We're supposed to be talking first songs tonight and I'm blanking. The first song I remember loving? Oh, God, I can barely remember the first song I made out to. But to go back to the first song I ever heard?
I know. "It's Your Thing." That's an Isley Brothers song (a great song, by the way) and it's the song that was playing the first time I smoked a joint. My friend and I wanted to have the ultimate pot experience. I'll call her Joanne (not her real name). So Joanne's brother was a major head. And their parents had no clue. She was suggesting we get stoned for some time. I was wanting to but it was just never working out. We couldn't get it together, man. (To put it in the lingo of the day.) So one day we were over there making prank calls to boys we liked (over at her house, she lived across the street) and her mother hollered that she had burned the roast and had to rush to the store to get something else for dinner. Her brother was not home. As soon as we heard her mother starting the car, Joanne and I ran into her brother's room and grabbed the pot stash. (He was a head, he had LSD and more. We just grabbed the pot.)
So we were rolling. I was rolling actually. My grandfather rolled his own cigarettes. He would sometimes ask us (the grandkids) to roll it for him. By the time I knew about pot, it was no longer a chore because I knew it was good for practice. So I knew how to roll a tobacco cigarette so I was the one rolling our first joint.
And Joanne suddenly remembers she didn't plan. Where's the music! She didn't have any Beatles (and I wasn't running across the street to my house). She started to put on a record and I told her if she put on the Monkees while we were getting stoned, I would break her record. So she turned on a transistor radio and, as I lit up, the Isley's came on.
It's a cool song so it made me feel even cooler to be smoking my first joint. Of course we weren't smart enough to open the windows. So we reeked. So I had to stay over at Joanne's for dinner and after. I remember I couldn't stop giggling when I was on the phone telling my grandmother (my grandparents lived with us) that I was eating dinner at Joanne's.
My grandmother then parked herself in her usual spot, right at the front window. She was convinced I was giggling because I was planning to do something. She didn't realize I was giggling because of what I'd already done. So there you go.
I'll go with the Isley's for my first.
Closing with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
Wednesday, January 14, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, suicide bombers are a concern only when its female suicide bombers, women's representation on the provincial councils just slips out of the law and no one's sure how which allows us to examine some of the most recent attacks on women's rights in Iraq.
Today Fu Yiming and Gao Shan (Xinhua) remind that a 10-year-old boy disguised himself as a floral vendor to launch a suicide bombing in Tarmiya last September and they note that other children "have been recruited and trained to be suicide bombers". So we will now see the efforts to ban children from public life, right? And flower vendors! And we'll see half-way homes set up for any children that fit Iraq's highly limited means of profiling, correct?
Oh wait, that only happens to women. And let's establish that by turning to two attacks last week. The first on women's rights and the second on the rights of the press. Sunday, January 4th when a bomber -- then identified as a woman -- took their own life and that of at least 40 other people in Baghdad. This was in the midst of a Holy pilgrimage, one that brought people from all over Iraq to the region and from outside of Iraq as well. By Tuesday, 'security' demanded action and, of course, the action just had to be an attack on women. From the January 6th snapshot:
In Iraq, the latest attack on women's rights takes place under the guise of security, always under the guise of security. AFP reports that ALL women are banned "from visiting a Baghdad district which is home to the city's most famous Shi'ite tomb" and why is that? Because of the Sunday suicide bombing which, you may remember, Sam Dagher and Mudhafer al-Husaini (New York Times) maintained Monday was carried out by a man despite statements to the contrary. So you've got confusion as to the gender of the bomber. But you've also got the fact that no men were banned from shrines and these bombings have been going on for over five years now. Regardless of whether Sunday's bomber was or was not a woman, there's never been a similar effort to ban just men. It's only women that get screwed over and always while being told that it's for the 'security' of all. It's not for security. It has nothing to do with security and when you grasp that this is a pilgrimage and that the pilgrims come from all over Iraq and outside of Iraq, this is blatantly offensive. It is yet another effort to curtail the mobility of women and even in the 'logic' being offered, there's no excuse for it. They have still not established the gender of Sunday's bomber. Dagher and al-Husaini as well as LAT's Usama Redha and Kimi Yoshino provided statements by Iraqis outraged by the lack of security. What you have is a band-aid measure that will not fix a damn thing but the government wants to scapegoat someone and, just like their allies in the US, the Iraqi government will gladly scapegoat women. And Reuters is now reporting: "Initial reports said Sunday's bomber was female, although the government later said he was male." But who's being barred from worshipping? Monday, the United Nation's Secretary-General's Special Representative for Iraq, Staffan de Mistura, made a point of condemning the attacks on pilgrims and decreeds bombings like Sunday's "appalling and unjustified crimes." Will de Mistura call out the barring of women from worship or is he only interested in speaking up for the male pilgrims?
Statistically female bombers really are not an issue (August 21st, LAT was reporting that "the number has jumped to 30" for the year 2008 -- still not a huge number) but if Iraq's so alarmed, well maybe they should pay more money? "Awakening" Council members are also known as Sons of Iraq and they do have Daughters of Iraq but they pay them over 20% than they do men. If they are saying female bombers are just so earth shattering and such a great threat, maybe they shouldn't have been so sexist and cheap? Maybe they should paid women doing the exact same work the exact same amount? And "they" is the US. The US military set up that pay scale, the US military endorsed and embraced sexism.
The Iraqi government (al-Maliki) knew the Sunday bomber was not a woman. They knew it before the implemented they attacked women's rights to worship. There was no 'security' improvement by destroying women's rights. It did give the appearance of 'movement' at a time when Iraqis were loudly and publicly criticizing the puppet government's inability to protect them. "Look, we did something!" Nothing that helped, but they did it. And where was the press? Where were they?
Did they call out the attacks on women's rights? No and they never do. Few bothered to even report the ban on women. Those did bother to report it never saw this ban as anything other than 'security' and never questioned why women -- not a large part of bombers in Iraq to begin with and the Sunday bomber was a man --were being targeted. There were no editorials in the US. There were no efforts to speak to Iraqi women's rights organizations. There was no effort to explore. It was just taken for granted that women are so damn unimportant in the world's eyes that if they're denied their right to freely worship, that's just the way it is.
Contrast that with the attack on the press. Friday's snapshot included this: "Kim Gamel (AP) reports that other 'laws' are being pressed. Specifically the puppet government has issued a 14-page conduct code for reporters -- Iraqi and foreign -- that they will need to sign 'in exchange for permission to attend this month's provincial elections, riaisng concerns among media analysts that independent coverage could be undermined'." The following day, Khalid al-Ansary, Tim Cocks and Katie Nguyen (Reuters) reported: "Media organisations who flout the Communications and Media Commission's mandatory code of conduct could be landed with a fine, have their equipment confiscated or be forced to make a public apology, said a document obtained by Reuters on Saturday. . . . Media organisations could have their licences revoked if they fail to pay any fines, according to the document." The press amplified the story by covering it, they spoke to Reporters Without Borders for quotes, to journalists for quotes, to journalistic unions for quotes. And by Sunday? Crisis averted! Gamel provided an update: Iraq will no longer require reporters to sign a contract in order to cover the January 31st provincial elections and the 14-page contract is being tossed. In an interesting development not really noted, Kimi Yoshino (Los Angeles Times) quotes Judge Qassim Hasan Abodi stating, "These are not our regulations. All we ask is that the media be neutral, transparent and objective. This is the only thing." Yoshino doesn't identify the body that Hasan's with, just notes it's over elections ("head of Iraq's election commission") -- he is the head of Iraq's Independent High Electoral Commission. That is the UN backed body (UNAMI works with them) and the claim being made on Friday -- when the story of the contract and the penalities broke -- was that the IHEC had pushed that. No, they didn't. It was al al-Maliki.
Now examine the above. The press goes along with the attack on women's rights but comes to life when the rights of the press are attacked. That goes to how little importance is placed on women's rights and the refusal to grasp that there is no democracy without equality. As important as a free press is to democracy, so is equality. Currently, a slaughter is goingo n in Gaza and in some of the critiques of the press -- blistering, as they should be -- a point may be lost. It's not, "Oh, look at the idiot who can't report!" What those calling the sorry and distorted coverage of the assault on Gaza are doing is believing in and advocating for the power of a free press. If the press does not matter, then it wouldn't matter what the press reported. What those critiquing the current coverage of that crisis are doing is advocating for a free press and acknowleging the power of the press -- and doing so much more than many members of the press ever do.
Above you have two examples of attacks on freedoms. The first attack, on women's rights, meant nothing to the press and they barely covered it. So the attack continued and laid the groundwork for future attacks. In the second case, the press responded and the attack was repealed. That is the power of the press.
Today Alissa J. Rubin and Sam Dagher (New York Times) report the latest attack on women's rights in Iraq: Somehow, no one can figure out how, the rights of women to be represented with 25% of the seats in the January 31st elections just fell by the wayside. No one can figure out. It just, in all the talks and discussions, somehow, no one can figure it out, it just dropped right out. Oops. The reporters explain, "Early versions of the law, which governs the election of Iraq's 18 provincial councils, included a firm guarantee that women would have at least 25 percent of the seats -- the same percentage mandated by the Constitution for the numbers of women in Parliament. In the male-dominated Arab culture, the framers of the Constitution and the Americans who were involved in drafting it thought that the quota was necessary to ensure that women would be represented.But the provincial election law was changed several times, and the quota language was gone by the time it went to the Presidency Council, whose approval is needed for it to become official. It went back to the Parliament with several unrelated changes and was published in early October. The lack of a strong guarantee for women's council seats has begun to gain widespread attention only in the last few days." And good for Rubin and Dagher but find that topic at any other outlet. Find one example in the US of the press using their power to amplify. You can't. As this snapshot is dictated, no news outlet except for the New York Times is covering it. The Houston Chronicle does make it a sidebar online to a Los Angeles Times article that, frankly, says nothing. The LAT article is all over the place (and doesn't mention women at all) but apparently that passes for 'universal' and attacks on women -- unlike attacks on men or attacks on the press -- is some sort of esoteric topic that's just not worthy of coverage.
What might life be like for Iraqi women today if the press had treated the repeated attacks on their rights as worthy of reporting? Maybe we wouldn't have today's 'In some small areas in Iraq, women can drive again!' stories. Because if these attacks on women were called out and not treated as 'oh, that's the culture,' women never would have lost their right to drive in Iraq or been pushed into wearing garb they didn't wish to. If the thugs the US put in charge of Iraq had known that they would be held up for the ridicule they deserved by the press over these attacks on women's rights, you damn well better believe that they would have cut it out, they would have stopped their attacks on women if only to avoid risking their puppet masters cutting off funding. Instead we got this b.s. nonsense that these were 'cultural' responses. No, they weren't. Iraq was a highly advanced country. It was not Afghanistan. The point Ava and I were making in February 2007, when we reviewed a bad TV show (Jericho), still applies and women reading better grasp that. No one's going to give you a damn thing but they will gladly rob your rights. And that's not just in Iraq or Afghanistan. We've seen it in this country. Susan Faludi did a wonderful job documenting the backlash during the Reagan era (and, hello, we're back in another Reagan era and Ms. magazine has made clear it will be just as pathetic now as it was then -- for those who missed how pathetic it was during the first Reagan era, you can refer to Faludi's Backlash for how Ms. actively underminded women's rights and standing). But that was nothing compared to an earlier backlash in this country. No, not the backlash after WWII when Rosie the Riveter was forced out of work (and that is covered in Faludi's book), the backlash that began with the Great Depression, the one no one ever wants to talk about. Choose any industry, and you'll find women high in the chain. That would end quickly. Let's talk film a second. Women were directors. Women were studio heads. Women were screenwriters. Women were producers. Come the depression, it's all over now, baby blue.
