Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Nothing big

Foreign Secretary David Miliband insisted Tuesday that "deep concerns" about mistakes in Iraq and Afghanistan should not stop Britain from championing democracy around the world, his office said.
In a speech honouring Myanmar's opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, Miliband said he was "unapologetic" about promoting a "mission to help democracy spread through the world," according to the text of the address issued in advance.
"I believe discussion about the Iraq war has clouded the debate about promoting democracy around the world," Miliband said in the address to an audience at her old Oxford college, Saint Hugh's.


That is from AFP and that is disgusting. "Championing Democracy" sounds so pretty, doesn't it?

What it means is at the end of a gun barrel. What it means is even more war. I've sat through this movie before when Vietnam ended. I know how this turns out.

Brad wrote to say it took him time to get into the opening track of Joni Mitchell's Shine but he has and it won a Grammy Sunday. He says, "You were right." I think it's a good song but that's my opinion. (I think it's better than good, actually.) But let's remember that awards don't validate our opinions or shouldn't. I'm happy Joni got a Grammy (and Herbie Hancock's tribute album -- River -- won for album of the year) but I would still love the song even if it hadn't won a Grammy. I love a ton of Diana Ross' work and she's never won a Grammy. There's little rhyme or reason to the way these things work out. Happy for it but I'd still love the song (and the CD), Grammy win or no Grammy win.

Closing with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Tuesday, February 12, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the Iraqi Parliament may split up, one journalist turns up dead the two from CBS News remain missing, and more.

Starting with war resisters. Linchpin's "
US AWOL's in Canada -- Let them stay" (Anarkismo) provides the background on war resisters in Canada:

Hear any of the Toronto based war resisters speak at a public meeting and patterns become clear in their experiences. Kim Rivera, a red head in her early twenties, served in an Artillery unit in Baghdad, that shipped out first in August 2006. Tales of gore, IED's and guts quickly changed her mind about the mission. The dehumanisation of Iraqi workers forced to etch out employment inside forward operation bases added to it.Another of the Toronto based war resisters is Phil McDowell. He joined straight after the September 11th attacks during his senior year majoring in IT. He was discharged in June 2006, some months later while traveling, he got notice he was being stop lossed back to Fort Hood, Texas for yet another deployment to Iraq.The Stop Loss policy is designed to offset the ebb and flow of recruiting patterns. It allows the military to forcibly re-enlist soldiers or involuntarily extend their tour of duty in a war zone -- it's a virulent source of antagonism for soldiers.

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

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


Meanwhile
IVAW is organizing a March 2008 DC action:

In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.
Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." As part of their fundraising efforts for the event, they are holding houseparties and a recent one in Boston featured both IVAW's Liam Madden and the incomprable Howard Zinn as speakers.

As
Steve Lannon (McClatchy Newspapers) explains today, "Violence is increasing In Iraq . . . Car bombs in Baghdad on Monday killed at least 11 people and injured a prominent leader of one of the country's most influential American-allied tribal militias. The Ministry of Electricity announced that power to much of the nations, already anemic, is likely to lag in coming days because insurgents had blown up transmission facilities and natural gas pipelines that fuel generators." And on the 12th day of the month, there have been 16 US service members announced dead thus far this month. The stated purpose of the escalation, stated by the White House, was to allow 'breathing space' for the puppet government in Baghdad to reach benchmarks -- those would be benchmarks that they failed to reach in 2007, White House defined benchmarks. US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who earlier was seen as in a battle with other members of the cabinet over his insistence that the drawdown start and proceed smoothly so that the approximately 30,000 US troops sent over to Iraq as part of the escaltion return as they were supposed to, has now declared that a 'pause' can be taken in the drawdown -- indicating that he either had a mysterious change of heart or he is not calling the shots for the department he heads. Thom Shanker (New York Times) observes that Gates' turnabout "was something of a surprise," that he was once "seen as a potential counterpoint to General Petraeus's calls for caution about withdrawing troops" and notes Gates previous public statements about the drawdown (which he then favored). Anna Mulrine (US News and World Reports) opines, "Gates's statement yesterday make it clear that the pause will likely last for some months and become the operative word in Iraq -- and it may become as overused as the now-familiar term surge." This as Richard Cowan (Reuters) reveals Gordon England, the US Deputy Secretary of Defense, informed the Senate Budget Committee today that in addition to the $70 billion planned for funding the illegal war in 2009, the White House will be asking "Congress for more money".

AFP addresses the realities of what's been accomplished during the escalation (nothing): "The reconciliation program was supposed to hang on three main pieces of legislation: a relaxation of the law to bar former Baathists from public office, a provincial election law and a law to distribute oil revenue. Of the three, only one has been passed." That would be the de-de-Baathification program. At the start of the month, Amit R. Paley and Joshua Partlow (Washington Post) reported on the passage/approval of that law while Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) reported on the criticism coming from CIA asset and Iraqi exile Ahmed Chalabi that the result of passage would be "all former Baathists now serving in the security services would lose their jobs, a total of 7,000 people" and, of the Iraqi Parliament, "People should pay attention to what they are discussing and voting on." One of three and the one is a nightmare (as all will no doubt be -- illegal occupations do not make for pleasant dreams). Working from agency reports, The Daily Star reports Mahmoud al-Mashhadani, the Iraqi Parliament's Speaker of the House, revealed that the country's treasury had thrown away $3 million by still not approving the 2008 budget and "threatened Tuesday to disband the legislature" which is permitted by the Constitution provided the move has the support of at least a third of the Parliamentay members (which he says it does) and this action "would further undermine Premier Nuri al-Maliki's shaky government, which is currently limping along with nearly half of the 40 government departments without ministers." Ahmed Rasheed (Reuters) maintains that an "absolute majority" of Parliament must favor dissolution for the body to be dissolved and quotes a member of Moqtada al-Sadr's bloc, Bahaa al-Araji, stating, "The crisis of conficence in parliament has grown. I think we should admit the failure of the (political process), dissolve parliament and hold new elections."

Today,
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports, the corpse of Husham Mijoud was discovered. AFP explains, "Underscoring the perils, the Young Journalists League said the body of an Iraqi journalist was found in Baghdad on Tuesday, two days after he disappeared after heading out shopping. According to League president Haider Hassoon, the body of Hisham Mijwit Hamdane, a 27-year-old married father of two, was found by police in the Bab al-Sheikh neighborhood of central Baghdad." The discovery comes as two CBS News employees remain missing (and unnamed). Deborah Haynes (Times of London) notes an ongoing hunt "for a British journalist and his Iraqi interpreter who were kidnapped at gunpoint from a hotel in Basra at the weekend. The two men, who were working for the American network CBS, were seized in the early hours of Sunday morning from the Qasr al-Sultan Hotel in the centre of the city by a gang of five to ten men." AFP explains, "Police on Tuesday threw a cordon around the Palace Sultan hotel in Basra, searching for clues and restricting movement in and out of the premises". Michael Howard (Guardian of London) takes the history route, noting, "If the accounts of the latest kidnapping in Basra are confirmed, it would be the first abduction of a western reporter in Iraq since Jill Carroll of the Christian Sciene Monitor was seized and her driver killed in western Baghdad in Janurary 2006. She was released two months later."

In other violence . . .

Bombings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that wounded one police officer, a Baghdad mortar attack that claimed 2 lives and wounded eight people a Diyala Province bombing that claimed the life of nine-year-old girl

Shootings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 girls and 1 boy were shot dead in an attack on a studen bus in Diyala Province with the driver and two boys also wounded while an armed clash in Mosul claimed the life of 1 police officer and seven unknown assailants and 2 police officers were shot down in separate incidents outside Basra. Reuters notes 'Awakening' Council member Ahmeda Mahmoud al-Nattah was targeted with an unsuccessful assassination attempt today outside Ramadi (two of his body guards were wounded).

Corpses?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 corpses discovered in Baghdad and 13 in Diyala Province.

