Tuesday, February 11, 2014

Good news for Nick Zano




Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "The Joker" and "Success" both went up this weekend.

"Success" is the one I'm highlighting tonight.


Meanwhile, do you know the actor Nick Zano?

Hopefully, he just caught a real break.

The Hollywood Reporter reports:

NBC's lesbian comedy has found its male lead in a familiar face.
2 Broke Girls alum Nick Zano will reunite with writer Liz Feldman and star in the network's One Big Happy, The Hollywood Reporter has learned.

From Warner Bros. Television and executive producer Ellen DeGeneres, One Big Happy centers on Lizzy, a lesbian who gets pregnant just as her straight male best friend (Zano) meets and marries Prudence, the love of his life.

Nick Zano was on What I Like About You -- but the first time I really noticed him was on 2 Broke Girls when he played Max's dog of a boyfriend and then on Happy Endings where he played Penny's boyfriend, remember?

I believe he freaked out at one point and then he dumped Penny.  I seem to remember him being tricked into attending a wedding planning convention.

But Zano's developed into a very strong comedic actor and I'm glad he's been cast in this new show.

I hope it airs.  If it does, it may become the first TV show I blog about each week.

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


Monday, February 10, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, there's an assassination attempt on the Speaker of Iraq's Pariament, beastly gas bags weigh in flaunting their ignorance, NPR is delighted by 'fun' bombing victims, NPR is among the many outlets that failed to cover Human Rights Watch's report on the abuse of Iraqi women, feminist or 'feminist' outlets in the US also ignored the report (Women's e-News did cover it), the assault on Anbar continues, and much more.


Let's start with the gas bags.  Former US Ambassador to Iraq James Jeffrey insists the US didn't fail and didn't lose Iraq and blah blah blah.  You know what, Foreign Policy pimps war.  They hire idiots like Thomas E. Ricks (oh, we'll to him, just wait) and when they seek outside views, the views are never outside.

Everyone in the US did not support Bully Boy Bush trying to destroy Iraq.  But the only voices Foreign Policy wants to offer are the voices of war.  James Jeffrey pushed for war on Iraq.  He just needs to sit his ass down.  He's an embarrassment.  He writes today yet somehow ignores last week's Human Rights Watch report.

Then there's the breasty Thomas E. Ricks who wants to quote Toby Dodge.  I don't have time to track down what Ricks is quoting.

Here's reality, if Dodge said what Ricks says Dodge said, he's not just a little wrong, he's damn stupid.

First off, Dodge is quoted stating that Nouri said any changes to the (2008) Status Of Forces Agreement would have to go through the Iraqi Parliament.  No, that's not the issue and it wasn't an issue.  This was not about approval for amendments.

The stumbling block for the administration was the issue of immunity.  It was present in the 2008 SOFA.  If only amendments to it required a vote, then the State Dept's Brett McGurk lied to Congress last week.

If Toby Dodge said or wrote what Man Boobs Ricks repeated, Dodge doesn't know a damn thing.

I've never heard of anything so stupid from a supposed expert before.

The Status Of Forces Agreement was a three year contract which governed 2009, 2010 and 2011.  The Parliament voted on it Thanksgiving Day 2008.

For 2011?  Nouri and other political leaders told the US that Parliament would not vote for a continued US presence so -- and McGurk testified to this just last week -- US government gave up.

As portrayed by Ricks, Dodge also doesn't grasp the argument Senator John McCain has presented.

This is more crap from Thomas E. Ricks -- the blogger who makes Thomas Friedman come off timely and relevant.

From the gas bags to the journalists, if you're ever trying  to figure out just how worthless NPR can be, they demonstrated it today as Mark Memmott made clear he wants to be the new Hedda Hopper.

As he makes clear here, he never learned about reporting.  He spent his time instead on the phone gossiping.

At least 21 people died in a bombing today.  We noted it, we noted the death toll.

We didn't note that they were suicide bombers or suicide bombers in training.

But Memmott does.  He 'backs it up' by linking to AP, for example.

AP had no one present at the bombing.

It's hearsay.

It's already been established -- thought not for Memmott or any of the US press because they're so stupid and so they're deceitful -- but it's already been established that the 'terrorists' killed in an assorted aireal bombings carried out by the Iraq military were often not terrorists.