It's amazing that Naomi Klein has yet to call out Barack's conservative economic statements and programs because the Shock Doctrine does not refer just to violence that allows an economic programs to be pushed through. It also includes economic violence that allows economic programs to be pushed through. (Naomi's book, while wonderful, merely popularizes theories that have been in place for many, many decades. The reading the book has been given is a very safe one and one that tells domestic readers in the US, "These are things that happen over there!" That is not the case and that is not the case only when it comes to a 9-11 or Pearl Harbor.) Barack's economic plan has rightly been called out for ignoring women. But by whom? Which male identified 'progressives' have bothered to say a damn word, which male identified 'progressive outlets' have bothered to raise an objection? None. The Nation hasn't done a thing. The Progressive hasn't done a thing. Because women can always be thrown overboard. It's not just in Iraq and women need to start grasping that. The failure to do so is why each geneartion of the women's liberation movement has to reinvent the wheel.
What's taken place in Iraq is the backlash in flip-card fashion. It's happened very quickly. Just last year, it was 'okay' to talk about institutionalizing widows. Prisons pretending to be halfway-houses were okay because, when you lose you husband, what better way to grieve than removed from your home, you friends and your family and locked away? That truly was presented as the 'answer' to female suicide bombers. Round up the widows and lock 'em away. Repeating, female suicide bombers do not make up the bulk of the bombers in Iraq. They are not the majority, they are a statistically insiginificant number. And they may be inflated as many later reports have proven when female bombers turn out not to be. (And often the excuse is given that someone must have been dressed as a woman! No, just as likely is that, not having any clues, a scapegoat is needed and what looms as the ultimate threat since the beginning of time to some men: Women.) But because a small number existed, it was time to propose locking them away.
Last week the desire to pathologize these women was noted:
The female suicide bombers result in alarmist headlines (here for US News & World Reports) because, "Oh goodness! It's a woman!" As if Pirate Jenny was an obscure character from a never heard of play? As if Pirate Jenny doesn't have her roots in any revolution (including the American revolution). But, "Oh no, it's a woman!" So when a female bomber executes a bombing, it's a big deal to the press. When a man does, it's a single sentence and there's no hand wringing or pondering WHY????? It's obvious why and the one's pretending otherwise are the same ones pretending that something good can yet come from this illegal war. And it's pretty obvious that there is HUGE sexism involved in the coverage. This summer Time offered up "The Mind of a Female Suicide Bomber." I'm sorry, are female bombers unheard of in illegal wars and occupations? They become the norm. And pretending otherwise is not only historically ignorant and sexist, it's damaging to anyone's grasp of what is actually taking place on the ground in Iraq. They're attempting to make it some sort of pathological sickness in the minds of some woman when this is a natural response to a people occupied, under attack and prevented from self-governance. There's nothing pathological about it. Historically, it is a common response. Mythologically, even more so. Will Time next offer us "The Mind of Areto"? Was there any difference in Areto attempting to avenge the murder of Hippolyte and Iraqi women today attempting to avenge the murders of their famillies? Aztec mythology includes many similar examples, such as La Llorona who acts to avenge the murders of her children. It's really disgusting that we rush to pathologize a normal response on the part of women that has been historically charted and culturally taught. The sickness is not inside the women in Iraq who decide to wear a bomb, the sickness is the illegal war and continued occupation and you have to historically and culturally ignorant or else a liar who hopes others are historically and culturally ignorant to push these women's responses off as something unheard of and completely unexpected.
Today we are told that young boys are becoming suicide bombers. We do not get, "WHY!!!! WHY!!!!! OH THE HUMANITY!!!!!" coverage. We do not get talk that they should be put away for 'security.' Naomi Klein rightly noted Iraq was the experimental lab where all the US kooks could test their theories. She failed to note that those theories included the attacks on women and on women's rights. A huge failure, a huge omission and until women start writing as if their rights are as important as men's, don't expect very many men to ever make that case.
If female bombers are truly a menace, then the government could fund for security. They don't want to. The US set the standard -- and did so without anyone calling them out. The June 6th snapshot included this:
Badken observes: "The US military pays each member $300 a month to man thousands of checkpoints throughout Iraq. The Americans have credited Sons of Iraq for the waning Sunni insurgency and the decline in sectarian violence in Baghdad. But questionable loyalties, often brutal conduct and an uncertain future make these groups a wild card in the ongoing effort to stabilize Iraq. In April, Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., said these U.S.-funded militias may one day 'turn their guns on us'." But that cautionary note is dismissed by the White House and, on Friday, Jim Frederick (Time Magazine) reported on the lastest twist to the "Awakening" Council: Female recruits! US Capt Michael Starz told Frederick that "this is an employment program" and that "many of the women around here are widows and have no way of supporting themselves." What a load of crap.
If the concern was providing women with opportunities, the US could have done so long ago, could have fought to protect and ensure women's rights instead of installing radical thugs in the puppet government. Most importantly, while the men make $300 a month, they're paying the women eight dollars a day -- that would be two dollars a day less than their male peers while claiming that there "are widows" who "have no way of supporting themselves." The US government wants credit for 'creating' employment opportunites for Iraqi women but the US is paying them $2 less a day than the males while claiming that the women needs these jobs because they're supporting themselves and children. Can you say "exploitation"? The real reason the US is using women, as Capt Starz readily admits is that female bombers are now an issue. The women are being trained to 'inspect' and search other women. And apparently that's not a job important enough to warrant equal pay -- at least not according to the US. And the reason for including Senator Boxer's April remarks was to make it clear that the US government is the one paying the "Awakening" Council members, nothing has changed on that since April. So the US government is sending the message in Iraq that a woman's work is worth 20% less than a male's. If that figure sounds familiar, Nancy Clark (Womens Media, link has audio) was noting that figure last year: "Women are paid 80 cents for every dollar men are paid and that does NOT include any part-time workers! If it did, it would be even lower." The women in Iraq are being asked to do the exact things the males are being asked to do and the US government is sending the message that, for the same work, it is okay to pay a woman 80 cents while paying a man a dollar. Capt Starz tells Frederick that the increase in female bombers means, "It is a critical security issue that we find a way to have women searched at high-traffic areas." It's 'critical' but, apparently, work but apparently not critical enough to offer the same rate of pay. Repeating, US tax dollars are paying for this program. (US Ambassador Ryan Crocker repeatedly bragged in April, before Congress, that paying them off meant attacks on US service members was down. It's the hand-over-your-lunch-money-to-the-bully-and-you'll-be-safe-in-the-playground 'strategy.') Should it be funded by the US? I don't think so but as long as the US funds it, it certainly doesn't need to endorse gender discrimination. But that is what's taking place.
Badkhen is Anna Badkhen and she was filing that for her former paper the San Francisco Chronicle. If you're concerned about 'security,' you don't pay women doing the same jobs as men 20% less. If you're concerned about 'security,' you don't whine, all this time later, that you don't have enough people (women) to search women. But it's not about security. Which is why there will be no attempts to target young boys or flower vendors for imprisonment or curtailing of rights. It's only done to women because they know they can usually get away with it. And they get away with it because. despite the intensive power of the press to be a light illuminating injustice, few news outlets even care. In fairness to them, they're only reflecting a large lack of concern that exists throughout the United States. It's that apathy that allowed the US government to pay Iraqi women 20% less than their male counterparts to begin with -- even after the press exposed that fact.
Turning to some more of today's violence . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that wounded four people, another Baghdad roadside bombing which wounded three people and a Mosul car bombing that claimed the life of 1 Iraqi soldiers and left five more people wounded.
Shootings?
Reuters notes 1 police officer shot dead in Kirkuk.
Yesterday's snapshot noted Deborah Haynes (Times of London) attempting to have the AIDS test that Iraq requires of foreigners (Erica Goode of the New York Times wrote last year of the government's disinterest in giving her one). IRIN explores AIDS in Iraq and notes, along with the fact that those with AIDS have to hide their status, the following history and facts:
The virus first came to Iraq in 1985 via contaminated blood imported from a French company. It was detected the following year in scores of people suffering from haemophilia, a hereditary blood disorder, said Wadah Hamed, the head of Iraq's AIDS Research Centre. "Treatment at that time was tough and arbitrary. Those found to be infected were placed in segregated medical facilities," said Hamed, who also heads Iraq's national AIDS prevention programme. Some 482 cases have been detected since 1986. Of these, 272 were Iraqis and the rest foreigners. Today only 44 are still alive, he said. Patients get the equivalent of about US$85 per month from the government, as well as a clothing allowance. Those infected in 1985 are paid an extra $200 monthly. They get free monthly check-ups; their partners are examined every three months, and other family members are checked every six months. Baghdad has at least 11 medical centres for this purpose and there is also one such centre in each province.
In the US, the New York Times will be publishing a story tomorrow (and later today online) about Barack and US commanders differences regarding Iraq or 'differences.' (I'm not waiting for it to go up but am noting it for a friend at the paper who asked that it be linked to. We'll link to it tomorrow.) On US politics, Margaret Kimberley (Black Agenda Report) evaluates the latest moves by president-elect Barack and provides the perspective for the not so surprising statements and actions:
Barack Obama just loves Ronald Reagan, the late president but still idolized leader of the American right wing. During his campaign for the presidency Obama famously said that unlike Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton didn't transform the country in a fundamental way. At the time he was in the thick of his primary battle against Hillary Clinton and the remark was perceived mainly as a dig against his opponent and her husband. When he later said that he would have a foreign policy like Ronald Reagan, it was seen as an attempt to get the votes of rural "Reagan Democrats" in the Pennsylvania primary. It is now clear that Obama's paeans to Reagan were not mere vote getting efforts or jabs at the Clintons. Barack Obama has proven himself to be a true believer in the Reagan revolution.
Even when Obama announced that his stimulus plan will include a $3,000 tax cut for businesses, his cultists say that we should just give him a chance, a chance to back up the bus and roll over us again. Hopefully Democrats like Senator Tom Harkin will remain vigilant and keep speaking up for the common good. Harkin and a few other democrats were actually paying attention to the Obama economic proposals and weren't pleased by what they witnessed. "I am a little concerned by the way that Mr. Summers and others are going at this in that, to me, it still looks like a little more of this trickle-down, if we just put it in at the top, it's going to trickle down."
"Trickle down" was a Reagan era buzzword that meant theft of public resources. The concept was that if those who already have a lot were to get even more, some of the lucre would trickle down upon the rest of us. It worked fine for the wealthy but thirty years later, working people have not recovered from the effects of the Reagan era.
Ronald Reagan successfully dismantled government programs that no other president dared to touch. He was called the great communicator because of his ability to convince white Americans to act against their own economic interests. His apocryphal tales of black "welfare queens" led an already racist nation to decide that government was the problem in their lives when it is actually the only means of protection from larceny committed by wealthy individuals and big corporations.
Not only is Obama promising tax cuts for businesses, but he is repeating the Reagan mantra about "reforming" Social Security and Medicare or cutting their rate of growth. Proposals to cut back on entitlements are dangerous and ought to be vehemently opposed. Entitlements are the only safety net that Americans have. Pension plans are available to an ever smaller group of workers, health benefits are lost when jobs are lost, and 401K accounts shrink along with the stock market.