As noted yesterday, Rose Gentle and Beverley Clarke are fighting for the truth in England. This is Great Britain's Socialist Worker's "
Military Families challenge war in House of Lords:"

Two women whose sons were killed serving in Iraq took their case for a public inquiry into the legality of the war to the House of Lords on Monday of this week.
Rose Gentle, whose son Gordon was killed by a roadside bomb in 2004, and Beverley Clarke, whose son David was killed in a 'friendly fire' incident in 2003, are asking the law lords to overturn a court of appeal judgement. This ruled that the government is not obliged to hold an inquiry into the deaths of the two soldiers. Rose and Beverly want an inquiry into government decisions in the run up to the invasion.
In particular they want to know why 13 pages of "equivocal" advice from the attorney general was reduced to one page that stated that the war would be legal.
Lawyers for Rose and Beverley argue that they should be granted an inquiry under Article 2 of the Europen Convention on Human Rights, which protects the right to life.
The case is being heard by nine law lords and a judgement is expected to take six months.
Just before she attended court on the first day of the hearing, Rose Gentle told Socialist Worker, "We want the right to have a public inquiry -- not just for us and our families, but for everyone. The whole world is watching what happenes.
"We are still not allowed to know the truth about the war. What does the government have to hide?"
Rose has campaigned tirelessly for justice for her son and for other victims of the war -- including the many thousands of Iraqis skilled.
She said, "We need to make sure the government can't get away with doing this again. I will be marching on 15 March to say we want all the troops back home."
© Copyright Socialist Worker (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original and leave this notice in place.


Turning to US politics with a qualifier. Politics don't belong in the snapshot unless it has to do with Iraq. We are a feminist community and we will note attacks on women regardless of Iraq-related or not. At the request of the community, we're addressing the sexism one more time since it's being ignored by many in Little Media. On MSNBC, David Shuster raised the 'issue' of Hillary Clinton's daughter in an offensive, insulting and sexist manner. Democracy Now! refuses to report on it. Free Speech Radio News refuses to report.
Smut Merchant Matthew Rothschild, so eager to link to the neocon bible The Weekly Standard and to do so with "RECOMMENDED" hasn't said a word. Bob Somerby (The Daily Howler) notes that Tapped (American Prospet) has stayed silent as well. That's not a surprise. They know who writes the pay checks and they know Robert Kuttner was lying hard on Democracy Now! last Friday when he claimed 'evil' Hillary has mandates in her health coverage and, as usual, Amy Goodman let him get away with that nonsense. It took Juan Gonzalez, citing Paul Krugman, to point out that Obama's plan also has mandates. Ooops. Called on, the idiot Kuttner offers a lot of nonsense rushing to this laughable conclusion, "Now, we can split hairs and argue whether Obama is being principled or tactical, but I think his discomvort with the ieda of a mandate is something that I applaud." In that laughable statement you can see how Little Media has repeatedly LIED and repeatedly DISGRACED themselves. Yes, Obama has mandates and Kuttner knew that before tearing into Hillary. Confronted on the reality, what happens? Obama's uncomfortable with them. That's good enough for Kuttner. Yes, Obama has mandates just like Hillary and if forced to acknowledge that, Kuttner will allow they exist but rush in to offer an excuse that attempts to create a difference where there is none. Or take, as Ava and I noted, Allan Nairn's ridiculous response when forced to admit that Obama's taking Big Bucks from Big Business: "He actually doesn't need to finance his campaign, to go to the hedge funds, to go to Wall Street. But he does anyway. And he does, I think, because if he doesn't, they wouldn't trust him [. . .] because he doesn't want to be attacked by those corporations." As Ava and I pointed out, "Nairn is (illogically and with no basis in reality) arguing that, yes, Obama does take big money but he only does so because, if he didn't, big money would attack him. It's a laughable 'theory' and a generous one -- one that's not extended to other candidates." But that's how it goes over and over. Kuttner thinks mandates are awful. Kuttner's forced to admit Obama's plan has them and offers that he feels they make Bambi uncomfortable. Nairn invents an excuse for why Bambi's taking huge monies from Big Business. This is how it plays out over and over.

Take Slate which features Guy Branum. For what reason? Because there are no journalistic standards. Guy Branum's infamous for a number of things. This includes being in the closet when everyone knew reality but that didn't prevent from writing a column on a 'date' with a man who won a contest (and that Branum had expected was a woman) where he made nasty little Crying Game jokes and presented himself as straight. He has issues. He has always had issues. His latest trash (no links to trash) is entitled "It's time for the press to scrutinize Chelsea" and Branum kind-of (not really) explains why he loathes Chelsea Clinton (without ever admitting that he loathes Chelsea). When he was in college (and still in the closet) and a football game was coming p, it was time for him to pen a column asking that his school "show your spirit on Chelsea's bloodied carcass" and that she "must be destroyed." He can offer any excuse he wants but you don't write that about any individual going to another school on the eve of a campus match up. The smart thing to do would be to admit, a decade later, that you were in the wrong. Instead Branum's showing up to distort reality again. He's probably not lying, to make such a fool of yourself probably requires a level of sincerity. He says of his 1997 column today, "The comments made their way to Mrs. Clinton, who asked the Secret Service to search my apartment and quiet me down, according to Chris Van Holt, one of the nice agents who visited. The Clintons later denied any involvement, but I did manage to get the agent's claim otherwise on a tape recorder I had with me." Again, he's not lying, he's just delusional. What he has on tape is a Secret Service agent responding to his whines of "WHY!" and at one point the agent states that his boss told him and his boss said Hillary told him. Setting aside the fact that it sounds like the Secret Service agents are trying to humor a delusional paranoid, if Branum would think about it, all he actually has is a game of telephone. He has: 'We were told by and he was told by and . . .' Apparently journalism didn't sink in while he was in college because he has no source. (At best, he has a lead. A decade later, his lead has gone cold.)

He shows readers just how much he hates women -- should have been clear by the 1997 column on Chelsea -- by calling Elizabeth Edwards' a "primary attack dog." I guess b**tch was off limits because she has cancer? Here's the reality Branum can never face -- his column was out of bounds regardless of which college freshman he was going after. But Big Bad Guy didn't care. Well, no one cares that after you write a column that can be seen as threatening to the daughter of the then-president, the Secret Service came to visit you. That's to be expected when you encourage others to "show your spirit on Chelsea's bloodied caracass" -- and no, Hillary didn't have to make any phone calls for such a visit to take place. (He does realize, right, that the Secret Service was on Chelsea's campus and that the tip-off to the San Jose office most likely came from those agents who would have, in fact, been doing their job.)

It helps Guy to believe that Hillary sicked the Secret Service on him because it allows him to avoid responsibility for his own actions. The same way looking at trannies and putting them down helps him feel like he's just a little gay and not really out there. (He's written of that, I'm not outing him on anything here.) Slate chooses to publish him when the only thing they should have done was encourage him to get help. Guy did something that required an investigation. An investigation by the Secret Service took place. It wasn't the end of the world. Ten year (and three months) later, you'd think the 28-year-old would be able to apologize to the 27-year-old (yes, Chelsea wasn't even an adult when Guy launched his attack on her). Instead he wants to offer up his nutso, watered-down. sort-of-almost Hinckley account and argue that the press is too kind to Chelsea. Crawl back under your rock, your basic cable rock.

Jesse Sheidlower (Slate) attempts to navigate the history of the term used. What Sheidlower doesn't grasp is that for the 'new' meaning to be used, there would be a workable substitute. "Pimp my ride" or "Pimp my car" can be seen as similar to your ride being "tricked out." Is that what David Shuster was suggesting on MSNBC, that Hillary had given Chelsea a makeover? No, that's not what Shuster was attempting to say. There's also where it was said. As Somerby points out, "As noted, the gentlemen at MSNBC have been piling up quite a track record lately . . . . In less than a year, three of the network's major male screamers have been forced to apologize for rude comments about women; one of the three has been fired, another has now been suspended. But then, Jack Welch's king of cable, Chris Matthews, has been gender-trashing Hillary Clinton for more than a year at this point." That would be the same MSNBC that Joan Walsh (Salon) was characterizing last week (before the remark was made by Shuster), "My frineds at MSNBC were getting ready for a big party Tuesday night when the first results came in, showing Barack Obama winning handily in Georgia. There was genuine news, and very good news in the results: Obama carried more than 40 percent of white Georgia voters . . . But it was really good news at MSNBC. You could see the expectations grow that finally they would be able to finish the dance on Clinton's grave they'd begun on Jan. 8, when she denied them the fun by winning New Hampshire." That is the climate in which Shuster made his comment. Somerby's dealing with what's being beamed across America, Walsh is talking about the behind-the-scenes mood. It does go into it. A comment wasn't just made, it was made on a network with a history and pattern of similar remarks.