In the Arabic world, they've been more than fine with doing journalism.  Visiting the areas, speaking to the people involved, documenting it with video.

Journalism is not presenting as fact one side's claims.  Those of us old enough to remember Vietnam, are fully aware that the government -- the US government -- repeatedly lied about who got killed and the numbers killed.  It's no different than The Drone War today and all the lies US President Barack Obama and others in the administration tell about 'terrorists' -- who apparently stopped to attend a wedding, for example.

What may be known is that 20 or 21 or 22 people died in a bombing.  Who those people were?

That's the slutty US press which can never stop whoring.  Women in Baghdad die, they're "prostitutes."  That's the sort of the US press does (AFP has picked it up as well).  Dead women who can't defend themselves are labeled prostitutes and the US press treats it as gospel.

There have always been prostitutes in Iraq -- male and female.  And many outlets know it.  Certainly the Go-Go Boys of the Green Zone were frequenting Baghdad prostitutes in 2003 and 2004.

But they couldn't report on the prostitution.  One denied it.

Off Our Backs was the only US publication to treat the prostitution in Baghdad issue seriously.

NPR didn't take it seriously.  But then they rarely take issues that impact women seriously.

The disgusting Mark Memmott finds it 'cute' that people died.  He'd insist he finds it cute that 'terrorists' died.  But he can prove they were terrorists.  The only source for that is the Iraqi government.  The same government that labels peaceful protesters as "terrorists."

Memmott's never felt the need to report that either -- even though Nouri's been labeling protesters as "terrorists" since 2011.

In Iraq, a lot of people get labeled as 'terrorists.'  An Iraqi female journalist, for example, was falsely labeled as one.  And the police knew it was false.  They tortured her anyway.  Because they didn't like her articles, they didn't like her reporting on the government's short comings.

Mark Memmott has a case of the giggles today and amuses himself with Iraq.

I guess he couldn't laugh last week when Human Rights Watch's released their report entitled (PDF format warning) "'NO ONE IS SAFE: Abuses of Women in Iraq's Criminal Justice System"?

That must be the explanation for his failure to write about that.  No one at NPR wrote about it for the website.  None of NPR's national programs covered it.

But let Little Marky have the opportunity to giggle over the-gang-who-couldn't-shoot-straight 'terrorists' and he's ready to run with it.  (Strangely, when Nouri's air forces bombed and killed a group of men at the end of last week -- a group of men who turned out to be Iraqi soldiers --  Mark Memmott had no interest in writing about that.)

Mark Memmott takes the Iraqi government on their word despite the fact that journalists are supposed to question and to present claims they can't verify as claims.

I don't trust Nouri's government because, unlike Mark Memmott, I pay attention.  This is from HRW's report released last week:


The report finds that security forces carry out illegal arrests and other due process violations against women at every stage of the justice system, including threats and beatings. Israa Salah (not her real name), for example, entered her interview with Human Rights Watch in Iraq’s death row facility in Baghdad’s Kadhimiyya neighborhood on crutches. She said nine days of beatings, electric shocks with an instrument known as “the donkey,” and falaqa (when the victim is hung upside down and beaten on their feet) in March 2012 had left her permanently disabled. A split nose, back scars, and burns on her breast were consistent with her alleged abuse. Israa was executed in September 2013, seven months after we met her, despite lower court rulings that dismissed charges against her because a medical report documented she was tortured into confessing to a crime. 



Do you get what happened there?  Mark Memmott can't because he's so stupid.

But most of us can read that paragraph above and note that Israa Salah was not only tortured by Nouri's forces, she was also put to death "despite lower court rulings that dismissed charges against her."


That should outrage most people.

She was executed even after a court had determined she had been tortured to give a false confession.

She was executed even after a court dismissed all charges against her.

Most people can grasp that the woman shouldn't have been executed but instead should have been immediately released.

Mark doesn't want to tell that story because it doesn't let him giggle or suck up to Nouri al-Maliki and others in power.

It's an uncomfortable story, not a chuckle.

And more and more -- especially with their ludicrous on air 'recipe' segments -- NPR can't offer anything but breezy nonsense.