Despite being ignorant about so much that effects their lives, Americans know that entitlements are their last hope for a decent life in old age. The only significant defeat for the Bush administration was the failure to privatize Social Security. It was the moment when Americans spoke up and forced Congress to prevent a Bush initiative from coming to fruition. If Barack Obama successfully tampers with Social Security and Medicare, which Bush was unable to do, then progressives who excuse Obama are worse than useless. They are traitors too.
By the way, the PIG that e-mailed Rebecca to get private e-mails and turn around and pass them on, then LIED and claimed he didn't (one of them was bounced by the then-vactioning 'REV's e-mail, he fowarded them, ASSHOLE) has a bad article on impeachment and it's even worse because the Barack Loving Jerkwad spent all of 2008 smearing Bill and Hillary Clinton with LIES thereby painting himself into such a corner that he can't refute John Conyers justifying not impeaching the Bully Boy by likening it to Bill Clinton's impeachment. Bill Clinton's conduct was a personal issue that did not reflect on his performance in office or his duties. It was a sexual matter and a private one -- forced out in the open by the Witchhunters who cornered and THREATENED a young woman (Monica Lewinsky). The people never supported impeachment of Bill Clinton before the proceedings started, not during it and not afterwards. Any or all of that could refute Conyers and then some; however, basking in his DERANGED CLINTON HATRED made PIG unable to write the article he tried to. He's in his own hell now where logic fails him because he's roped himself off with so many LIES. Paul Krugman and others warned people that you didn't join in the sliming and trashing of Bill Clinton just because it made you feel so good. Now it comes back to bite in your fat, saggy assses. No one's fault but your own. And for PIG, as for so many, the hatred wasn't even of Bill. The real bile was reserved for Hillary. Who they went on to viciously attack for policies of Bill's that they disagreed with. And they thought no one picked up on that, no one noticed. A lot more caught on than they'll ever know and it's why the dregs of Panhandle Media's days have passed . . . at their own hands, group suicide style.
iraq
the los angeles timeskimi yoshinousama redha
the new york timessam daghermudhafer al-husaini
alissa j. rubin
tim cockskhalid al-ansarykatie nguyen
anna badkhen
kim gamel
margaret kimberleysusan faludi
deborah haynes
erica goode
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Phoebe Snow's live album Live is out
So if you've already the snapshot today, you may have guessed I had a bit of a panic when C.I. was dictating it. Phoebe Snow has a new album out called Live. I did not know. While C.I. was dictating the snapshot, I called Elaine's office and she was free. I said, "Did you know Phoebe Snow had a new album out?" (It was released in October.) No. And Elaine was just mentioning Phoebe Snow last week. Elaine asked me when it came out and confessed she had two boxes (not Christmas presents) C.I. had mailed that she hadn't gone through due to being short of time. (Mailed near the end of the year.) One of them, she had opened and taken out the books but that's all she had time for.
So I'm thinking, "Hmm. I bet I have Phoebe Snow's new CD as well." Elaine says she'll open the boxes and call me later tonight. She does, she does and she has. So we all have it.
And we probably seem like the most ungrateful in the world. But C.I.'s always giving us stuff and I'm always saying, "If there's something you think I'll love, let me know." Because otherwise the box is on my to-do list. This is the first week I've been home since September. But I feel so bad because (a) I know C.I. thinks the world of Phoebe Snow, (b) I know Phoebe Snow has had a very patch and (c) I expect it's a great album.
Instead of attempting to figure out where the box is, I just downloaded it tonight (from Amazon, here). I'm listening to it right now and will try to do another CD review this weekend.
That's not, "C.I.'s asking me to review her friend!" C.I.'s asked no such thing. And made no big deal or even told me about the CD. But if I had known in October it was out, I would have reviewed it. Or tried. Some CDs, even if I love them, I can't find a way in. I don't think that will be a problem here.
Guess who did know about the CD? Mike. Elaine told me that. She said Mike goes, "Oh yeah, that's a cool CD." Elaine asked when he'd listened to it (Mike got his own copy from C.I. despite the fact that Elaine and Mike cohabitate) and he said during studying for his tests and finals last semester. Then he realized he'd been listening with headphones. But he's been blasting it for months. He said to start with "You're My Girl" -- actually he said, "Little Girl." I said, "Elaine, tell him there's no 'Little Girl' on this album." So then Mike starts singing it and I figure out it's "You're My Girl." ("You're my girl, my little girl . . .") And it is the place to start.
If you haven't read the snapshot, C.I. made a point to include an excerpt of a wowOwow interview with Phoebe Snow ("In other news, The Women on the Web score an exclusive interview with singer and songwriter Phoebe Snow" . . .) She really is just putting it out there in the interview.
One more time, the CD's called Live. Available for download, can be purchased online and can be purchased in stores.
Betty plans to blog tonight but if she doesn't, she said to put in that she's loving her new job. She was worried but she loves it. She also is glad about the move.
Closing with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
Tuesday, January 13, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, Peter Pace wants to share his final thoughts, Iraq makes noise about evicting squatters, Joe Biden continued his Iraq visit, and more.
Yesterday, Bully Boy showed up for the final without his Blue Book and naked. Today General Peter Pace wanted to take a crack at getting in his final thoughts in the final days of the Bully Boy's administration. Lolita C. Baldor (AP) quotes Pace declaring, "I certainly made some wrong estimates. And I certainly made some recommendations that, if I could take them back and change them, I would." Noted homophobe Pace was a far cry from his frolicking earlier days as he stood before an oil painting that drawfed him. In June 2007, Isaiah featured Pace in "Bye-bye" as he quoted the outgoing Joint Cheifs of Staff Peter Pace from less than two years before (April 22, 2005) stating, "This is an incredible moment for me. It is both exhilirating and humbling. It's exhilirating because I have the opportunity, if confirmed by the Senate, to continue to serve this country. It's humbling because I know the challenges ahead are formidable." Baldor notes that former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld attended and she insists, "Both Pace and Rumsfeld were political casualties of the war, losing their jobs as the public became increasingly frustrated with the lack of progress in Iraq and the escalating troop deaths -- now numbering more than 4,200." On the deaths -- the actual fatalities -- yesterday we noted the death of a US soldier outside Samarra. There was a second death announced late yesterday: "A Multi-National Force – West Marine died as the result of a non-combat related incident here [al Asad Airbase] Jan. 11. The Marine's name is being withheld pending notification of next-of-kin and release by the Department of Defense. The incident is under investigation." The announcement brings the total number of US service members who have died in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4226. The total for the week thus far is 3 announced deaths.
Today the incoming US vice president, Joe Biden, continued his visit in Iraq. AFP calls it "a trail-blazing visit" and notes that he met today with puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki in Baghdad before moving onto the oil-rich and disputed city of Kirkuk "where he met governor Abdul Rhaman Mustafa and his deputy Rakan Saeed al-Juburi." Timothy Williams (New York Times) notes bombings took place "a few hours before" Biden's arrival. Al Jazeera observes, "Violence in Iraq has marred a visit by Joe Biden" and notes that "[d]espite the decreasing violence across the country, local police are still being targeted as they take over control of the provinces from US forces" and that continued today with at least two incidents involving attacks on police officers. Brian Montopoli (CBS News) noted yesterday, "The visit was not officially announced." Tim Cocks and Ahmed Rasheed (Reuters) quote al-Maliki stating, "Senator Joe Biden asserted the importance of cooperation . . . to implement the foreign troop withdrawal agreement signed by the two countries." That would be the treaty masquerading as a Status Of Forces Agreement and that, if true, would be the same treaty Joe Biden loudly opposed throughout 2008, up to the November election. The treaty extends the US presence to 2011 if both sides agree to exercise the two renewal options and do not alter the treaty. Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) notes Biden met with Jalal Talabani, President of Iraq, the day before and that Senator Linsey Graham was also on the trip to Iraq. AP adds that Biden also met with "Vice President Adel Abdul Mehdi and Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih." Not listed but he also met with Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari. AP does note that Graham and Biden had dinner with members of Delaware's National Guard including Beau Biden, the vice president-elect's oldest son who delivered a very moving speech nominating his father at the Democratic National Convention last August.
Meanwhile Baghdad residents have received news via e-mail: The price of electricity is going up. A McClatchy Iraqi correspondent (Inside Iraq) reports, "Most of us in Iraq (Im talking about regular people not officials) have power for four hours a day and you can imagine the crises happening in every house. There is a specific time for bathing and another time for washing the cloths. Every single member in the family should follow the schedule. Breaking the rules means destroying the system which leads the life of the family." The rate increase comes at a time, as noted, when Iraq still can't count on electricity, when potable water is an issue ignored (until September and October roll around and the cholera outbreak returns), and many internal refugees remain without homes they can call their own. Iraqi squatters have existed throughout the illegal war. Some took over the homes of others or abandoned homes. Others set up homes in abandoned Iraqi buildings. That group was, in fact, encouraged by the US who gave the okay for it and allowed it to continue. In the last few years, the puppet has tried to show how 'strong' he is by repeatedly cutting the rations Iraqis depend on and by repeatedly threatening to evict squatters. An Al Jazeera video report from last July is here. Current context includes that the Ministry of Displacement and Migration does not have the funds for the housing projects they promised and so some construction has been delayed "until 2010". Despite that, IRIN reported last week, "The Iraqi government has decided to evict all people who have been squatting in government buildings or on government land since the 2003 US-led invasion" and quotes a government stating that the decision was made by the Iraqi Cabinet. That would be al-Maliki's cabinet. Yesterday they reported a move on the part of the Iraqi Parliament and NGOs to halt the planned evicitions until winter has ended. IRIN quotes the Parliament's Displacement and Migration Committee's chair Abdul-Khaliq Zankana stating, "The law must prevail, but I do believe the best way to deal with this issue is to postpone the implementation until the middle of the year as it is winter now and we can't turn those people out onto the street. This will affect the attendance of their children at school."
Meanwhile Deborah Haynes (Times of London) reports that, as required by the Iraqi government of all foreigners, she took an AIDS test and she describes what she saw at al-Alwiya Hospital in Baghdad:
. . . it was immediately clear that there was minimal electricity. The small entrance hall was dark and dirty, with steps zigzagging upstairs. A couple of elevators on one wall appeard to have been out of action for a while.
Gingerly climbing up the stairs to the third floor, I was told that the doctor who handles foreigners' blood was running late so "would I sit in the waiting room."
This compromised a sorry line of chairs in the corridor. A dustbin in one corner overlowed with empty cans of fizzy drink. A thin meshing covered the windows, which hung open on rusty hinges, letting a cold draft.
A tatty-looking poster warning people about the perils of smoking hung from one wall, while a couple of feet away a make-shift snack stall on a rickety table sold packets of cigarettes as well as piles of biscuits, sweets and nuts."
While Iraq's services and infrastructure remain largely non-existant the US did set up the thugs in Iraq the same way they went to the war lords in Afghanistan. Anthony Shadid (Washington Post) reports on Nadhim Khalil, the thirty-year-old wonder-thug who was "on the losing side" (attacking the US) but has seen where the money is . . . for now and has set himself up as the war lore of Thuluyah: "His formula is simple: With God, guns and money, he is now the authority in town." Shadid quotes him stating, "I'm sure the Americans will leave after a little while, and there's nothing I achieve by kililng them now. I could kill them anytime, anywhere, and so what?" The thug controls the town and waits. To do what? Who knows? Shadid reports:
The elected city council can only watch and complain -- in whispers -- about a man they fear. The town's elders scoff at his age and pedigree, with a wayward glance.