Now a lot of older women who should know better write nonsense online (no names, we'll be kind) and fail to convey the importance of how Hillary's campaign is handled by the press. You don't have to be for, you don't have to like her. But you do need to grasp that she is now the template for media coverage. And what's done to her will be done to women who come later. Then the excuse will be, "What's your problem? That's how we covered the first female candidate for president that was seen as viable." So if sexism is okay with you for all women, by all means, go ahead and pile on. If that's how PATHETIC you are, pile on. But the reality is what is accepted from the press right now will be used on all other women with the defense that, "Well that's how we covered Hillary." A lot of damage is being done currently and it makes some fools gleeful (fools and half-wits) because it's Hillary in the cross-hairs. That's not what feminism's about. And think about how
Uncle Tom Laura Flanders could call out the press coverage of Condi Rice but doesn't have a thing to say today (other than ga-ga-ga-goo-goo-Bambi). It's pathetic. And we do have a responsibility not to make things worse for those who come after. (We should be responsible for a great deal more than that but hopefully even half-wits like Laura Flanders can agree that we have a responsibility not to make things worse for those come after.) If the coverage of women doesn't matter, why did Flanders waste our time talking about and writing about the way the press responded to Condi Rice? It does matter. And if it's not called out, it makes things worse for every woman that comes after.

Equally true is who is fueling this. It's not the right-wing. They're focused on their own primary. It's the left and 'left' that's fueling it and they've done it over at The Nation, The Progressive, Democracy Now!, etc. There's nothing wrong with holding Hillary accountable. And it doesn't just have to be for her record. People should speak in their own voices with their own type of criticism. But that's not what we're seeing. What we're seeing is Hillary is held to standards and Obama's not to held to any. And that's come from the alleged 'independent' media. Sombery often refers back to the damage The Nation, in particular, did to Al Gore. It would probably be helpful for him to show his readers what they're doing to Hillary currently, what they've been doing. Show it as it happens in real time, not after the election's over. For how Amy Goodman skews the race, you can see
Rebecca's post from last night. And let me echo what Elaine wrote about the closeted last night. It is amazing to see a Communist or Socialist or Green self-present as a Democratic in their endorsement columns of Bambi. It's amazing and it's a lie. Day after day, they pop up, people who never even could endorse John Kerry during the ABB mood of 2004 but there are a number of behind the scenes deals taking place. And we've got a lot of non-Democratic Party types making endorsements which isn't really a good idea. If you're building your endorsement around "I'm just like you" then you better be honest about who you are or else you're begging for voters to make the connection that frauds and phonies hope on the Bambi train. (You're also begging for someone to go digging in your own backyard.) SusanUnPC (No Quarter) documents what the right-wing is doing with a Che flag hung at an Obama campaign office. You better believe closeted types offering endorsements are creating a future problem for his campaign. (As one political reporter at a daily paper put it yesterday, "Oh look, another Red for Obama.") There is no reason for anyone to hide in this day and age. Grace Lee Boggs is a radical and doesn't hide that. Her endorsement doesn't hurt. But, for instance, when you're a Socialist and you pen a "I'm a feminist for Barack Obama" column, you're not only being laughed at the mainstream media, you're creating a future problem should Obama get the nomination. That's not when this stuff needs to come out. If you're in the closet politically and you favor Obama, you're not doing him any favors by endorsing him publicly. [To be clear, Obama is just another corporate Democrat. He is not in the closet politically. He is not the issue, the issue is supporters creating an embarrassment if you're in the closet politically.] (Again, Grace Lee Boggs is not a problem. She's not in any closet. Others can't say the same.) By the same token, Obama needs to worry less about Hillary's tax returns and a little more about Antoin "Tony" Rezko (and the Landmark commission which will be big news in a general election). Pressed yesterday, Alex Koppelman (Salon) writes, Hillary responded stating if she got the nomination, she'd release them and noting Obama's ties to the nuclear industry as well as, "We still don't have a lot of answers about Senator Obama and his dealings with Mr. Rezko." As Wally, Cedric and Mike noted yesterday, David Roeder (Chicago Sun-Times) reported Sunday that the FBI's "mole" (John Thomas) on the Rezko investigation reportedly "logged frequent visits to Rezko from Gov. Glagojevich and U.S. Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill) . . . Sources said Thomas helped investigators build a record of repeat visits to the old offices of Rezko and former business partner Daniel Mahru's Rezmar Corp., at 853 N. Elston, by Blagojevich and Obama during 2004 and 2005."

Joe Wilson used to a topic of 'independent' media and it often that the only time Amy Goodman, Laura Flanders, et al could shut about him was if they were speaking with him for their programs. Wilson endorsed Hillary in December. Suddenly the name Joe Wilson appears 'banned' by Little Media. In today's Baltimore Sun,
he writes:

Sen. Hillary Clinton is one of the few who fully understood the stakes in that battle. Time and again, she reached out to my wife - outed CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson - and me to remind us that as painful as the attacks were, we simply could not allow ourselves to be driven from the public square by bullying. Mrs. Clinton knew from experience, having spent the better part of the past 20 years fighting the Republican attack machine. She is a fighter.
But will Mr. Obama fight? His brief time on the national scene gives little comfort. Consider a February 2006 exchange of letters with Mr. McCain on the subject of ethics reform. The wrathful Mr. McCain accused Mr. Obama of being "disingenuous," to which Mr. Obama meekly replied, "The fact that you have now questioned my sincerity and my desire to put aside politics for the public interest is regrettable but does not in any way diminish my deep respect for you."
Mr. McCain was insultingly dismissive but successful in intimidating his inexperienced colleague. Thus, in his one known face-to-face encounter with Mr. McCain, Mr. Obama failed to stand his ground.

Again, once upon a Little Media couldn't shut up about Joe Wilson. Somerby notes
Paul Krugman's blog where he explains, "Folks you've been played like a fiddle by people in the media who just plain hate the Clintons." That says a great deal. For more you can read his Monday New York Times column.










Monday, February 11, 2008

John Dickerson, Paul Krugman

1. Clinton has a floor: Despite Obama's successes, he has been unable to make significant inroads with key voting blocs. Women, Latinos, and less-prosperous voters all have continued to support Clinton. Obama is the candidate who is supposed to have the crazed supporters, but when the Washington Post recently asked Democratic voters how adamantly they supported their candidate, it was Clinton whose troops were more committed.
These are the groups that helped sustain Clinton in big states on Super Tuesday after Obama won in Iowa and South Carolina. Obama has had a few scattered wins among them (leading with women in Iowa and Maine), but he has not had great success reaching into these still-for-Clinton groups.
Clinton's support among these key demographics also provides her with her electability argument as she tries to make the case that Obama is a modern-day George McGovern—the pet rock of the party's wealthy liberal wing. "How can we have a nominee who can't win the votes of working-class people?" says one Clinton strategist. It's a good question.
Clinton is banking on her loyal constituencies for her comeback day on March 4, where she hopes working-class whites in Ohio and Latinos in Texas will give her victories. An early test of whether blue collar voters are holding for Clinton might come in pockets of Wisconsin, which votes next week. The college towns will go for Obama, but much of the state resembles Ohio. These areas should back Clinton. If not, she's in trouble.
2. Front-Runner Blues: Who would want to be the front-runner in this race? Every time someone is thus anointed, he or she falters. This isn't just superstition. There are specific pressures that come with being at the front of the field. Buyer's remorse can set in. As more Democrats look at Obama in nominee focus, they might start to worry over his general election liabilities. He may have experience, but he's never really been tested. (These unresolved qualms may explain why voters who make up their mind on Election Day go with Clinton).
The press might start pushing harder on Obama, too. The
stories that weren't followed up on during the galloping horse race stage of the early primaries might get a second look. Plus, there are more reporters covering fewer candidates, and perhaps the press will feel compelled to extensively vet a candidate who looks like he's on his way to the nomination.

That's from John Dickerson's "Hillary Comes Alive: The conventional wisdom says Clinton is doomed. Don't believe it" (Slate) and you can expect more of those type of excerpts here. I'm all for holding Hillary accountable. But we haven't had that. We've had non-stop attacks on her while 'independent' media has thrown their lot behind Bambi. It's not just happening, it is orchestrated. Having heard the crap that was Democracy Now! today (read Rebecca tonight, C.I. knew everyone would want certain things and suggested we do a conference call before those who blog at night do. We did that and everyone was able to grab something different so you're not reading the same topic but various opinions tonight), I'm sick of it. Rebecca will point out the bias today. But I'm not taking part in this.

I'm happy to call Hillary out. But I'm not going to do that while she's being trashed. I assumed, wrongly, that the 'independent' media would have a standard and they would apply it fairly to all candidates. They never have. They still don't. It's trash Hillary and praise Bambi. They are not that different on Iraq. The real difference is that if Hillary wants troops home (I don't know that she does), she can get it done. She knows how Congress works from outside and inside. She's a politician and somehow it's a bad thing for a politician to run for president? Somehow someone with no track record (both because of his 'present' votes and because he's done so little) is better than someone with experience?