Morning Edition did not report on Human Rights Watch's investigation.  Terry Gross did not invite HRW onto Fresh Air to discuss the findings.  All Things Considered?  Nothing was considered when it came to the Human Rights Watch report because All Things Considered ignored it as well.  Diane Rehm had a whole hour Friday to fill, her so-called 'international hour' -- and yet she served up nonsense and crap and didn't even touch on Iraq.  Why do you have radio programs, public radio, when you refuse to cover investigations and human rights abuses.


Let's go to the report again:

For example, Fatima Hussein (not her real name), a journalist accused of involvement in the murder of a parliamentarian’s brother and of being married to an Al-Qaeda member, described physical and sexual torture in early 2012 at the hands of one particular interrogator in Tikrit, Colonel Ghazi. She described Ghazi tying her blindfolded to a column and electrocuting her with an electric baton, hitting her feet and back with cable, kicking her, pulling her hair, tying her naked to a column and extinguishing cigarettes on her body, and later handcuffing her to a bed, forcing her to give him oral sex, and raping her three times. “There was blood all over me. He would relax, have a cigarette, and put it out on my buttock, and then started again,” she said. 
Women who spoke with Human Rights Watch, who all explicitly denied involvement in alleged crimes, also described being pushed towards confessions by interrogators threatening to hurt loved ones. Fatima described Ghazi passing her the phone, with her daughter at the end of the line, before threatening: "I'll do to your daughter what I did to you." 



Again, the Human Rights Watch's report is entitled (PDF format warning) "'NO ONE IS SAFE: Abuses of Women in Iraq's Criminal Justice System."  Ramzy Baroud (Arab News) notes the report:

“No One is Safe” presented some of the most harrowing evidence of the abuse of women by Iraq’s criminal “justice system.” The phenomenon of kidnapping, torturing, raping and executing women is so widespread that it seems shocking even by the standards of the country’s poor human rights record of the past. If such a reality were to exist in a different political context, the global outrage would have been so profound. Some in the “liberal” western media, supposedly compelled by women’s rights would have called for some measure of humanitarian intervention, war even. But in the case of today’s Iraq, the HRW report is likely to receive bits of coverage where the issue is significantly deluded, and eventually forgotten.
In fact, the discussion of the abuse of thousands of women -- let alone tens of thousands of men -- has already been discussed in a political vacuum. A buzzword that seems to emerge since the publication of the report is that the abuse confirms the “weaknesses” of the Iraqi judicial system. The challenge then becomes the matter of strengthening a weak system, perhaps through channeling more money, constructing larger facilities and providing better monitoring and training, likely carried out by US-led training of staff.
Mostly absent are the voices of women’s groups, intellectuals and feminists who seem to be constantly distressed by the traditional marriage practices in Yemen, for example, or the covering up of women’s faces in Afghanistan. There is little, if any, uproar and outrage, when brown women suffer at the hands of western men and women, or their cronies, as is the situation in Iraq.


Is that fair?  Are feminists ignoring the report?

Feminism is global.  I can't speak for what all of the world is doing.  But for Third, we did "Editorial: War Crimes against women and the outlets that ignore them" and it notes the US coverage - or lack of it -- including:

Ms. magazine's blog never noted the report.
While Women's Media Center has a campaign which insists "Don't Let Women's Voices Be Silenced in 2014," they have thus far let Iraqi women be silenced by refusing to write an article or even a Tweet about the HRW report (and they've 28 Tweets since the report was released).
B-b-but the report just came out!
Last Thursday.  And Women's e-News has managed to cover it. Sarah Sheffer covered it for The NewsHour (PBS).
By contrast, NPR refused to cover it -- on air or at the website.
They did 'tax' themselves by re-running an AP report.
Women are tortured and raped, disappeared into prisons, their children threatened and this isn't news to Women's Media Center?
WMC makes time on their awful Twitter feed to whore for the daughter of celebrities  but they can't do a damn thing for Iraqi women?


So, yeah, in the US, there is a need to call out.

Trina was on the phone earlier and she's addressing this at her site tonight because of something she saw online -- something covered by a feminist outlet that wasn't really news but the feminist outlet still can't cover the Human Rights Watch report.

The silence in the US -- whether from the feminist press or the mainstream press -- is shameful.