"My opinion?" asked Abdullah Jabbouri, a council member and former general. He paused, smiling a little sheepishly.
"Anyone who has absolute power becomes dangerous, even to himself," he said.
As US Senator Barbara Boxer noted of thugs on the US dime in a Foreign Relations Committee hearing last April, "You cannot count on them." Or why the incoming vice president questioned these sudden 'allies'. As Anna Badkhen (San Francisco Chronicle) pointed out, found, "Sen. Jospeh Biden, D-Del., said these U.S.-funded militias may one day 'turn their guns on us'."
Moving over to medical care. Yesterday's snapshot noted, "The CBS Evening News reported (link has text and video) on PTSD December 26th and noted, 'There were 115 military suicides last year, and 93 through just August of this year'." Suicide among the military is in the news today. Starting with Marines and dropping back a bit to when Ann Scott Tyson (Washington Post) reported on the 2004 Marine suicide rate (reported Feb. 25, 2005) noting it had increased by 29%, that 31 Marines had taken their own lives and 83 more had tried to do so. Tony Perry (Los Angeles Times' Babylon & Beyond) reports there are 41 "possible or confirmed [Marine] suicides" for 2008. As Gregg Zoroya (USA Today) points out, none of the 2008 numbers are final yet. Zoroya tells Army combat soldier and Iraq War veteran Josh Barber's story of taking his own life because the "smell of death" couldn't be escaped and grieved over his PTSD and the military's being unable/unwilling to treat it. Zoroya explains, "Marines and combat veterans who have killed themselves in recent years, at a time when the Pentagon has stretched deployments for combat troops to meet President Bush's security plans in Iraq. The Marine Corps reported 41 actual or suspected suicides in 2008, a 20% increase over 33 in 2007. In 2007, the Army counted 115 suicides, the most since tracking began in 1980. By October 2008, that record had been surpassed with 117 soldier suicides. Final numbers for 2008 have not been released. Suicides among Iraq and Afghanistan veterans doubled from 52 in 2004 to 110 in 2006, the latest statistics available, according to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)." This comes as the Defense Dept and the Dept of Veterans Affairs is in the midst of their multi-day Department of Defense/Veterans Affairs Annual Suicide Prevention Conference in San Antonio (through the 15th). Michael Tolzmann (Defense Media Activity) notes that Dr. Loree K. Sutton (Army Brig Gen) explained that "toxic leadership" creates stigmas "that can kill" such as when "[a]n Army staff sergeant who had lost Soldiers in the war zone was called a coward, a wimp and a wuss form a leader when he mentioned he might need psychological help."
Meanwhile Iraq War veteran Nathan Ryan Smith is AWOL in the US. Scott Michael (ABC News) reports he is "charged with kidnapping, rape, arson and tampering with evidence." Michael quotes a rape victim stating he allegedly told her, "I have killed several people in Iraq. I'm crazy in the head, and if I get caught by police I will come looking for you and kill you." Ian Demsky (Tacoma's News Tribune) reported last week that court records describe the police involvement beginning as follows:
Police responding to a missing persons report Jan. 1 found the woman they were looking for. Her body bore the signs of torture. Rope burns on her arms were "deep and distinct." She had scratches on her back and sharp red lines running across her chest. There was blood inside her coat and on her pants.
The officers took her to Tacoma General Hospital.
She told police she had been walking to the store when she noticed a silver pickup truck with a canopy pull into the parking lot behind her. A man got out and shouted for her to come to him. He then grabbed her and choked her unconscious.
She said she woke up in a strange room. She was naked and her arms and legs were bound with plastic zip-ties. She tried to free herself, but a male voice told her, "If you fight, you'll die."
Her abductor held a butcher knife to her face and promised she'd go home if she cooperated. He picked her up by the ties and carried her to another room. She told police she saw Army patches in a windowsill.
She said she was dropped onto a bed, gagged, sexually abused and raped. She told police she was tortured with a device hooked up to a battery.
When the man was done, he let her get dressed. She said he told her he'd kill her and her family if she told anyone.
Turning to some of today's reported violence in Iraq . . .
Bombings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad mortar attack that left seven people wounded, a Baghdad roadside bombing that wounded eight people and a Mosul roadside bombing that claimed the life of 1 police officer and left another wounded.
Shootings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a police officer was "severely" injured in a Mosul shooting.
Corpses?
Reuters drops back to Monday to note 1 corpse discovered in Baghdad.
Josh Foster, of Boston, writes the London Review of Books over a bad piece the periodical ran:
The London Review let itself be carried away by an uncharacteristic fit of optimism with the cover line of Patrick Cockburn's latest report on Iraq, 'America Surrenders' (LRB, 18 December 2008). There are nearly 150,000 US troops deployed throughout the country, and while they're perfectly content to let Iraqis do the killing for them (along the lines of Nixon's 'Vietnamisation' strategy), there's no telling when (or if) they'll leave. It's possible, of course, that the Status of Forces Agreement is being ignored in the US because it shows how little America has achieved for its efforts in Iraq. But the failure of the press to report the story fully may also reflect a sensible recognition that Iraq's real future is being written in the streets, not in parliament. How likely is it that SOFA won't end up being as useful a guide to Iraqi reality as Stalin's 1936 Constitution was to Soviet reality? That constitution, which remained in effect until 1977, was described as the most democratic in the world. It included universal direct suffrage and recognised an impressive range of social and economic rights -- and wasn't worth the paper it was written on.
Those late to the party on Patrick Cockburn's maniacal ravings can see The Cat's Blog here and here -- the latter of which notes:
As I wrote in my previous blog, the same day Counterpunch published P. Cockburn's article, Reuters reported, "Ali al-Dabbagh, spokesman for the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, said some U.S. forces could be needed for 10 years": "We do understand that the Iraqi military is not going to get built out in the three years. We do need many more years. It might be 10 years," Dabbagh said at a Pentagon press briefing.But besides what this or that puppet might say, one needs just to stop the flow of propaganda and think; if the US didn't respect the UN Charter and international law when they invaded Iraq, they will certainly not respect any meaningless agreement signed by its own Quisling government. To focus on the SOFA is just another diversion; the US plan, far from being a "total defeat", as Cockburn writes, has been completely successful. Mission accomplished.The official lib-left intelligentsia must continue its real job as gatekeeper of dissent; its audiences, the most aware, active and willing to stop their governments from continuing to perpetrate crimes against humanity for the sake of elites' profit and power, must be controlled through "friendly" propaganda. When Obama's war machine is preparing to use all its bestial might against the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan and with an economic and financial crisis without precedent hitting millions of people, the public opinion in the West needs to be tamed once again. The eunuchs have gladly renounced to their organs in change of a little place at the table of the gods, or maybe they are just happy for some falling crumbs.The eunuchs have gladly renounced to their organs in change of a little place at the table of the gods, or maybe they are just happy for some falling crumbs.
You can also refer to this site's December 11th "Iraq snapshot" and "I Hate The War" for more on Cockburn's fevered prose.
In US political news, Brian Montopoli (CBS News) notes Senator "Roland Burris will likely be sworn into the U.S. Senate sometime Thursday afternoon, reports CBS News' John Nolen."
In other news, The Women on the Web score an exclusive interview with singer and songwriter Phoebe Snow:
wOw: You and I spoke very briefly between Christmas and New Year's. You were very upset because you missed your daughter, Valerie, who died last year. How are you feeling now, in the New Year?Phoebe: Well, let's just say I've shifted into neutral. I have a lot of work to do. You know, she was my only child and we had a very unusual, very unique relationship. We lived together for 31 years. I'm very forthcoming about this -- I want people to know about her now, because I sort of kept all this under wraps for most of the time that she was alive. She was a victim of multiple birth injuries. Her brain damage was caused by the birth, by the doctor. There was a gigantic medical malpractice suit that came to trial. It took 17 years to come to trial. I don't want to go there.
wOw: I understand.Phoebe: Basically her original prognosis was that she would live in a persistent vegetative state -- although they didn't use those words back then -- that she wouldn't be conscious, fully, because she had been so terribly brain damaged that she would probably expire sometime around her first birthday, if even that long. And she lived to be 31 years old. I instantly, and forever, rejected the idea that she would live in any other type of place except with me. wOw: That's rough, Phoebe.Phoebe: And for most of this experience I was a single parent. She did live with me for 31 years. And we were ... anyone who knows us will validate this -- we were madly in love with each other. And, you know, her death had nothing to do with any of her other pre-existing medical conditions. She ... I don't want to talk about that right now. But she died very suddenly, very unexpectedly. It was the worst curveball that life has ever thrown me. And, you know, I'm shattered. I'm absolutely shattered. But I'm putting the pieces back together little by little.
Disclosure, I know Phoebe (and many of the women who make up "The Women of the Web"). Recommendation, read the article and get Phoebe's new CD Live.
The Green Party of Michigan released the following statement on the slaughter in Gaza:
Green Party leaders in Michigan condemned the brutal air strikes and military assaults by Israel on unarmed civilians in Gaza and called for a boycott of Israel. The Israeli blockade of Gaza, erected in 2006 after the democratic election of Hamas, was an act of war. As a result of the blockade, 80% of Gazans live on less than two dollars a day, unemployment hovers at 50-60%, with only 195 factories working, reduced from 3,900 in 2005. In spite of this near strangulation of their society, the people of Gaza agreed to a ceasefire with Israel. Now, Israel drops dozens of bombs on students and children, killing over 820 people and wounding 3,000. United Nations aid for the injured is blocked; reporters are completely barred. Israel leaflets Gazans telling them to leave and closes all the borders. And this pogrom isn't over yet. Derek Grigsby, chairperson of the Detroit Green Party and candidate for Michigan House of Representatives, 7th district, said: "We demand that the Bush administration stop using the state of Israel as a terrorist force against the people of the Middle East and use the money being given to them for basic necessities here at home, like healthcare and education." He continued: "We call on all of our elected leaders to stand up for justice and human rights and roundly condemn the murderous aggression committed by Israel on the Palestinians." Margaret Guttshall, candidate for Wayne State Board of Governors, spoke of her experiences. "When I was a student at Wayne State a few years ago, we organized and convinced the Student Council to support divestment from Israel, one of the first schools to do so. Now it is time to implement divestment as well as academic sanctions against Israel, just as we did against the apartheid regime of South Africa." "We want all military and economic aid from the U.S. to Israel stopped immediately," said Fred Vitale, state chairperson and candidate for Michigan House of Representatives from the 3rd district. "We support, among other actions, boycotts, divestment campaigns and sanctions against Israel -- until it ceases to deny Palestinian history, ends the occupation, ceases discrimination against Palestinian citizens of Israel, and permits displaced Palestinian refugees to return to their homes," Vitale concluded.
For more information: www.gpus.org www.MIGreens.org http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article10056.shtmlfor information on the call for a boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel.
iraq mcclatchy newspapers the washington post ernesto londono
ann scott tyson
anthony shadid
deborah haynesthe new york timestimothy williams
the los angeles times
tony perry
gregg zoroyausa today
the cat's blog
brian montopoli
cbs news
anna badkhen
scott michaelabc news
tim cocks
the world today just nuts
So I'm thinking, "Hmm. I bet I have Phoebe Snow's new CD as well." Elaine says she'll open the boxes and call me later tonight. She does, she does and she has. So we all have it.