Think about that. Think about how you run a . . . Baskin & Robins! (We stopped somehwere for ice cream today and that's still on my mind. Ava, C.I. and I are back on the road.) Hillary's eaten ice cream, she's sold ice cream. She worked X number of years at Braum's. While she was working at Braum's, every dirty trick in the world was used against her and it didn't phase her. She didn't cave and crumble. Now you've got a slot open at Baskin & Robins. You've also got Bambi applying. In the interview, you ask the first question and he gives you an answer that goes on for six minutes and it certainly sounds amazing as the words come together but it really doesn't say anything of substance. It's just pretty words. You look at his application. He's only worked at Braum's for a little bit. He used to work at a yogurt stand. Yogurt and ice cream are not the same thing. Then you find out that when he took the Braum's job he publicly stated he would stay with that job for six years. He'd learn the job and he would stay with it. It's exactly two years and a month later when he shows up for a job interview. You ask him about that and he replies with a non-answer. The store needs to be locked up each night by whomever you hire. You point out that he has a guy, a Tony Rezko, down as a reference and ask, "Is this the same Rezko under federal indictmen?" He replies he only did five hours of work for Rezko and barely knows him. He tells you he pushed through some changes at Braum's to protect customers. You find out later that there was a proposal that would protect customers but he wrecked it. It never went through, even though he told you to your face it did.

Do I need to go on?

I don't think so.

Bambi's getting a pass. I'll be happy to go back to holding Hillary accountable when the day comes that Bambi's held accountable. But he's gotten non-stop passes and I'm sick of it.

I'm also thinking how strange it is that, in terms of their age, it's the woman with experience that's ripped apart while the man with so very little experiecne (who happens to be younger) is getting a pass. It's the job-world at large. It's Lily Tomlin training assistants in Nine to Five and them being promoted over her.

Hillary's qualified. Bambi's not. That's not in doubt. Someone may not like her, may not want to vote for her because of the illegal war. That's fair. But fair is also noting that Bambi's record since he got into the Senate is identical to Hillary's. Pretending otherwise is lying.

This is from Paul Krugman's "Hate Springs Eternal" (New York Times):

The bitterness of the fight for the Democratic nomination is, on the face of it, bizarre. Both candidates still standing are smart and appealing. Both have progressive agendas (although I believe that Hillary Clinton is more serious about achieving universal health care, and that Barack Obama has staked out positions that will undermine his own efforts). Both have broad support among the party’s grass roots and are favorably viewed by Democratic voters.
Supporters of each candidate should have no trouble rallying behind the other if he or she gets the nod.
Why, then, is there so much venom out there?
I won't try for fake evenhandedness here: most of the venom I see is coming from supporters of Mr. Obama, who want their hero or nobody. I'm not the first to point out that the Obama campaign seems dangerously close to becoming a cult of personality. We’ve already had that from the Bush administration -- remember Operation Flight Suit? We really don’t want to go there again.
What's particularly saddening is the way many Obama supporters seem happy with the application of "Clinton rules" -- the term a number of observers use for the way pundits and some news organizations treat any action or statement by the Clintons, no matter how innocuous, as proof of evil intent.

For more on this topic, see "Editorial: State of 'Independent' Media" (The Third Estate Sunday Review). For more on how Paul Krugman and others are being treated by 'independent' media, see "What you didn't hear on Pacifica last week" (ibid). Want to see how women are treated (it's not just Hillary), read Ava and C.I.'s "TV: What's the measurement?" where you'll find out how Diane Sawyer was treated by Charlie Gibson on ABC (there were many other examples) and how Bill Moyers decided to explore the Latino vote -- which Bully Boy lost in 2000 and 2004, they went Democratic -- which is backing Hillary -- via a religious conservative who's hero (of mortals) is Ronald Reagan. Note that not only did Moyers book a man, he again ignored gender. For how many weeks this year. I'm sick of it. I'm sick of hours and hours of discussions on race because there's never time to discuss women. As Ava and C.I. point out, were it not for Cokie Roberts on ABC Tuesday night, the gender aspect would not have been discussed. Let's talk about race, I'm all for it. But let's talk about gender as well. The fact that the media won't suggests that they don't think it's important.

Closing with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

February 11, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the death toll for US service members in Iraq gets closer to 4,000 since the start of the illegal war, Captains Of War meet but who notices that or the protests, yesterday in Iraq saw so many deaths it's been dubbed "Bloody Sunday," Blue-Light special in Iraq, British mothers push for answers regarding the illegal war and more.

Starting with war resisters. Over the weekend, the Captains Of War met in Germany for the 44th Munich Conference on Security Policy. Among the attending was US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. Also 'representing' the US were US Senators Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman -- who no doubt made a delightful traveling couple -- with Turkey represented by its prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Little Kenny Roth of Human Rights Watch among others. We'll come back to what was stated at the conference. But while Captains Of War gathered to plot continue war, people rose up en mass to protest.
Amy Bradley (Indybay IMC) reports that Friday saw "several hundred activits" protesting and the number increased the following day as "several thousand protesters gathered in Marienplatz to continue the protests" including Iraq War veteran and war resister Chris Capps who the Minuch American Peace Committee awarded a peace medal and who is starting an IVAW chapter in Germany. Bradley reports 14 arrests while an estimated "3,700 police monitored the marchers." Bradley provides a number of photos of the two day protests and this one probably depicts the size of the crowd best. Courage to Resist profiles Chris Capps here and a quote we'll note is his stating, "If the politicians refuse to listen to the people, then the people need to take action. If we had resistance throughout the military then we could finally end this war here and now."

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

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


Meanwhile
IVAW is organizing a March 2008 DC action:

In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.
Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." As part of their fundraising efforts for the event, they are holding houseparties and a recent one in Boston featured both IVAW's Liam Madden and the incomprable Howard Zinn as speakers.

Returning to the Munich Conference on Security Policy for a number of reasons including that it is news. The protests against it are news and what was stated is news. We'll focus on a few speeches briefly and then move to US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.
Lindsey Graham was making his tenth trip and apologizing for being "a poor substitute for Senator [John] McCain" and, as if to make clear how poor, he made a non-funny joke about Russia that wasn't well received and his "I'll buy you a beer after" didn't smooth things over. Even with a crowd that didn't boo his white-washing/minimizing Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, he managed to get off on the wrong foot immediately. Graham offered this look-for-the-rainbow praise: "when NATO expands, the war is enriched." Joe Lieberman wants war with Iran very, very badly. It was the focus of his speech and just because there is no "covert work on bomb design" going on, Lieberman's up in arms over the "overt work on enrichment" as Iran established a nuclear power industry. Human Rights Watch's Little Kenny Roth bragged about the "expertise" his organization has allegedly developed. "We do not deal with the nuclear question. But we look at weapons systems that are used," explained Roth. "Cluster munitions caused more civilian casualities," in Iraq, he declared, "than any weapons other than small arms." He spoke of his concern with "the failure rate" of cluster munitions. Yes, that is a serious concern -- those pesky things do not go enough immediately. So he's not opposed to the indiscriminate deaths they cause immediately, just the deaths they cause days, weeks or years later? Someone needs to watch Human Rights Watch. Bobby Gates declared his focus was the Afghanistan War (for his speech -- before the British and Canadian governments protest, it was the focus for his speech only) and that would be the war that started in 2001 and continues today. He offers a revisionary history -- in bulletin points -- on the 'justification' for the war (no, he doesn't mention Osama bin Laden -- which, for anyone with a memory, was why the US began bombing -- after the Tailaban asked for proof of crimes before turning over bin Laden, the US response was to begin bombing). That war celebrated its sixth anniversary last fall so pay attention to this statement by Gates, "As many of you know, a Strategic Vision document is being drafted that will assess NATO's and our parenters' achievements in Afghanistan, and will produce a set of realistic goals and a roadmap to mee them over the next three to five years." Three to five years? The US Secretary of Defense is stating that the Afghanistan War could last through 2013 or even later? He went on to bemoan "bureaucratic hurdles" that "hinder our progress in Afghanistan" and advoacted for the passage of the NATO Commander's Emergency Response Fund which "will, for NATO, require a more flexible approach to budgeting and funding." Considering the millions, billiions and trillions being spent on both the Iraq War and the Afghanistan War presently, it's hard to see what "bureaucratic hurdles" Gates imagines side-stepping unless he means Congress itself?
Walter Pincus (Washington Post) reports on US House Rep John Murtha's take on the huge financial cost of the illegal war and whose being effected -- Murtha: "You can't put a trillion-dollar war on a credit card and leave the bills for our children to pay. The same Americans suffering in Iraq today will be paying for this borrowed war for the rest of their lives." Pincus reports, "Noting that the administration is spending $343 million every 24 hours on the Iraq war, Murtha said that 11 hours in Iraq 'could restore $156 million cut by the president's Defense Department budget for the Family Advocacy Program'."