Today the European Union's Foreign Affairs Council issued a statement which includes:

The EU considers that internal political divisions and sectarian tensions have significantly contributed to the deterioration of the security situation inside Iraq, to which a security response alone cannot be sufficient. The EU renews its call on all of Iraq's political and religious leaders to engage in dialogue and to speak out against sectarianism and violence. It encourages the Government of Iraq to reinforce the rule of law and take decisive  measures to promote inclusiveness and advance reconciliation, as Iraq's long term security and stability depend on an inclusive political process. 

The EU is closely following the developments in Anbar province, including in the cities of Ramadi and Fallujah, and encourages the Government of Iraq to strengthen cooperation between its security forces and local Anbar tribes. The EU is deeply concerned by the large numbers of Internally Displaced Persons fleeing the conflict zones and emphasises the importance of protecting civilians. The EU also encourages efforts by the Government of Iraq to ensure the provision of essential services as well as access by humanitarian agencies to areas affected by the fighting.


Let's move to violence and then we'll come back to the elections.

In today's big news, know it's not the gossip, it's that the Speaker of Parliament survived an assassination attempt.   Reuters notes, "The speaker of Iraq's parliament narrowly escaped death on Monday when a roadside bomb exploded near his convoy close to the northern city of Mosul, his office said."  Mu Xuequan (Xinhua) offers, "In the northern province of Nineveh, a roadside bomb went off near the convoy of Speaker Osama al-Nujaifi and Governor Atheel al- Nujaifi, also brother of Osama, south of the provincial capital of Mosul, a local police source told Xinhua."  NINA notes the bombing left six security guards injured,  AFP adds, "Mosul and the surrounding Nineveh province, where Nujaifi’s brother Atheel is governor, is one of Iraq’s most violent areas, with attacks regularly targeting security forces, government officials and civilians."

The US State Dept issued the following statement today:


Press Statement
Marie Harf
Washington, DC
February 10, 2014





The United States strongly condemns today’s attack on the convoy of the Speaker of the Iraqi Council of Representatives, Osama al-Nujaifi, in Ninewa province. Speaker Nujaifi has been a strong partner of the United States’ efforts in Iraq and we are grateful that he was unharmed in the attack.
Today’s attack exemplifies the danger terrorist groups pose to all Iraqis, and the importance of Iraqi leaders from all communities working together to isolate militant groups from the broader population. The United States stands with the Iraqi people and will continue to work closely with Iraqi political and security leaders to combat those who commit such senseless acts.


Osama al-Nujaifi is a Sunni, a group persecuted and targeted by Nouri.  In doing so, Nouri has allowed Shi'ite militias to operate in Iraq -- this after militias were supposedly outlawed.  But more than just allowing them to operate, Nour  is supporting Shi'ite militias.  In September, Tim Arango (New York Times) broke the story:



In supporting Asaib al-Haq, Mr. Maliki has apparently made the risky calculation that by backing some Shiite militias, even in secret, he can maintain control over the country’s restive Shiite population and, ultimately, retain power after the next national elections, which are scheduled for next year. Militiamen and residents of Shiite areas say members of Asaib al-Haq are given government badges and weapons and allowed freedom of movement by the security forces.


Loveday Morris (Washington Post) picked up the topic on Sunday and reported:

Members of Asaib Ahl al-Haq, an Iranian-backed Shiite group responsible for thousands of attacks on U.S. forces during the Iraq war, admit they have ramped up targeted killings in response to a cascade of bomb attacks on their neighborhoods.
“We’ve had to be much more active,” said an Asaib Ahl al-Haq commander who goes by the nom de guerre Abu Sajad. “Those who are trying to incite sectarianism, we have to deal with them,” he said, drawing his hand over his throat like a knife.

Again, it's Loveday Morris and the Washington Post -- not AP as some outlets have wrongly credited the article.  Although the credit on this reposting of Loveday Morris' article may seem the most incorrect and brazen.

 Over the weekend, NINA reported:

The Arab Political Council in Kirkuk expressed on Saturday 8 Feb. its surprise at the unjustified silence of the parliamentary political blocks, parties and organizations towards the humanitarian tragedy in Anbar province, and especially the city of Fallujah.
Chairman of the Council , Sheikh Abdul Rahman Munshed al- Assi told the National Iraqi News Agency / NINA / : "We are very concerned for the effects and consequences of the current crisis, humanly and politically, a matter that requires everyone to stand and think to find an urgent solution to stop the bloodshed now ongoing in al-Anbar.


