading us to think that they are not just simple criminals interested in money'. Concern is increasing for the 67 year-old hostage who suffers ill health, for which he needs daily treatment."
Maria Lauterbach is the US marine who vanished while pregnant. She was murdered. See the January 10th snapshot, the January 11th snapshot, the January 14th snapshot, the January 16th snapshot and the January 22nd snapshot. Maria's presumed murderer wasn't just anyone, he was someone she had stated raped her, stated to her commanding officers and she wasn't protected. They can argue that point all they want but Maria did accuse the man thought to have murdered her with rape and the US military didn't do anything. A hearing was coming up when she disappeared but . . . strangely . . . that didn't make the military take any more interest in him than they did prior. They treated it like it wasn't their problem. They acted as if it was Maria's problem. Jessica Pupovac (In These Times) examines the effects Maria's story is having which includes activist Susan Avila-Smith currently advising those who have experienced Military Sexual Trauma (MST) to be temporarily silent: "It breaks my heart to do that but I want to get them out alive and that's my main goal." Sgt. Myla Haider explains how investigations work (or don't) and notes, "The investigators themselves, when working on cases, tended to focus on reasons a victim could be lying. . . . [and use] tag team interviews [where] one agent after another is sent in there to 'get the truth' out of the victim. On occasion, that results in the victims becoming very upset." VETWOW is one organization that helps those with MST and Suzanne Swift is a strong example of how the US military refuses to do anything (Swift was assaulted and harassed, went through channels and was sent to 'training' on how not to be 'tempting' -- when the military refused to stop the abuse, Swift self-checked out).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)