Back in Munich, Secretary Gates insisted that "we are applying a comprehensive strategy" in Iraq and then declared the following:

We have leanred that war in the 21st century does not have stark divisions between civilian and military components. It is a continuous scale that slids from combat operations to economic development, governance and reconstruction -- frequently at the same time.
The Alliance must put aside any theology that attempts clearly to divide civilian and military operations. It is unrealistic. We must live in the real world. As we noted as far back as 1991, in the real world, security has economic, political, and social dimensions. And vice versa. In the future, the EU and NATO will have to find ways to work together better, to share certain roles -- neither excluding NATO from civilian-military operations nor barring the EU from purely military missions. In short, I agree entirely with Secretary General [Jaap] de Hoop Scheffer and Minister [Herve] Morin's comments yesterday that there must be a "complimentarity" between the EU and NATO.

We could go on and on regarding that push for war-more-war-always-war. Instead, we'll note that
Oliver Rolofs found Gates "ostentatiously concillatory towards Germany during the conference.In his contribution on the future of Aghanistan on the Sunday morning, he said that he had not intended to point a figner at Germany at all, explaining that the request for more commitment in Afghanistan had been issued to all the members of the Alliance." Secretary Gates next jaunted off to Iraq where, Steve Lannen (McClatchy Newspapers) reports, "A few hours before he landed in Baghdad, a big suicide car bomb exploded near a local market in Yathrib, north of Baghdad in Salahuddin province, killing at least 23 and injuring 45. . . . Another car bomb exploded near Ramadi, killing three, and further north two car bombs were reported in Mosul, Iraq's third-largest city. Both of them targeted Iraqi soldiers and four were killed in one of the explosions, police said. To the west of Mosul, 21 people were killed in fighting between insurgents and members of the U.S.-funded local awakening council militia." "Awakening" Councils are the US effort at Rent-An-Ally, whereby they toss coins around in an attempt to buy loyalties from those against centeral government in Baghdad, those against the illegal US occupation of Iraq, etc. They're more like Rent-A-Thugs and Ian Fischer (New York Times) explains, "At least 100 Awakening members have been killed in the last few weeks." Fisher goes on to detail the US government's latest attempt to control the news cycle by having the military selectively releasng two documents one allegedly portions of a diary but it's no The Diary of Anais Nin. Maybe they tell something, maybe they don't. Maybe a full release would. But, to be sure, the US government thinks this is the story to inject into the news cycle. Probably a 'happier' thought than letting people focus on the latest problems with the "Awakening" Council. Steve Lannen (McClatchy Newspapers) reported Saturday that the US collaborators in Diyala Province went on strike and that "A leader of the group said that brigade members, most of them Sunni Muslims, wouldnt' resume working with U.S. and Iraqi government forces until the Shiite police feisng or is indicted." Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) picked up the story on Sunday noting that the Diyala "walkout" wasn't the only problem, there were problems in Anbar Province as well where the conflict is over the outcome of elections which the Iraqi Islamic Party won and that outcome is not pleasing the 'Awakening' Council or helping with the turfs war. (Both the IIP and members of 'Awakening' are Sunni.) In Diyala, Rubin notes, while the 'Awakening' Council members want the police commander gone (he's Shi'ite and they declare he's a bagman for Moqtada al-Sadr while he stated that the problem is that they are "continuing their past activies of killing and displacing Shiite families."

We're not done with Gates. He announced Lieapalooze 2008 today.
CNN reports that Gates has held a press conference this morning in Baghdad and declared it "makes sense" to halt the return of US troops from Iraq and "A senior U.S. military official in Baghdad told CNN recently that Petraeus feels strongly there should be a period of review before he makes any decisions about additional troop withdrawals." BBC notes it as well but notes that Gates himself "favours a 'pause' in troop reductions in Iraq". Demetri Sevastopulo and Steve Negus (Financial Times of London) quotes Gates stating, "I think that the notion of a brief period of consolidation and evaluation probably does make sense" and the reporters remind, "Until recently, Mr Gates repeatedly said he hoped the military could continue to pull out troops at the same pace over the second half of 2008, which would have left about 100,000 forces in Iraq when the next US president takes office in January 2009." Yes, he did take that position publicly . . . once. Apparently, despite Gates quoting Alexis de Tocqueville in Munich, he actually packed Jerry Hopkins' trashy No One Here Gets Out Alive? That seems to be US Senator John Ensign's opinion as well. CBS and AP report that the senator "rejected calls Saturday for the withdrawal of U.S. troops in Iraq by the end of the year".

Meanwhile
Alex Spillus (Telegraph of London) reports on Senator John McCain, in the race for the GOP presidential nomination, voicing his regrets that British forces withdrew (somewhat) from the southern part of Iraq -- that's how to appear presidential, whine about the actions of one of the US allies! "Obviously I would like to have seem stay longer and larger," declared McCain who previously stated (video link) that if the US remained in Iraq for 100 years it "would be fine with me." No word yet on whether he's prepping for a role in Broadway bound musical of Dr. Strangelove. Two would disagree with McCain are UK citizens Rose Gentle and Beverley Clarke. Michael Herman (Times of London) reports the two women were in the House of Lords today with their attorneys who "will argue before an enlarged panel of nine law lords that the Government is obligated to hold an independent review of the decision to go to war under Article 2 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) which protests the 'right to life'. They will argue that the Government is bound by the convention to safeguard soldiers' lives by not sending them to fight in an illegal war. If the mothers win their appeal, it could result in Tony Blair, Lord Goldsmit, QC, the former Attorney-General, and Geoff Hoon, the former defence minister, called upon to give evidence in public." Beverley Clarke's son David Clarke died in Basra in March 2003 while Rose Gentle's son Gordon Gentle died in Basra June 2004 (both men were 19-years-old). The Express & Star notes, "The hearing at the Lords is expected to last three days." Tim Castle (Reuters) states it "will continue for the rest of the week after which judgement will be reserved to be given in writing later, probably in two to three months' time." ITN quotes Rose Gentle stating, "I think Tony Blair sent our boys to war on a lie. He just agreed with George Bush right away. They didn't even give it a second thought" and the father of the late Shaun Brierley, Peter Brierley, stating, "My son always used to say he would defend his country. This was not defending his country. The country was not under any threat of attack." Hasan Suroor (The Hindu) notes concerns that British troops were not also not supplied with adequate equipment (the inquiry into Gordon Gentle's death found he would have lived had the vehicle he was in been up to standard) and quotes Rose Gentle explaining, "It's really important to us to find out why my son was sent there and why he was killed in this right equipment, we believe they should never have been there in the first place." BBC cites attorney Rabinder Singh and notes, "Mr Singh said it had become clear the overwhelming body of legal advice had been the invasion would not be lawful without a second resolution from the UN Security Council, in addition to Resolution 1441 on 8 November, 2002." The UK's Military Families Against The War notes Rose Gentle's speaking at the London College of Communication as part of an action that includes the screening of the documentary Battle for Haditha directed by Nick Broomfield.

CBS and AP term yesterday in Iraq "
Bloody Sunday" and adds today, "In all, 70 people were reported killed or found dead by police on Sunday, one of the highest nationwide death tolls in recent months." Today?

Bombings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad car bombing that claimed 1 life and left two people wounded, a Baghdad roadside bombing that wounded two people, a Baghdad car bombing that wounded three people as well as two police officers, a Mosul mortar attack that left two people wounded, a Mosul roadside bombing that wounded "a woman and a child" and what may be a coordinated Baghdad car bombing where one went off not far from a Sheikh's office and, five minutes later, as police were headed there, another car bombing took place at an intersection resulting in at least 11 deaths and thirty more people wounded including Sheik Ali Hatem. Steve Lannen (McClatchy Newspapers) notes that the Sheik is with the US collaborating 'Awakening' Council, that Sheik Abdul-Sattar Abu Risha ("Ali Hatem's predecessor") was assassinated in September (two weeks after meeting with the Bully Boy of the United States) and describes the bombing scene, "In neighborhoods nearby, dark gray smoke could be seen lifting in the air from the site of the bombs. Gunshots from security forces trying to ward off crowds were also heard."

Shootings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports an armed clash in Diyala Province in which 3 apparent assailants were killed by the Iraqi army, a shooting outside of Mosul that left one person wounded, an armed clash in Mosul where 3 people were killed and an Iraqi soldier was wounded.