Sunday, NINA reported that Sheikh Ali Hatem al-Suleiman -- a Sahwa leader -- declared that "the solution of the crisis in Anbar lies in a neutral third party and implementing the legitimate demands of the protesters." and that "the government should prove its good faith by stopping the shelling of cities and sending food and medical supplies as well as oil , in addition to the full response to the legitimate demands of the protesters." Motahedoon coalition MP Salman al-Jumaili stated Sunday that solutions were being ignored as the government continued to attempt a "military solution"  and that  "any initiative to resolve the crisis in Anbar cannot succeed if it does not include stop shelling and air strikes on Fallujah and other neighborhoods first, and the return of displaced people , as well as keeping the army out of the areas of contact with citizens and then re local authorities to enforce security."  NINA also reported on Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq:


Al-Mutlaq said in a meeting with ambassadors of EU countries in the Greek Embassy in Baghdad on the occasion of handing over Greece EU presidency , that the military operations in Anbar province, left behind thousands of displaced families facing harsh conditions due to the extreme cold and lack of food and medical supplies , not to mention the other families still besieged and exposed to bombardment , threats and very difficult humanitarian situations.
Al-Mutlaq discussed , according to a statement by his press office , with a number of ambassadors from the European Union, visions to resolve the crisis of Anbar and restore security and stability to its cities, and be quick in taking positions that would lead to compensate the displaced families and ease their coming back and repair the physical damage to their properties.


Not everyone speaks out against violence.  Press TV speaks with history professor Ali al-Nashmi about the assault:


Press TV: Do you think the government will win in this battle against such forces?

al-Nashmi: No... I think the government... I don’t know, I think there is every opportunity for the Iraqi government they can win very easily when they attack Fallujah because Fallujah is a city, they are just some houses - then they can attack the extremists there using tanks or airplane or by jets.
I am surprised. They lost that opportunity because most of extremists they have escaped from al-Fallujah to other places like Baghdad and in other places they are increasing the violence.

I think if the Iraqi forces and the Iraqi government attacked the places they would achieve many things: they would achieve a military win because they would destroy those people – and they have killed many extremists; and it would be a political win because it would mean in any place in Iraq it would not be safe for al-Qaeda or al-Dasht.


NBC journalist Richard Engel  notes al-Nashmi  in his book A Fist in the Hornet's Nest: On the Ground In Baghdad Before, During and After the War, al-Nashmi was a history professor when the US invaded Iraq.  Engel reports meeting al-Nashmi in a building being remodeled:

A highly ambitious man, he gave me a tour of the new office space -- stepping over a workman scraping droplets of paint off the stone floor -- explaining the layout of the future headquarters of his new political part (the Union of Independent Intellecutals), socialist newspaper (The Dawn of Baghdad), magazine for children (as yet unnamed) and, he hoped, local television station. 
[. . .] al-Nashmi was bursting with pent-up political desires.  Twenty years earlier, al-Nashmi had been arrested and tortured by Saddam's regime for starting a movie club in his home, where about a dozen of his friends would gather in secret every week to watch and discuss foreign films.  Al-Nashmi was first accused of founding an illegal communist cell and later of being an Islamic militant, a charge that seemed especially ill-suited, considering his secular views, Western dress and polished English.