And we probably seem like the most ungrateful in the world. But C.I.'s always giving us stuff and I'm always saying, "If there's something you think I'll love, let me know." Because otherwise the box is on my to-do list. This is the first week I've been home since September. But I feel so bad because (a) I know C.I. thinks the world of Phoebe Snow, (b) I know Phoebe Snow has had a very patch and (c) I expect it's a great album.
Instead of attempting to figure out where the box is, I just downloaded it tonight (from Amazon, here). I'm listening to it right now and will try to do another CD review this weekend.
That's not, "C.I.'s asking me to review her friend!" C.I.'s asked no such thing. And made no big deal or even told me about the CD. But if I had known in October it was out, I would have reviewed it. Or tried. Some CDs, even if I love them, I can't find a way in. I don't think that will be a problem here.
Guess who did know about the CD? Mike. Elaine told me that. She said Mike goes, "Oh yeah, that's a cool CD." Elaine asked when he'd listened to it (Mike got his own copy from C.I. despite the fact that Elaine and Mike cohabitate) and he said during studying for his tests and finals last semester. Then he realized he'd been listening with headphones. But he's been blasting it for months. He said to start with "You're My Girl" -- actually he said, "Little Girl." I said, "Elaine, tell him there's no 'Little Girl' on this album." So then Mike starts singing it and I figure out it's "You're My Girl." ("You're my girl, my little girl . . .") And it is the place to start.
If you haven't read the snapshot, C.I. made a point to include an excerpt of a wowOwow interview with Phoebe Snow ("In other news, The Women on the Web score an exclusive interview with singer and songwriter Phoebe Snow" . . .) She really is just putting it out there in the interview.
One more time, the CD's called Live. Available for download, can be purchased online and can be purchased in stores.
Betty plans to blog tonight but if she doesn't, she said to put in that she's loving her new job. She was worried but she loves it. She also is glad about the move.
Closing with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
Tuesday, January 13, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, Peter Pace wants to share his final thoughts, Iraq makes noise about evicting squatters, Joe Biden continued his Iraq visit, and more.
Yesterday, Bully Boy showed up for the final without his Blue Book and naked. Today General Peter Pace wanted to take a crack at getting in his final thoughts in the final days of the Bully Boy's administration. Lolita C. Baldor (AP) quotes Pace declaring, "I certainly made some wrong estimates. And I certainly made some recommendations that, if I could take them back and change them, I would." Noted homophobe Pace was a far cry from his frolicking earlier days as he stood before an oil painting that drawfed him. In June 2007, Isaiah featured Pace in "Bye-bye" as he quoted the outgoing Joint Cheifs of Staff Peter Pace from less than two years before (April 22, 2005) stating, "This is an incredible moment for me. It is both exhilirating and humbling. It's exhilirating because I have the opportunity, if confirmed by the Senate, to continue to serve this country. It's humbling because I know the challenges ahead are formidable." Baldor notes that former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld attended and she insists, "Both Pace and Rumsfeld were political casualties of the war, losing their jobs as the public became increasingly frustrated with the lack of progress in Iraq and the escalating troop deaths -- now numbering more than 4,200." On the deaths -- the actual fatalities -- yesterday we noted the death of a US soldier outside Samarra. There was a second death announced late yesterday: "A Multi-National Force – West Marine died as the result of a non-combat related incident here [al Asad Airbase] Jan. 11. The Marine's name is being withheld pending notification of next-of-kin and release by the Department of Defense. The incident is under investigation." The announcement brings the total number of US service members who have died in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4226. The total for the week thus far is 3 announced deaths.
Today the incoming US vice president, Joe Biden, continued his visit in Iraq. AFP calls it "a trail-blazing visit" and notes that he met today with puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki in Baghdad before moving onto the oil-rich and disputed city of Kirkuk "where he met governor Abdul Rhaman Mustafa and his deputy Rakan Saeed al-Juburi." Timothy Williams (New York Times) notes bombings took place "a few hours before" Biden's arrival. Al Jazeera observes, "Violence in Iraq has marred a visit by Joe Biden" and notes that "[d]espite the decreasing violence across the country, local police are still being targeted as they take over control of the provinces from US forces" and that continued today with at least two incidents involving attacks on police officers. Brian Montopoli (CBS News) noted yesterday, "The visit was not officially announced." Tim Cocks and Ahmed Rasheed (Reuters) quote al-Maliki stating, "Senator Joe Biden asserted the importance of cooperation . . . to implement the foreign troop withdrawal agreement signed by the two countries." That would be the treaty masquerading as a Status Of Forces Agreement and that, if true, would be the same treaty Joe Biden loudly opposed throughout 2008, up to the November election. The treaty extends the US presence to 2011 if both sides agree to exercise the two renewal options and do not alter the treaty. Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) notes Biden met with Jalal Talabani, President of Iraq, the day before and that Senator Linsey Graham was also on the trip to Iraq. AP adds that Biden also met with "Vice President Adel Abdul Mehdi and Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih." Not listed but he also met with Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari. AP does note that Graham and Biden had dinner with members of Delaware's National Guard including Beau Biden, the vice president-elect's oldest son who delivered a very moving speech nominating his father at the Democratic National Convention last August.
Meanwhile Baghdad residents have received news via e-mail: The price of electricity is going up. A McClatchy Iraqi correspondent (Inside Iraq) reports, "Most of us in Iraq (Im talking about regular people not officials) have power for four hours a day and you can imagine the crises happening in every house. There is a specific time for bathing and another time for washing the cloths. Every single member in the family should follow the schedule. Breaking the rules means destroying the system which leads the life of the family." The rate increase comes at a time, as noted, when Iraq still can't count on electricity, when potable water is an issue ignored (until September and October roll around and the cholera outbreak returns), and many internal refugees remain without homes they can call their own. Iraqi squatters have existed throughout the illegal war. Some took over the homes of others or abandoned homes. Others set up homes in abandoned Iraqi buildings. That group was, in fact, encouraged by the US who gave the okay for it and allowed it to continue. In the last few years, the puppet has tried to show how 'strong' he is by repeatedly cutting the rations Iraqis depend on and by repeatedly threatening to evict squatters. An Al Jazeera video report from last July is here. Current context includes that the Ministry of Displacement and Migration does not have the funds for the housing projects they promised and so some construction has been delayed "until 2010". Despite that, IRIN reported last week, "The Iraqi government has decided to evict all people who have been squatting in government buildings or on government land since the 2003 US-led invasion" and quotes a government stating that the decision was made by the Iraqi Cabinet. That would be al-Maliki's cabinet. Yesterday they reported a move on the part of the Iraqi Parliament and NGOs to halt the planned evicitions until winter has ended. IRIN quotes the Parliament's Displacement and Migration Committee's chair Abdul-Khaliq Zankana stating, "The law must prevail, but I do believe the best way to deal with this issue is to postpone the implementation until the middle of the year as it is winter now and we can't turn those people out onto the street. This will affect the attendance of their children at school."
Meanwhile Deborah Haynes (Times of London) reports that, as required by the Iraqi government of all foreigners, she took an AIDS test and she describes what she saw at al-Alwiya Hospital in Baghdad:
. . . it was immediately clear that there was minimal electricity. The small entrance hall was dark and dirty, with steps zigzagging upstairs. A couple of elevators on one wall appeard to have been out of action for a while.
Gingerly climbing up the stairs to the third floor, I was told that the doctor who handles foreigners' blood was running late so "would I sit in the waiting room."
This compromised a sorry line of chairs in the corridor. A dustbin in one corner overlowed with empty cans of fizzy drink. A thin meshing covered the windows, which hung open on rusty hinges, letting a cold draft.
A tatty-looking poster warning people about the perils of smoking hung from one wall, while a couple of feet away a make-shift snack stall on a rickety table sold packets of cigarettes as well as piles of biscuits, sweets and nuts."
While Iraq's services and infrastructure remain largely non-existant the US did set up the thugs in Iraq the same way they went to the war lords in Afghanistan. Anthony Shadid (Washington Post) reports on Nadhim Khalil, the thirty-year-old wonder-thug who was "on the losing side" (attacking the US) but has seen where the money is . . . for now and has set himself up as the war lore of Thuluyah: "His formula is simple: With God, guns and money, he is now the authority in town." Shadid quotes him stating, "I'm sure the Americans will leave after a little while, and there's nothing I achieve by kililng them now. I could kill them anytime, anywhere, and so what?" The thug controls the town and waits. To do what? Who knows? Shadid reports:
The elected city council can only watch and complain -- in whispers -- about a man they fear. The town's elders scoff at his age and pedigree, with a wayward glance.
"My opinion?" asked Abdullah Jabbouri, a council member and former general. He paused, smiling a little sheepishly.
"Anyone who has absolute power becomes dangerous, even to himself," he said.
As US Senator Barbara Boxer noted of thugs on the US dime in a Foreign Relations Committee hearing last April, "You cannot count on them." Or why the incoming vice president questioned these sudden 'allies'. As Anna Badkhen (San Francisco Chronicle) pointed out, found, "Sen. Jospeh Biden, D-Del., said these U.S.-funded militias may one day 'turn their guns on us'."
Moving over to medical care. Yesterday's snapshot noted, "The CBS Evening News reported (link has text and video) on PTSD December 26th and noted, 'There were 115 military suicides last year, and 93 through just August of this year'." Suicide among the military is in the news today. Starting with Marines and dropping back a bit to when Ann Scott Tyson (Washington Post) reported on the 2004 Marine suicide rate (reported Feb. 25, 2005) noting it had increased by 29%, that 31 Marines had taken their own lives and 83 more had tried to do so. Tony Perry (Los Angeles Times' Babylon & Beyond) reports there are 41 "possible or confirmed [Marine] suicides" for 2008. As Gregg Zoroya (USA Today) points out, none of the 2008 numbers are final yet. Zoroya tells Army combat soldier and Iraq War veteran Josh Barber's story of taking his own life because the "smell of death" couldn't be escaped and grieved over his PTSD and the military's being unable/unwilling to treat it. Zoroya explains, "Marines and combat veterans who have killed themselves in recent years, at a time when the Pentagon has stretched deployments for combat troops to meet President Bush's security plans in Iraq. The Marine Corps reported 41 actual or suspected suicides in 2008, a 20% increase over 33 in 2007. In 2007, the Army counted 115 suicides, the most since tracking began in 1980. By October 2008, that record had been surpassed with 117 soldier suicides. Final numbers for 2008 have not been released. Suicides among Iraq and Afghanistan veterans doubled from 52 in 2004 to 110 in 2006, the latest statistics available, according to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)." This comes as the Defense Dept and the Dept of Veterans Affairs is in the midst of their multi-day Department of Defense/Veterans Affairs Annual Suicide Prevention Conference in San Antonio (through the 15th). Michael Tolzmann (Defense Media Activity) notes that Dr. Loree K. Sutton (Army Brig Gen) explained that "toxic leadership" creates stigmas "that can kill" such as when "[a]n Army staff sergeant who had lost Soldiers in the war zone was called a coward, a wimp and a wuss form a leader when he mentioned he might need psychological help."