Kidnappings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports Dr. Ahmad Al Jubouri was kidnapped in Muqdadiyah in Diyala Province and also, "Gunmen kidnapped a foreign journalist and his translator Sunday night. An Iraqi police captain identified the kidnapped to be a journalist who works for CBS news and said the gunment using two civilian cars kidnapped the two men near Qasr Al Sultan hotel in Basra." On the latter, CBS and AP note, "Two journalists working for CBS News in Basra are missing and efforts are underway to find them. A statement released by the network said CBS News had been in touch with the families and asked that their privacy be respected." Reuters notes, "The Committee to Protect Journalists in a recent report called the Iraq war 'the deadliest conflict for journalists in recent history,' with 125 journalists and 49 support workers killed since the March 2003 U.S.-led invasion."

Corpses?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 corpses discovered in Baghdad.

Today, the
US military announced: "DIYALA PROVINCE, Iraq -- A Multi-National Divison -- North Soldier was killed Feb. 10 when the Soldier's vehicle was struck by an improvised explosive device. Two MND-N Soldiers were wounded and were evacuated to a Coalition Force medical facility for treatment." So on the 11th day of the month, 16 US service members have thus far been announced dead. And the total since the start of the illegal war is currently 3960 which is 40 from the 4,000 mark.

And as the illegal war drags on, never forget what's being fought for --
Roland Gribben (Telegraph of London) explains, "Foreign investors are being offered joint venture and production-sharing agreements in 400 state-owned factories and plants in Iraq in an effort to break the industrial reconstruction log jame. Forty contracts, described as the 'most productive and lucrative', are being offered in an initial programme that Fawzi Hariri, minister of industry and minerals, hopes will yield $2bn in foreign investment." They paved paradise . . . and held a tag sale. Worked so well in Argentina -- oops, didn't. Selling off the people's property -- a puppet government is selling off the people's property (or at least trying to). The theft of Iraq continues. Roula Khalaf (Financial Times of London) notes, apparently with approval, that "The US has been bypassing the Iraqi government, trying to revitalise economic life at the community level. Charles Ries, the US co-ordinator for economic transistion in Iraq, says the US has given grants of $1,000 to shopkeepers in pacified areas and employed 70,000 in community programmes." Note the salary for 'Awakening' Council members (approximately 60,000 people): $300 a month -- this when unemployment is at over 35% in Iraq.

Turning to US politics -- mainly because 'media critic' Amy Goodman didn't see it as news on Democracy Now! today --
Feminist Wire Daily explains:

MSNBC anchor David Shuster was suspended from the network last week following his offensive comments about Chelsea Clinton's work for her mother's candidacy. While guest hosting on "Tucker," Shuster
remarked that Chelsea's efforts to support her mother were unseemly and that it was like she is being "pimped out" by the campaign. Shuster has been suspended from all NBC network appearances other than to issue his apology. He also apologized to the Clinton family. NBC News President Steve Campus said in a statement: "David Shuster . . . made a comment about Chelsea Clinton and the Clinton campaign that was irresponsible and inappropriate. . .NBC News takes these matters seriously, and offers our sincere regrets to the Clintons for the remarks." "I am a mom first and a candidate second and I found the remarks incredibly offensive," said Senator Clinton said at a news conference over the weekend, reports Reuters. "I have sent a letter to the head of NBC expressing the deep offense that I took." Senator Clinton did not say whether or not she would participate in the debate scheduled for February 26th on MSNBC. Take Action to tell network presidents that sexist comments like Shuster's are not acceptable.

Apparently the treatment of women by the media is of little concern to Amy Goodman? Meanwhile
Liliana Segura (via CounterPunch) examines Barack Obama's endorsement from "Habeas Lawyers for Obama" and explains how constitutional lawyer Bambi just doesn't get what's going on at Guanatanamo and Segura notes, "In April of 2007, Obama gave a speech in Chicago at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs in which he outlined five ways he would lead if he were elected to the White House. Restoring habeas corpus was not among them. Neither was eradicating torture in the War on Terror. Neither for that matter, was closing Guantanamo. To be fair, this does not mean he wouldn't do these things. But his argument rested on a sort of benevolent militarism and an expansion of U.S. involvement across the world -- as Noam Chomsky called it, 'the military humanism'."

Goodman did make time today to wrongly state that a US army sniper was convicted of "killing" an Iraqi. No, he was convicted of murder. You expect bravery from independent media and they had none. But they didn't even need bravery, they just needed to use the same terms that the US military did in this instance.
M-NF's announcement on the verdict:Sgt. Evan Vela was found guilty Feb. 10 on one specification of unpremeditated murder during a general courts martial at Camp Liberty Courthouse.Vela, a Soldier in 1st Battalion, 501st Airborne, was on trial for the murder of an Iraqi man as part of operations May 11 in Jurf as Sakhr.Vela was found guilty under Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice for conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline -- wrongfully placing an AK-47 on the remains of a deceased person.He was also found guilty under UCMJ Article 107 for making a false official statement.The proceedings are currently in the sentencing phase.From M-NF's announcement of the sentencing:Sgt. Evan Vela was sentenced Feb. 10 in a general court-martial at Camp Liberty Courthouse.Vela was sentenced to 10 years confinement. He was also sentenced to a reduction in rank to E1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances and a dishonorable discharge from the Army.Vela, a 24-year-old Soldier in 1st Battalion, 501st Airborne, was on trial for the murder of an Iraqi man during operations May 11, 2007 in Jurf as Sakhr, Iraq.Vela was found guilty on one specification of unpremeditated murder.In addition, Vela was found guilty under Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice for conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline (wrongfully placing an AK-47 on the remains of a deceased).He was also found guilty under UCMJ Article 107 for making a false official statement.The next step in the process is an automatic appeal. Solomon Moore (New York Times) reports, "Sergeant Vela, of Idaho, slumped in his chair as he heard the verdict, and his wife, Alyssa Carnahan, broke down in tears." Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) report, "Outside the courthouse, the brother of Ghani Naser Janabi, the man killed by Vela, rejoiced at the ruling. 'It is proof that my brother is not guilty. It was the sergeant,' Fadl Janabi said."










Friday, February 08, 2008

The 'standard'

Rebecca and I are blogging together. In Trina's Kitchen. We're raiding C.I.'s personal e-mail account (with permission) and both opening with this:

Good News! NBC News President Steve Capus just announced the suspension of commentator David Shuster for his sexist remarks last night about Chelsea Clinton and apologized to the Clinton family. Please email Capus immediately to thank him for his swift action and to tell MSNBC and the rest of the TV news networks that sexist coverage of this historic election must stop.
Last night, as guest host of Tucker Carlson's show, Shuster asked whether Chelsea Clinton was being "being pimped out in some weird sort of way" by the Clinton campaign because she was working to support her mother's candidacy.
Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident. Already,
MSNBC's Chris Matthews has had to apologize for his sexist remarks during this election. But, as Capus has recognized, apologies are no longer enough.
Sexism in the media, however, is not isolated to MNBC. Feminists and people concerned with social justice have been dismayed by the coverage of this historic election.
The media is losing its credibility as it is holding on to an old-fashioned formula to stir up false debate. It must retain commentators that reflect the diversity of both the US and this historic election. As one of the most important elections of modern times, the nation deserves and demands a more serious presentation of the issues and campaigns.
As the next round of state primaries is fast approaching,
tell the news media that we don't want more of the same. Women must be taken seriously.
For equality,
Eleanor Smeal

President
The Feminist Majority Foundation
Kathy Spillar

Executive Editor
Ms. Magazine

That's pretty important. Some may not be supporting Hillary Clinton. That's your business. (I voted for Cynthia McKinney this week.) But the reality is this crap has been going on forever. Due to the fact that we have a woman in the race -- a real contender -- we have a window of opportunity to call this crap out and possibly be listened to. It could have lasting impact on the way women are discussed by the media. (It may not.)

We need to be paying attention and we need to be objecting when Hillary is held to a standard that her male peers aren't. It doesn't matter if you're for Hillary's campaign or not. What's being done to her is done by the media to all women. This is our chance to make a difference. And if we really call this crap out, we can make it easier for the next generation of women. They'll pick up the baton (as they always do) and carry the progress even further.

So think about when you see coverage of Hillary. Ask yourself, "Is this the way they'd treat McCain or Obama or Huckabee?" If it's not, call it out. Again, you don't have to be for her. But because she is a presidential contender, they are forced -- if called out loudly -- to consider the complaints a little more seriously than they normally would.

Calling it out will make things better for all women. That includes ourselves, obviously, but it also means we're doing a favor for future generations of women.
Okay, this is from Ken Silverstein's "The Meaning of Mitt's Tears:"

Mitt Romney reportedly teared up during his withdrawal speech yesterday but so far the pundits aren’t analyzing his moist eyes. Did he really get choked up? Was it merely a ploy to build sympathy for his likely presidential run in 2012? Alas, that sort of penetrating insight is reserved only for tears shed by Hillary Clinton.

It should be noted that Hillary shed no tears, her eyes only welled up the first time. (I didn't see the video of the second incident.) Equally true is that Mitt Romney has looked like he cried before. I know that because C.I. ripped apart a friend working for Romney's campaign (not a close friend) for letting a candidate go on CNN, Romney, the morning after Iowa. Romney's eyes were bright red. C.I. was saying, "No one had Visine? No one thought how it might look when he's saying 'I'm not worried' while his eyes are bright red?" (We were in New Hampshire that week and the guy saw us at the hotel and rushed over to say hi. I should note that C.I. was asked by the friend -- who thought the CNN bit played well -- "What do you think?" C.I. said it was a huge problem and "if you're working for that candidate, you need to do a good job. He's a danger and a menace but if you're going to work for him . . .") That was before Hillary's New Hampshire moment. And Mitt did look like he was crying. People can go look it up at CNN, they'll see.

But it wasn't an issue. No one made a big deal out of it. They only did that with Hillary.

Closing with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Friday, Feburary 8, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, Andy Sullivan loves John McCain and lies for him, will al-Sadr's cease-fire/truce hold when they're praying in some regions for it to end, Americans say "Save the economy by pulling out of Iraq," and more.

Starting with war resistance,
Krystalline Kraus (The Rabble) traces the historical support Canada has provided to war resisters:

According to Lee Zaslofsky, a key organizer for the
War Resisters Support Campaign and a Vietnam resister himself, he believes that Canada has a certain historical legacy to live up to by accepting war resisters.
It was Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau and the Liberal Party who opened Canada's doors during the Vietnam war to thousands of Americans war resisters, who were often motivated by the same feeling of objection to an unjust and illegal war.
"Of course, Canada's legacy extends back further to the [American] Civil War and before that when slaves came north via the underground railroad, and even before that with the United Empire Loyalists, so there is sort of a Canadian tradition of welcoming dissenters from the United States and this is another part of that," Zaslofsky explains.

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

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


Meanwhile
IVAW is organizing a March 2008 DC event:

In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.
Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." As part of their fundraising efforts for the event, they are holding houseparties and a recent one in Boston featured both IVAW's Liam Madden and the incomprable Howard Zinn as speakers.

In the United States, a new poll may cause a stir. Jeannine Aversa (AP) reports that Americans surveyed by AP and Ipsos feel "The way to get the country out of recession -- and most people think we're in one -- is to get the country out of Iraq" and "Pulling out of the war ranked first among proposed remedies in the survey, followed by spending more on domestic programs, cutting taxes and, at the bottom end, giving rebates to poor people in hopes they'll spend the economy into recovery." The number saying ending the illegal war would pull the United States out a recession was 43% and included respondent Hilda Sanchez who declares, "Let's stop paying for this war. There are a lot of people who are struggling. We can use the money to pay for medical care and help people who were put out of their homes." [Marin of error on the poll was plus/minus 3/1%.]

In Iraq, a cease-fire/truce between the US military and Moqtada al-Sadr is close to expiring.
Sudarsan Raghavan (Washington Post) reports that yesterday a raid conducted by US soldiers, with Iraqi support, was conducted in "the Shia distrcit of Sadr City" utilizing Humvees and helicopters to arrest 16 (one of which would die in 'custody') and doing so over the objections of local Iraqis such as Abu Sajjad who declares that the US military "detained people who are neutral and educated people. They care only about religion. They will never be witht he military wing." al-Sadr has issued a statement for all followers to continue the truce/cease-fire at present. Lebanon's The Daily Star notes a "report by the International Crisis Group think tank said the respite offered by the cease-fire was 'exceedingly frail' and that Sadrists -- many of whom complain they are targeted by security forces -- remain extremely powerful" and offers this description of the US military incursion into a civilian neighborhood yesterday: "Police and residents said that US soldiers in humvees, backed by helicopters, sealed off a block of the neighborhood and raided four house. The front-door lock on one of the houses was shattered by gunfire, and 22-year-old Arkan Abid Ali was shot in the chest and wounded. Diaa Shakir, 20, said he heard gunfire coming from inside houses US soldiers had entered, as he watched the operation from the window of his home nearby." The paper also notes that the military assualt on a civilian area left two women injured as well as an elderly person. Though the 16 arrested (that's counting the one who was reported to have died in US 'custody') have not been identified by name, the BBC runs with the US military command's boast that one of the 16 may be "a suspected leader of a Shia militia group allegedly backed by Iran." AP notes the toll from the assualt as 1 Iraqi who died in US custody, 1 Iraqi woman shot (but "treated and released"), "two women and an elderly man also had been wounded and tkane to a hospital, where one of them had died." Lauren Frayer (AP) explains that in Kufa today, prayers included condemning "the recent arrests and accused Iraqi officials of sectarian bias" quoting Sheik Abdul Hadi al-Karbalaei who believes the truce/cease-fire is leaving them vulnerable, "For the past six months there have been non-stop detentions of al-Sadr followers, day and night." Those who would like or require audio can refer to Jim Lehrer's News Summary (PBS) from The NewsHour which briefly includes the incident and also notes:

In Iraq, the US military announced an American soldier died Wednesday in a roadside bombing. There have been eight U.S. deaths so far this month. More than 3,950 Americans have died in Iraq since the war began.

In the New York Times today,
Alissa J. Rubin leaves out the total but makes a similar claim re: 1 death announced. Repeating from yesterday's snapshot:

Today the US military announced [PDF format warning]: "
A Multi-National Division - Baghdad Soldier was killed when the Soldier's vehicle was struck by an improvised explosive device in western Baghdad Feb. 6." As noted this morning: "The ICCC total since the start of the illegal war for US service members killed while serving in Iraq is 3950 with 6 for the month. 50 away from the 4,000 mark but since Ted Koppel stepped down from Nightline does the media -- big or small -- even bother to let those numbers register?" The numbers have gone up -- due to DoD namings, not M-NF announcements. Currently the total is 3952 since the start of the illegal war and 8 for the month thus far. On the 7th day of the month, the number of US service members who have died in the illegal war this month is 8.

The US military wasn't eager for the deaths to be widely noted (AEB the fact that M-NF didn't make the announcements) but they're eager for everyone to know something else.
Amit R. Paley (Washington Post) notes the US military is stating that al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia is instructing its followers to 'play nice' out of concern that potential Sunni allies might be turned off and Paley speaks with a man named Riyadh al-Ogaidi whom is identified by the paper as a senior leader of the group who claims, "The Americans have not defeated us, but the turnaround of the Sunnis against us had made us lose a lot and suffer very painfully" and also asserts that the Iraqi membership accounted for 12,000 last year but has fallen "to about 3,500 today."

In political news,
Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) reports that Thursday Iraq's "Parliament again deferred a vote on the budget of Thursday as political blocs argued about how to divide financing among the provinces, but legislators did make headway toward approving a law that would outline provincial powers. . . . The debate on Iraq's 2008 budget, which was supposed to have been resolved with a vote in December, has revolved around how much of the money to allocate to the Kurds and whether the central government will pay the costs of the pesh merga soldiers, the Kurdish militia. Lawmakers said Thursday that the Planning Ministry had collected date showing that Kurdistan had 14 percent to 15 percent of Iraq's population, and that it should get that share of the nonfederal part of the budget." Along with deferring a vote -- on the 2008 budget, the 2008 budget -- they also had a walk out. Tina Susman (Los Angeles Times via San Francisco Chronicle) reports the walk out took place "to protest parts of a draft law that would lay out rules for provincial elections later this year, marking another potential setback for U.S.-backed proposals to ease Iraq's sectarian rifts. The walkout postponed a vote on the measure to redistribute power in Iraq."

"The delay in the budget is harming everyone," stated Adel Abdel-Mehdi, Iraq's Shi'ite vice president
according to Lebanon's The Daily Star which also notes that legislation put on hold also included a bill "that would release thousands of mainly Sunni Arabs from Iraqi jails . . . The law that would free prisoners who have not been charged with or convicted of major crimes, like murder or treason, is also seen as a step toward reconciliation because most of the 23,000 people held in Iraqi jails are Sunni Arabs" and this is among the legislative demands that the Sunni Accordance Front made before walking out of puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki's cabinet.