Meanwhile Iraq War veteran Nathan Ryan Smith is AWOL in the US. Scott Michael (ABC News) reports he is "charged with kidnapping, rape, arson and tampering with evidence." Michael quotes a rape victim stating he allegedly told her, "I have killed several people in Iraq. I'm crazy in the head, and if I get caught by police I will come looking for you and kill you." Ian Demsky (Tacoma's News Tribune) reported last week that court records describe the police involvement beginning as follows:
Police responding to a missing persons report Jan. 1 found the woman they were looking for. Her body bore the signs of torture. Rope burns on her arms were "deep and distinct." She had scratches on her back and sharp red lines running across her chest. There was blood inside her coat and on her pants.
The officers took her to Tacoma General Hospital.
She told police she had been walking to the store when she noticed a silver pickup truck with a canopy pull into the parking lot behind her. A man got out and shouted for her to come to him. He then grabbed her and choked her unconscious.
She said she woke up in a strange room. She was naked and her arms and legs were bound with plastic zip-ties. She tried to free herself, but a male voice told her, "If you fight, you'll die."
Her abductor held a butcher knife to her face and promised she'd go home if she cooperated. He picked her up by the ties and carried her to another room. She told police she saw Army patches in a windowsill.
She said she was dropped onto a bed, gagged, sexually abused and raped. She told police she was tortured with a device hooked up to a battery.
When the man was done, he let her get dressed. She said he told her he'd kill her and her family if she told anyone.
Turning to some of today's reported violence in Iraq . . .
Bombings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad mortar attack that left seven people wounded, a Baghdad roadside bombing that wounded eight people and a Mosul roadside bombing that claimed the life of 1 police officer and left another wounded.
Shootings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a police officer was "severely" injured in a Mosul shooting.
Corpses?
Reuters drops back to Monday to note 1 corpse discovered in Baghdad.
Josh Foster, of Boston, writes the London Review of Books over a bad piece the periodical ran:
The London Review let itself be carried away by an uncharacteristic fit of optimism with the cover line of Patrick Cockburn's latest report on Iraq, 'America Surrenders' (LRB, 18 December 2008). There are nearly 150,000 US troops deployed throughout the country, and while they're perfectly content to let Iraqis do the killing for them (along the lines of Nixon's 'Vietnamisation' strategy), there's no telling when (or if) they'll leave. It's possible, of course, that the Status of Forces Agreement is being ignored in the US because it shows how little America has achieved for its efforts in Iraq. But the failure of the press to report the story fully may also reflect a sensible recognition that Iraq's real future is being written in the streets, not in parliament. How likely is it that SOFA won't end up being as useful a guide to Iraqi reality as Stalin's 1936 Constitution was to Soviet reality? That constitution, which remained in effect until 1977, was described as the most democratic in the world. It included universal direct suffrage and recognised an impressive range of social and economic rights -- and wasn't worth the paper it was written on.
Those late to the party on Patrick Cockburn's maniacal ravings can see The Cat's Blog here and here -- the latter of which notes:
As I wrote in my previous blog, the same day Counterpunch published P. Cockburn's article, Reuters reported, "Ali al-Dabbagh, spokesman for the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, said some U.S. forces could be needed for 10 years": "We do understand that the Iraqi military is not going to get built out in the three years. We do need many more years. It might be 10 years," Dabbagh said at a Pentagon press briefing.But besides what this or that puppet might say, one needs just to stop the flow of propaganda and think; if the US didn't respect the UN Charter and international law when they invaded Iraq, they will certainly not respect any meaningless agreement signed by its own Quisling government. To focus on the SOFA is just another diversion; the US plan, far from being a "total defeat", as Cockburn writes, has been completely successful. Mission accomplished.The official lib-left intelligentsia must continue its real job as gatekeeper of dissent; its audiences, the most aware, active and willing to stop their governments from continuing to perpetrate crimes against humanity for the sake of elites' profit and power, must be controlled through "friendly" propaganda. When Obama's war machine is preparing to use all its bestial might against the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan and with an economic and financial crisis without precedent hitting millions of people, the public opinion in the West needs to be tamed once again. The eunuchs have gladly renounced to their organs in change of a little place at the table of the gods, or maybe they are just happy for some falling crumbs.The eunuchs have gladly renounced to their organs in change of a little place at the table of the gods, or maybe they are just happy for some falling crumbs.
You can also refer to this site's December 11th "Iraq snapshot" and "I Hate The War" for more on Cockburn's fevered prose.
In US political news, Brian Montopoli (CBS News) notes Senator "Roland Burris will likely be sworn into the U.S. Senate sometime Thursday afternoon, reports CBS News' John Nolen."
In other news, The Women on the Web score an exclusive interview with singer and songwriter Phoebe Snow:
wOw: You and I spoke very briefly between Christmas and New Year's. You were very upset because you missed your daughter, Valerie, who died last year. How are you feeling now, in the New Year?Phoebe: Well, let's just say I've shifted into neutral. I have a lot of work to do. You know, she was my only child and we had a very unusual, very unique relationship. We lived together for 31 years. I'm very forthcoming about this -- I want people to know about her now, because I sort of kept all this under wraps for most of the time that she was alive. She was a victim of multiple birth injuries. Her brain damage was caused by the birth, by the doctor. There was a gigantic medical malpractice suit that came to trial. It took 17 years to come to trial. I don't want to go there.
wOw: I understand.Phoebe: Basically her original prognosis was that she would live in a persistent vegetative state -- although they didn't use those words back then -- that she wouldn't be conscious, fully, because she had been so terribly brain damaged that she would probably expire sometime around her first birthday, if even that long. And she lived to be 31 years old. I instantly, and forever, rejected the idea that she would live in any other type of place except with me. wOw: That's rough, Phoebe.Phoebe: And for most of this experience I was a single parent. She did live with me for 31 years. And we were ... anyone who knows us will validate this -- we were madly in love with each other. And, you know, her death had nothing to do with any of her other pre-existing medical conditions. She ... I don't want to talk about that right now. But she died very suddenly, very unexpectedly. It was the worst curveball that life has ever thrown me. And, you know, I'm shattered. I'm absolutely shattered. But I'm putting the pieces back together little by little.
Disclosure, I know Phoebe (and many of the women who make up "The Women of the Web"). Recommendation, read the article and get Phoebe's new CD Live.
The Green Party of Michigan released the following statement on the slaughter in Gaza:
Green Party leaders in Michigan condemned the brutal air strikes and military assaults by Israel on unarmed civilians in Gaza and called for a boycott of Israel. The Israeli blockade of Gaza, erected in 2006 after the democratic election of Hamas, was an act of war. As a result of the blockade, 80% of Gazans live on less than two dollars a day, unemployment hovers at 50-60%, with only 195 factories working, reduced from 3,900 in 2005. In spite of this near strangulation of their society, the people of Gaza agreed to a ceasefire with Israel. Now, Israel drops dozens of bombs on students and children, killing over 820 people and wounding 3,000. United Nations aid for the injured is blocked; reporters are completely barred. Israel leaflets Gazans telling them to leave and closes all the borders. And this pogrom isn't over yet. Derek Grigsby, chairperson of the Detroit Green Party and candidate for Michigan House of Representatives, 7th district, said: "We demand that the Bush administration stop using the state of Israel as a terrorist force against the people of the Middle East and use the money being given to them for basic necessities here at home, like healthcare and education." He continued: "We call on all of our elected leaders to stand up for justice and human rights and roundly condemn the murderous aggression committed by Israel on the Palestinians." Margaret Guttshall, candidate for Wayne State Board of Governors, spoke of her experiences. "When I was a student at Wayne State a few years ago, we organized and convinced the Student Council to support divestment from Israel, one of the first schools to do so. Now it is time to implement divestment as well as academic sanctions against Israel, just as we did against the apartheid regime of South Africa." "We want all military and economic aid from the U.S. to Israel stopped immediately," said Fred Vitale, state chairperson and candidate for Michigan House of Representatives from the 3rd district. "We support, among other actions, boycotts, divestment campaigns and sanctions against Israel -- until it ceases to deny Palestinian history, ends the occupation, ceases discrimination against Palestinian citizens of Israel, and permits displaced Palestinian refugees to return to their homes," Vitale concluded.
For more information: www.gpus.org www.MIGreens.org http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article10056.shtmlfor information on the call for a boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel.
iraq mcclatchy newspapers the washington post ernesto londono
ann scott tyson
anthony shadid
deborah haynesthe new york timestimothy williams
the los angeles times
tony perry
gregg zoroyausa today
the cat's blog
brian montopoli
cbs news
anna badkhen
scott michaelabc news
tim cocks
the world today just nuts
Monday, January 12, 2009
Talking post
Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Princess Brat's Big Plan" went up yesterday and I love it. He asked C.I. to link to my "Elvis and Princess Brat Caroline" which was very sweet of him. Right back at you, Isaiah.
Yesterday also saw my first CD review of 2009 go up: "Kat's Korner: The really best of Janis Ian." E-mails are very positive but I fear everyone is being kind. I wrote that at the computer and typed it as fast as I could because I had X number of minutes before I had to leave the airport Saturday morning. If you like it, it's because of Janis Ian's music. So if you don't have Best of Janis Ian: The Autobiography Collection already, please consider getting it.
I had a few questions and I'll try to answer the ones I can remember. I'm tired. Betty, her kids and I landed this afternoon. I had so much fun with Betty and her kids and am looking forward to this week. C.I. and Ava are speaking in the area because of Betty's kids. C.I.'s already enrolled them in school or schools -- I was in Georgia, folks, I don't know -- and will be taking them to school this week. Betty's got a forty minute drive to work and back and one of the things she was thinking about was how her kids would have to go to school in the city she's working in because otherwise day care would be a problem (rushing like crazy to be there by six p.m. and hoping traffic doesn't create even more of a problem). So C.I. told her it wasn't a problem for everyone to pool together and handle dropping her kids off in the morning and picking them up in the afternoon. Ty's the immediate emergency contact because he can leave work if a problem comes up. Dona, Jim and Jess go to school (grad school for the first two, law school for Jess) and if they can be reached right away, they can go but Ty's schedule and location is a little more permanent. The picks up will mainly fall on Dona, Jim and Jess. Not a problem. The drop offs will most likely be Ty.
Ava, C.I., Wally and myself are usually gone during the week, out of state speaking about Iraq so we're not going to be around as much. But when we are, we'll be happy to do our share as well. This way Betty's just got to focus on work.
If one of the kid's is sick? Jim's already said he'll stay home with them. So Betty's got a support system in place and hopefully everything will run smoothly.
Question one: Did we see Janis Ian last November in New Londonderry? I have no idea where that city is. Sorry. We were in New Hampshire. It's a lovely state. It was a Thursday. If that's where her concert was, that's where we saw her. The New England states really aren't my expertise. We go there to speak and all but it's not like Florida or somewhere else where I'm thinking, "Oh, so that's ____." It was a nice place (the city the concert was in), I just don't know where it was. (And, yes, I drove. Using Yahoo MapQuest.)
Question two: "We." More of comments than a question. Several of you thought that was great that Wally, Ava, C.I. and I went to the concert.
That would have been great.
That did not happen.
C.I. gave away her ticket.
Why?
She had too much to do. And that's a point I really thought about writing back then and before then and after then. It was a Thursday and there are so many times on Thursdays where (after we finish the roundtable for the gina & krista round-robin) we go out and have some fun. Not C.I. She's got to do "I Hate The War" for The Common Ills. She has to do her column for the gina & krista round-robin. She's got so much to do and it never, ever ends.