In some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad mortar attack. Reuters notes that yesterday people in police uniforms conducted a home invasion in Baquba, shot dead 5 people and then exploded the home and today a Hawija car bombing injured two police officers.

Shootings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 person and 1 police officer in Anbar Province following a clash with unknown assailants and, last night in Baghdad, the "Head of Sahwa," was shot dead in Baghdad (two bodyguards of the 'Awakening' Council chiefton were also injured). Reuters notes a college student was shot dead in Mosul.

Kidnappings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 Christian missionaries ("with the Norwegian Churches Organization") were kidnapped last night in Basra.

Corpses?

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

Today the US State Department issued "Background Notes: Iraq" which contained many amusing 'interpretations' but we'll note this section:
The focus of United States policy in Iraq remains on helping the Iraqi people build a constitutional, representative government that respects the rights of all Iraqis and has security forces capable of maintaining order and preventing the country from becoming a safe haven for terrorists and foreign fighters. The ultimate goal is an Iraq that is peaceful, united, stable, democratic, and secure, with institutions capable of providing just governance and security for all Iraqis and is an ally in the war against terrorism. U.S. forces remain in Iraq (under a UN Security Council mandate) as part of the Multi-National Force-Iraq to assist the Government of Iraq in training its security forces, as well as to work in partnership with the Government of Iraq to combat forces that seek to derail Iraq's progression toward full democracy. The U.S. Government is carrying out a multibillion-dollar program to assist in the reconstruction of Iraq.

"Under a UN Security Council mandate" is a good time to again note the treaty that the Bully Boy is attempting to prepare with Nouri al-Maliki -- without US Congressional consent (a violation of the US Constitution) or the Iraqi Parliament's consent (ditto). As noted in
Wednesday's snapshot, US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and the Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Stafff Michael G. Mullen went before the US Senate's Armed Service Committee on Wednesday to beg for even more money and claimed that there was no interest in the permanent bases being established in Iraq or that the treaty (neither used that term) didn't call for them. Yesterday, Peter Spiegel (Los Angeles Times) covered the Wednesday hearing as well as the Wednesday House Armed Service Committee hearing, noting that "Gates denied Wednesday that the Bush administration was seeking a treaty with Iraq that would require long-term secuirty commitments forcing future U.S. presidents to continue sending troops. Instead, Gates told lawmakers, a new agreement with Baghdad would give the U.S. military continuing legal authority to operate in Iraq, much like the current United Nations resolutions, which expire at the end of the year." Why not simply renew the resolution isn't dealt with. At the end of 2006, al-Maliki by-passed the Parliament and the Iraqi Constitution by renewing it all on his own. Though the Constitution makes clear he does not have the power to do that, the Parliament passed legislation which they hoped would prevent that from taking place agian. Instead, al-Maliki went around them again. It needs to be noted that the United Nations was aware of that and should have rejected the renewal (which would legally mean US forces could not be in Iraq) . Because Parliament is even angrier at al-Maliki this time and because Bully Boy's reign at the White House will come to a close next January, the two are cooking up a scheme that by-passes the United Nations, both countries' Constitutions and both countries' legislative bodies. As Spiegel notes, "Democratic Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York has made the proposed agreement an issue in her presidential campaign, accusing the administration of seeking to tie the hands of the next president by committing to Iraq's protection with U.S. forces" and that to Gates denial that this is a "treaty," "Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), a senior member of the Armed Services Committee, has countered that the Iraqi foreign minister has termed the agreement a treaty and that, under the U.S. Constitution, Congress is required to ratify any treaty that provides such security guarantees." Charlie Savage (Boston Globe) interpreted the Senate Committee hearing to mean that the White House "is backing off its unprecedented plans to commit the US military to defending Iraq's security for years to come without submitting the agreement to a vote in Congress" citing Gates' testimony after Gates first attempted to debate what qualified for a treaty.

Staying with the US,
Andy Sullivan (Reuters) reports that US Senator John McCain ("his victory as Republican nominee for the U.S. presidency virtually assured"????) has "turned his sights on his Democratic challengers" today claiming that "they were weak on national security and their Iraq stance would hand al Qaeda a victory." Senator Insane is a little slow on the draw -- possibly due to age? -- and Sullivan misses a lot himself. Sullivan goes on to quote a statement by US Senator Barack Obama (singing the same song he always sings and has it gotten old: "On the most important foreign policy decision in perhaps a generation, I strongly believe John McCain got it wrong") but seems to miss Hillary Clinton.
Sullivan forgets in his ENTIRE article is a sitting US senator and not just "former first lady" and a presidential contender. It's cute the way he also refuses to quote Clinton's statements. But Sullivan IS WRONG. Bambi may or may not have 'fired back' today. Hillary Clinton raised the issue yesterday.

Get it straight, McCain didn't lay down a 'marker' -- a mythical narrative to paint him as a 'leader.'
Perry Bacon Jr. (Washington Post), Julie Bosman (New York Times) and, most important to this community, our own Kat noted that Hillary laid down the marker yesterday declaring, "I have the greatest respect for my friend and my colleague Senator McCain. But I believe that he offers more of the same, more of the same economic policies, more of the same military policies in Iraq." Reuters needs to figure out (A) how Sullivan is so grossly uninformed that he's not aware of that and today paints Hillary as responding to McCain's 'leadership' and how Sullivan manages to credit Barack Obama as a US Senator when he's only been that since Jan. 2005 but Hillary Clinton, a US Senator since Jan. 2001, is just "former first lady." Reuters really needs to figure that out -- especially since the press has a long history of bending over backwards in favor of Senator Crazy, the Showboat Express. Kat's finishing her explanation tonight (on the "She's boxed someone in" via the statemtns) tonight, just FYI. We (Kat, Ava and myself) heard that (Hillary's statement) on NPR yesterday evening but I'm not seeing any article of it online (and it may have been local news and not the national news feed). Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers) takes a look at McCain's public statements and winds down noting, "Now he espouses the belief that the U.S. can stabilize regions -- with enough troops. The lesson of Vietnam and Iraq, he said in a May 2007 speech, is that 'we must never again launch a military operation with too few troops to complete the mission and build a secure, stable and democratic peace. When we fight a war, we must fight to win'." That is a revisionary take on Vietnam. And it's one that avoids issues such as legalities and treaties. Senator Crazy, despite Andy Sullivan's mad crush from him, is not yet the GOP presidential candidate and may not yet become it. Again, Reuters needs to take a serious look at how that nonsense ran to begin with.


Tonight on
Bill Moyers Journal, the program looks at viewers recommendations for what book the next president of the United States should take to the White House. Among the books noted thus far by viewers at the show's blog are Anthony Arnove's IRAQ: The Logic of Withdrawal and Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine: The Rise Of Disaster Capitalism.

Winding down, Angelina Jolie's visit to Iraq. Noted in
yesterday's snapshot and we were supposed to continue it today. No time. Leila Fadel (Baghdad Observer, McClatchy Newspapers) shares what she thinks of the visit. This was addressed earlier today -- from that entry, among the coverage the Iraqi refugee crisis received as a result of Jolie's visit: Here's a gossip column in the Miami Herald that mentions Jolie's visit. Here it is in India's The Economic Times. Here's AP at MSNBC. Here's the British tabloid Hello! Here's a Seattle Post-Intelligencer gossip column. Here's Australia's Herald Sun. Here's AP in the Toronoto Star. Here's E! (gossip channel). Here's Reuters. And, of course, Fadel's write up.

Lastly. In DC today, at the US State Dept, this question was asked, "I wondered if you wanted to comment on a memo that was sent by a former contractor at the U.S. Embassy, Manuel Miranda, to Ambassador Crocker at the U.S. -- a former contractor at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. And he, in this memo, complains that the Foreign Service is not competent to do the job that they have undertaken in Iraq. He talks a lot about how Foreign Service officers do not have enough management experience so that they're not equipped to management programs, hundreds of millions of funds and the capital assets needed to help the Government of Iraq to stand up. So do you have any comment on that?"

The State Dept's deputy spokesperson Tom Casey responded by first attempting to make a joke of it ("Yeah, I guess he needs to tell us how he really feels") and then declaring, "Look, Mr. Miranda, was, as you note, a 3161 -- that's a contracting employee -- in Iraq, I guess, for about -- I guess for about a year. Obviously, he's expressing his own views and he's entitled to his opinions. What I can tell you is that you've heard from the President, Secretary Rice and many others about the job that Ryan Crocker is doing as the U.S. Ambassador to Baghdad. We think he and his team are doing a tremendous job" blah, blah, blah.