I could tell she was bothered about missing the Janis Ian concert. We had just finished the roundtable and were leaving the hotel. C.I. was walking with us to get some air. We saw the guy who was always so helpful. (Not a clerk, I'm not sure what he was but he was always helping us while we were at the hotel even though it wasn't his job.) C.I. called to him and he came over and said he'd be happy to convey whatever we needed but he was actually off. C.I. explained that we had an extra ticket to a concert and wanted to know if he wanted it. He was happy to have it. And he road with us and we all loved the concert.
Janis wore glasses on stage, by the way. Not complaining, they were nice glasses. And her hair was shorter then on the DVD cover. And it looked rally nice as well. I mentioned "Jesse" and that was her encore. I have no idea on the other songs' orders and really only remember "Watercolors" right now (but I'm tired). But it was a great concert.
I meant what I said about bring cash to a Janis concert. (Or credit card.) You really will see a ton of items on the merchandise tables. You'll be kicking yourself.
But back to my point. I'm tired every week we're on the road and I'm lucky to do my five little evening posts here. C.I. is speaking as much (sometimes way more) than I am and is doing columns for how many newsletters (five, I believe), doing Spanish language TV reviews with Ava for El Spirito, doing TV commentaries with Ava for Third each Sunday, doing how many entries each week at The Common Ills? (A minimum of twenty.) C.I.'s up every morning working out (generally Wally works out with C.I. -- I'm always sleeping, Ava often is) and going through the day at a faster race than the rest of us.
And when something like this comes up, a concert C.I. really wanted to catch, it becomes an issue of can I do it or not? And it was a "no." There wasn't time. And that happens so much. There are times when we go to concerts and C.I. will arrive at the last part of it and it's been a mad rush to take care of things just to get there then.
That's it for me, I'm exhausted. I mentioned (but forgot links for) The Third Estate Sunday Review's Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, and Ava, and C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review,Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills),
Closing with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
Monday, January 12, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces another death, Bully Boy rewrites history, Joe Biden goes to Iraq, PTSD remains in the news, and more.
"Clearly putting a 'Mission Accomplished' on a aircraft carrier was a mistake," said the Bully Boy of the United States at the White House today in what he billed as "the ultimate exit interview." That was a mistake, when he was asked to identify them, he threw that out. The Iraq War itself? "And when the history of Iraq is written," declared the ahistorical Bully Boy, "historians will analyze, for example, the decision on the surge. The situation was -- looked like it was going fine and then violence for a period of time began to throw -- throw the progress of Iraq into doubt. And rather than accepting the status quo and saying, oh, it's not worth it or the politics make it difficult or, you know, the party may end up being -- you know, not doing well in the elections because of the violence in Iraq, I decided to do something about it -- and sent 30,000 troops in as opposed to withdrawing. And so that part of history is certain, and the situation did change." What's certain is that he continues to misrepresent what was taking place (including Moqtada al-Sadr's cease-fire/truce) at that time.
"Mission Accomplished," he wanted the world to know was a mistake. Abu Ghraib, by contrast, was "a huge disappointment during the presidency." Not a mistake, not a crime, just "a huge disappointment during the presidency." He found also label the lack of WMDs in Iraq "a significant disappointment." In fact, let's note that passage of his remarks -- and the question had been about mistakes: "There have been disappointments. Abu Ghraib obviously was a huge disappointment during the presidency. Not having weapons of mass destruction was a significant disappointment. I don't know if you want to call those mistakes or not, but they were -- things didn't go according to plan, let's put it that way."
Let's not. Abu Ghraib isn't a disappointment, it is a WAR CRIME. And the criminals were never punished because they went straight up the chain of command. As for WMD -- what's one supposed to think about his statements today? Presumably, he means that since he lied about WMD ahead of the illegal war, he's "disappointed" that none were found and that's due to the "rationale" for the illegal war. But some will rightly point out that the construct of his response indicates he wishes WMD had been in Iraq. In which case, that would have meant what for the US service members sent there? Or is that more thinking than Bully Boy is capable of?
By the same token, he should have been forced to walk out his mistake a little further. He said, "Clearly putting a 'Mission Accomplished' on an aircraft carrier was a mistake. It sent the wrong message. We were trying to say something differently, but nevertheless, it conveyed a different message." He's referring to his May 2, 2003 padded-crotch strut across the USS Abraham Lincoln below a banner proclaiming, "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED." If the banner was a mistake, was it a mistake to blame others for it? Was it a mistake all along or just when he got caught out? When did Bully Boy believe it became a mistake? John Dickerson (Time magazine), November 1, 2003:
Asked at a news conference whether the "Mission Accomplished" banner had been prematurely boastful, the president backed away from it, saying it had been put up by the sailors and airmen of the Lincoln to celebrate their homecoming after toppling Saddam's regime.
Not long afterwards, the White House had to amend its account. The soldiers hadn't put up the sign; the White House had done the hoisting. It had also produced the banner -- contrary to what senior White House officials had said for months. In the end, the White House conceded on those details, but declared them mere quibbles. The point was, they said, that the whole thing had been done at the request of the crewmembers. Even that explanation didn't sit well with some long-time Bush aides. "They (the White House) put up banners at every event that look just like that and we're supposed to believe that at this one it was the Navy that requested one?" asked a senior administration official. Others remember staffers boasting about how the president had been specifically positioned during his speech so that the banner would be captured in footage of his speech.
Mission Accomplished? Reuters notes at multiple bombings in Baghdad today and that incoming US vice president Joe Biden has landed in Iraq. We'll come back to that but first let's turn to peace news to wipe away the smell of the Bully Boy. Military Familes Speak Out plans a February sixth through ninth action in DC entitled "The Change WE Need:"
President Elect Obama opposed the war in Iraq before it started, calling it a "dumb war." But he and his advisors have also said that they plan to spread the return of combat troops from that "dumb war" out over sixteen months and to keep tens of thousands of other troops on the ground in Iraq indefinitely.
So from February 6-9, MFSO will be traveling to Washington to bring the new President and new Congress the message that it is long past time to bring all our troops home from Iraq. The four days of events will include:
A teach-in on Capitol Hill featuring the voices of military families, veterans, and Iraqis, explaining the need for an immediate and complete end to the war in Iraq -- and the human impacts of continuing the occupation.
A march from Arlington National Cemetery to the White House.
Lobbying members of Congress to end the war in Iraq.Watch for more details in the days to come!
March 21st, A.N.S.W.E.R. will be among those sponsoring the "Bring the Troops Home Now" March on the Pentagon:
Tragically, the criminal occupation of Iraq will not be over even by the sixth anniversary of the start of the war in March 2009. People around the world will be marching together on the sixth anniversary in the strongest possible solidarity with the people of Iraq demanding an end to the occupation of their country. Marking the sixth anniversary of the criminal invasion of Iraq, on March 21, 2009, thousands will March on the Pentagon to say, "Bring the Troops Home NOW!" We will also demand "End Colonial Occupation in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and Everywhere" and "Fund Peoples' Needs Not Militarism and Bank Bailouts." We will insist on an end to the war threats and economic sanctions against Iran. We will say no to the illegal U.S. program of detention and torture. To endorse the March 21 March on the Pentagon, click here. To sign up to be a Transportation Organizing Center, click here. While millions of families are losing their homes, jobs and healthcare, the real military budget next year will top one trillion dollars--that's $1,000,000,000,000. If used to meet people's needs, that amount could create 10 million new jobs at $60,000 per year, provide healthcare for everyone who does not have it now, rebuild New Orleans, and repair much of the damage done in Iraq and Afghanistan. The cost for the occupation of Iraq alone is $400 million each day, or about $12 billion each month. The war in Iraq has killed, wounded or displaced nearly one third of Iraq's 26 million people. Thousands of U.S. soldiers have been killed, and hundreds of thousands more have suffered severe physical and psychological wounds. The U.S. leaders who have initiated and conducted this criminal war should be tried and jailed for war crimes.
On the topic of violence, Sunday the US military announced: "A Multi-National Division – Baghdad Soldier died when an improvised explosive device struck his vehicle in eastern Baghdad at approximately 8 p.m. Jan. 10. The Soldier's name is being withheld pending notification of next of kin." Today the US military announced: "A U.S. Solder died as a result of a non-combat related injury near Samarra, Iraq Jan. 11. The name of the deceased is being withheld pending notification of next-of-kin and release by the Department of Defense. The incident is under investigation." The death brings to 4225 the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war.
Over 1.5 million Iraqis have died since the start of the illegal war. Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing and a car bombing at eight this morning that claimed 3 lives and left ten people wounded, a Baghdad sticky bombing fifteen minutes later that claimed 1 life and left another person wounded, a Baghdad roadside bombing forty-five minutes later which claimed 1 life and left three people wounded, a Baghdad roadside bombing one hour later that wounded four people and, one hour later, a Baghdad roadside bombing that claimed the lives of 3 Iraqi soldiers and left three people wounded. Al Dulaimy also notes a Mosul sticky bombing targeting al-Hadbaa National List's Faris Sinjari -- they are among the political parties in Mosul competing for seats in the provincial elections scheduled for January 31st. BBC has video on today's violence.
Moving to Iraqi politics but starting with a US example. Willam Brockman Bankhead was the Speaker of the US House of Representatives for over four years. He died unexpectably of a heart attack on September 15, 1940. (For those unfamiliar with Bankhead, he was the father of Tallulah Bankhead.) The following day, Sam Rayburn became Speaker of the House. The following day. December 23rd, Mahmoud al-Mashhadani was forced out of the Speakership of the Iraqi Parliament. The week prior he had stated he was resigning. He attempted to take that back but a large number wanted him gone as Speaker and had wanted him gone for some time with repeated public efforts to oust him. It is now January 12th and they have still not appointed a new Speaker. Today Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) reports that the Parliament will address the issue on Saturday and they expect to continue discussing it. Saturday -- when they do not expect to make a decision -- will be the 17th. It will be almost one month later. Repeating, when US House Speaker Bankhead unexepectedly died in office, he was replaced by Speaker Rayburn the next day. Repeating, al-Mashhadani was wanted out by many (in the summer of 2006, believing whispers, the New York Times reported he would be out of the post shortly). Despite all the planning to oust him, despite the fact that it was not a surprise, nearly a month later and they have yet to name a replacement. Sam Dagher (New York Times) reported yesterday, "According to political agreements, his successor must be a Sunni Arab, as part of a codified effort to help Iraq's Sunni minority feel it has a voice in government. But disagreements over the choice led to more walkouts from the main Sunni political coalition, Tawafiq, on Saturday, weakening the bloc before crucial provincial elections scheduled for the end of January and raising the possibility of street protests by outraged Sunnis. The dispute may also keep Parliament from passing any legislation until a speaker is chosen and confirmed." Kimi Yoshino and Ali Hameed (Los Angeles Times) added, "The defection came just a couple of weeks after five Sunni members from Mashadani's party, the National Dialogue Council, withdrew."
Meanwhile incoming US vice president Joe Biden arrived in Baghdad. Or, as the New York Times puts it, "Bombings in Iraq as Biden Arrives." The paper's Timothy Williams notes, "Mr. Biden met with the Iraqi president, Jjalal Talabani, according to Iraqi state television, but there were no accouncements regarding their content." AFP quotes Iraq's Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari stating, "President Talabani and I have met with him. We discussed the latest developments in Iraq and the good progress that has been made. He is aware that his new administration is facing a new reality."
"Under the leadership of Dr. James Peake, the Veterans Administration has shown callous disregard for the intense suffering of Veterans like my husband who are struggling with psychological injuries. My husband has described his treatment at the hands of the Veterans Administration as frustrating and belittling -- and has been outraged at the dismissive attitude the leadership of the VA has demonstrated twoard the epidemic of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and suicide plaguing veterans of the war in Iraq," says Military Families Speak Out's Stacy Hafley. We're focusing on PTSD again. Underfunded and hidden away by the military culture. JD Malone (Express-Times) reports on Afghanistan War veteran Rob Kislow: "A Taliban fighter blindsided the 19-year-old soldier from East Allen Township with three shots from a high-powered rifle. He lost most of his right leg. His right forearm is so reconstructed it feels like a steel pipe. He kept the bullet that pierced the back of of his skill." Malone's article includes this:
"The injury is nothing now," Kislow said, pointing to the side of his head, "it's the fight up here now."
The fight Kislow speaks of is one with posttraumatic stress disorder, which afflicts almost one in five veterans of the current wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, according to the National Center for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder.
He said PTSD is a ghost: present at times, invisible at others. He's learned to cope with not having a leg, and with the recovery from his brain injury.
Jeff Schogol (Stars and Stripes) broke the story last week on the decision not to recognize PTSD as a wound eligible for the Purple Heart: "The matter came up in May, when a military psychologist at Fort Bliss, Texas, told reporters he felt that making troops suffering from PTSD eligble for the Purple Heart would help remove the disorder's stigma." Schogol quoted Dr. John E. Fortunato stating, "These guys have paid at least a high -- as high a price, some of them -- as anybody with a traumatic brain injury, as anybody with shrapnel wound, and what it does is it says this is the wound that isn't worthy, and I say it is." Justine Judge (CBS 3 -- link has text and video) reported Saturday on the Pentagon's decision and the reaction to it. Judge spoke with MFSO's Kevin Lucey, father of Iraq War veteran Jeffrey Lucey who was butchered and neglected by what passes for mental 'health care' in the VA. Lucey explained, "If anybody even questions how lethal or how damaging PTSD can be and whether its real we would invite them to go down to our son's grave." Pentagon apologist Stephanie Salter (Terre Haute News) believes everything is as plain as her face: "No blood, no Purple Hearts." Let's quote Kevin Lucey again, "Unless you see blood then it's not really a wound? Well I can tell you the day that I found our son Jeff was bloody, on his arm and down his shoulders." The CBS Evening News reported (link has text and video) on PTSD December 26th and noted, "There were 115 military suicides last year, and 93 through just August of this year." Kimberly Dozier noted the military culture of denial and illustrated it with this: "Commanders at one army base posted a fake 'Hurt Feelings Report' -- portraying a crying cartoon face -- to moke soldiers seeking help for combat stress. Selections on the form ncluded: 'I am a crybaby,' 'I want my mommy' and 'All of the above.' It was tacked on the barracks bulletin board, next to the sign-up sheet for the mental health clinic." Stephanie Slepian (Staten Island Advance) reports, "Joseph Di Giovanni, commander of the Military Order of the Purple Heart, Father Capodanno Chapter, who lost a finger and took shrapnel in the eyes and chest during an ambush in Vietnam, believes the Pentagon should rethink its decision. . . . William Liell, a Korean War veteran and adjutant for the Capodanno Chapter, shares that view." John E. Bircher III, Director of Public Relations of Military Order of the Purple Heart, disagrees and you can click here for his thoughts.
Mental Health Counserlor William Anderson offers his thoughts to the Sarasota Herald- Tribune:
The Pentagon has decided that the disabled and damaged young people who return from war with post-traumatic stress disorder should not get the Purple Heart, which recognizes the sacrifice that soldiers have made. The Pentagon says this is because the wound is not physical and because the damage was not caused intentionally by the enemy.
Those who say this live in unbelievable ignorance. They need a higher awareness of the nature of warfare today, and a better knowledge of medical science.
Today the weapon of our enemy is "terror," and we have identified our enemies, the "terrorists," not by nation, but by their chief weapon of destruction and the damage it causes. PTSD is a result of contact with not only the enemy's terror, but with the bullets and bombs used to create it. PTSD is a tormenting, disabling condition, caused by direct contact with violent trauma. The enemies' destruction of us is certainly intentional, and the reality of our troops' psychological wounding is not up for debate.
PTSD is well-documented, relatively easy to diagnose and clearly identified in the DSM-IV-R, the diagnostic manual used in behavioral medicine and psychiatry. In many cases, PTSD is much harder to recover from than other potentially crippling wounds. It most certainly deserves the Purple Heart. I've heard of people getting Purple Hearts for minor injuries; PTSD is a major one.
Come on, you who want to lead our soldiers. Earn your leadership, or let more knowledgeable and wiser people take your place.
Dan Rodrick (Baltimore Sun) evaluates the issue:
The Pentagon has decided that soldiers who suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) do not deserve the Purple Heart. "PTSD is an anxiety disorder caused by witnessing or experiencing a traumatic event," Defense Department spokeswoman Eileen Lainez told Stars and Stripes. "It is not a wound intentionally caused by the enemy from an 'outside force or agent.'" In short, the psychological wound does not merit the same medal the nation would award for a physical one; witnessing your buddy blown apart by a 107- mm rocket is not as significant as taking shrapnel from it.Anyone who has kept an eye on the Bush administration's conduct of the military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan -- and that's an ever-shrinking number of Americans -- would understand why the Pentagon wants nothing to do with Purple Hearts for PTSD. This isn't as much about upholding standards as it is about maintaining, in classic military style, the status quo in the face of overwhelming evidence that increasing numbers of troops are surviving combat but with severe psychological trauma.According to RAND Corp. estimates, about 320,000 veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan sustained brain injuries by 2007, while close to that number -- about 300,000 -- reported symptoms of PTSD or major depression. (An estimated 1.8 million Americans have served in Iraq and Afghanistan.) The last thing an administration waging a long, costly and unpopular war wants is for the number of casualties from that war to run into the hundreds of thousands; that's far more Purple Hearts than budgeted. The Purple Heart ruling is in keeping with what Aaron Glantz, author of a new book on the neglect of veterans during the George W. Bush years, calls the official shortchanging of service members who were sent to fight."The Bush administration was never seriously interested in helping veterans," Mr. Glantz concludes in The War Comes Home. "The sorry state of care for Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans is not an accident. It's on purpose. After the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the Bush administration fought every effort to improve care for wounded and disabled veterans. At the root of that fight was its desire to hide the true costs of the war in order to boost public support." And, says Mr. Glantz, rejecting PTSD claims is one way of making sufferers not only ineligible for benefits but also fit for multiple tours of duty, something vital to an all-voluntary military challenged to reach recruitment goals.
Glantz' book is due out January 15th. In the 2004 presidential debates, Democratic Party nominee John Kerry rightly called Bully Boy out for not adequately funding the VA. His thanks for that bit of truth telling was to be slammed by various outlets and to have the alleged "FactCheck.org" dismiss his statements and call them false. John Kerry was exactly right and anyone paying attention to the issue at that point would have seen (as Elaine did, she has always rightly noted that FactCheck.org has blood on their hands) Senator Kerry was correct. For those who are still living in denial, McClatchy's Joseph L. Galloway (Salt Lake Tribune) observed the p.r. efforts to make Bully Boy appear to have done something for the VA and offers the actual reality on what Bully Boy did:
Those who try to rewrite history credit Bush with increasing veterans' benefits and transforming veterans' health care. They claim that he instituted reforms in the care of wounded soldiers coming home from his wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and expanded resources for mental health services for troops coming home with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and traumatic brain injuries (TBI).
The truth is that Congress passed virtually every bill to spend more money on benefits for veterans over the opposition of the Bush administration. Reforms in the care of wounded soldiers came only after The Washington Post exposed the shameful warehousing of the recovering wounded at Walter Reed Army Hospital, less than five miles from the Oval Office.
Even as the Iraq War dragged on and the numbers of severely wounded troops began rising sharply, Bush's Secretary of Veterans Affairs Jim Nicholson, a former Republican National Committee chairman, was up on Capitol Hill delivering a budget with cuts in health-care staffing at VA and cuts in nursing home care.
Nicholson, on White House orders, blocked four congressional attempts to streamline the VA's handling of a disgraceful six-month backlog in veterans benefit claims -- a backlog that's only grown worse in subsequent years.
Veterans for Common Sense is staying out of that debate:
We believe a more important issue is the troubling fact that many soldiers and veterans are waiting months, often years, for mental healthcare and disability benefits.
What veterans need are pre- and post-deployment medical examinations as well as prompt and high-quality treatment without stigma. Congress ordered the military to conduct the deployment examinations in 1997, yet the military still refuses to perform the exams required by the Force Health Protection law, PL 105-85, Sections 761 - 771. Once again, VCS urges the DoD to follow the law.
What the public needs are facts about PTSD and traumatic brain injury (TBI) so discrimination against our veterans is mitigated. For example, the Department of Labor launched a new website that we highly recommend for employers and others interested in PTSD and TBI.
Turning to US political news, Senator Roland Burris has still not be seated. Yesterday he spoke with Bob Schieffer on CBS' Face the Nation (link has text and video):
Roland Burris, the former Illinois Attorney General chosen by Gov. Rod Blagojevich to fill out Obama's term, said this morning that according to the Illinois State Supreme Court and by other constitutional authorities, the appointment was legal. Appearing on CBS' Face The Nation this morning, Burris also said that the documents he has submitted are in compliance with Senate Rules, and furthermore he complied with the requests of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Illinois' senior Senator Dick Durbin to appear before the Illinois House of Representatives' impeachment committee to answer questions about Blagojevich. Following a meeting between his attorneys and the Senate's lawyers, Burris said, "It is our position that we have done everything that's required, and that, yes, I should be seated forthwith, and I should be seated prior to the inauguration of our 44th president, a seat for which I now hold." "I am the junior senator from the state of Illinois. There is no question of my legality of appointment," Burris told host Bob Schieffer. "Illinois has two senators. That is the law. We have two senators."
Senator Burris has been made to jump through hoops unheard of (see Third's editorial yesterday). This afternoon, John Nolan (CBS News) reported that Senator Burris' attorneys were "in the Secretary of the Senate's office". Thomas Ferraro (Reuters) reports, "U.S. Senate officials on Monday approved Roland Burris to fill the Senate seat vacated by President-elect Barack Obama, which would give Democrats 58 of the Senate's 100 seats, their biggest majority since 1981." Evan Glass and Dana Bash (CNN) add:
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Illinois senior senator and Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin said Monday that the Senate would accept the credentials of former Illinois Attorney General Roland Burris.
"The Secretary of the Senate has determined that the new credentials presented today on behalf of Mr. Burris now satisfy Senate Rules and validate his appointment to the vacant Illinois Senate seat. In addition, as we requested, Mr. Burris has provided sworn testimony before the Illinois House Committee on Impeachment regarding the circumstances of his appointment," the two said in a statement.
"We have spoken to Mr. Burris to let him know that he is now the Senator-designate from Illinois and as such, will be accorded all the rights and privileges of a Senator-elect," the statement said. "Accordingly, barring objections from Senate Republicans, we expect Senator-designee Burris to be sworn in and formally seated later this week. We are working with him and the office of the Vice President to determine the date and time of the swearing-in."
iraqjohn e. bircher iiidan rodricksaaron glantz
kimberly dozier
cbs news
the new york timessam dagher
alissa j. rubinthe los angeles timeskimi yoshinoali hameed
face the nationmcclatchy newspapers
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)