All the assault has done is add to the already intense violence.  Today?   National Iraqi News Agency reports a Kirkuk car bombing claimed 1 life, a Kirkuk sticky bombing claimed 1 life, a central Baghdad bombing (Bab aal-Muadham area) left a colonel injured, an attack on Judge Saadoun al-Hesniyani's residence left 2 security guards injured, a Falluja bombing left 3 people dead and six injured, an Aliyadhiyah roadside bombing left two Iraqi soldiers injured, a Musayyib sticky bombing claimed 1 life and left three injured, a southwest Baghdad roadside bombing (Baya area) left five people injured, a Shirqat roadside bombing left two Iraqi soldiers injured, a Hit roadside bombing left 1 police member dead and three more injured, an al-Shi'lar sticky bombing left three people injured, a suicide bombing near al-Sidikiyah bridge (near Ramadi) left 2 Iraqi soldiers and 2 police members dead with seven more injured, Falluja General Hospital was again shelled (by Iraqi military) and 1 person was killed with fourteen more left injured ("including a doctor and three nurses"),  a Nasiriyah roadside bombing left four people injured, a Baghdad home invasion left five people injured, a Samarra car bombing killed 21 people, a Mosul car bombing left eleven people injured (relatives of Nineveh Police Chief Khalid al-Hamdani), a central Baghdad sticky bombing left six people injured, a Baghdad attack (al-Obeidi area) left 1 person dead and another injured,  a Sadr City bombing left one person injured, a Mahmudiya bombing left 1 person dead and two more injured, and 1 corpse (bullet wounds) was found dumped in Abu Ghraib.

Through yesterday, Iraq Body Count counts 269 violent deaths.  Now let's move over to the issue of elections.  April 30th, parliamentary elections are supposed to be held in Iraq.  World Bulletin reports:

Iraq's Independent High Election Commission asserted on Sunday that parliamentary elections will be held on schedule countrywide, including in the western volatile Anbar province.
"The elections will not be postponed anywhere in Iraq, including in Anbar," spokesman Safaa al-Musawi told Anadolu Agency.
"The commission has finalized preparations for the elections everywhere in Iraq, including in Anbar," he added.


Last week, the Justice and Accountability Commission excluded 69 candidates from the expected April 30th parliamentary elections.   In 2010, the Justice and Accountability reared its ugly head surprising many -- including Saleh al-Mutlaq. Well the Justice and Accountability Commission is back.

February 2, All Iraq News reported Nouri al-Maliki has nominated Basim al-Badri to head the Justice and Accountability Commission.  al-Badri is both Nouri's freind and a member of Nouri's Dawa political party. In 2010, the commission eliminated many candidates ahead of the parliamentary elections.  They eliminated Saleh al-Mutlaq, for example -- the current Deputy Prime Minister.  A few token Shi'ites were eliminated from running -- most of which were steadfast and vocal opponents of Nouri.  However, the bulk of the disqualified were Sunni politicians.  In all, they eliminated 511 candidates from running.

Now the commission is back and Iraq Times reported Friday that they had banned 69 of the 379 candidates they had so far checked.   Mohammad Sabah (Al Mada) reported that many politicians are nervous such as Saleh al-Mutlaq.

Back to Sabah who reports that the UNHCR has pointed out that, thus far, the JAC has not checked the names of prominent candidates.  (That would most likely mean Saleh al-Mutlaq's name has not yet been checked which would explain why he's worried.)   Sabah reveals they will be checking the names of 10,293 candidates in all.   He notes many observers fear the JAC is being used again as a net to remove the political rivals of Nouri.

Looking at an early list -- small list of under 300 -- initially sent to JAC, you've got a list where the only thing that really stands out is the oldest candidate on that subset was born in 1940 and the youngest in 1982.  And then if you apply a little logic, why is anyone born in 1982 someone requiring a 'Ba'athist' check.  They were 20 years old in 2002.  If their birthday was in April or later, how close could they be connected to Saddam Hussein?

Today,  National Iraqi News Agency notes they excluded 6 more candidates today.

Zooming in on one person running in the elections, Rudaw notes:

Berivan Navkhosh, the assistant head of the Akre health department in Duhok, is one of only two women hopefuls running in Iraq’s upcoming parliamentary elections. 
 Running on an independent slate, Navkhosh says, “It is to show the public that there are independent individuals running for the parliament and to show that political parties are not the only ones who nominate candidates.” 
Navkhosh was once a member of the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), the largest party in the Kurdistan Region, but says she has quit her membership in order to maintain her independence. 
"I used to be a member of KDP, but it has been a while since I resigned from the party," she says. "My family is KDP, but people who know me know that I am no longer a member of the KDP."


Changing topics, community member Marci e-mailed to inform I'd forgotten to note the new content at The Third Estate Sunday Review in of the other entries.  She is correct.  To make up for my oversight, we'll close by noting that content:



Thank you, Marci, for catching that.


npr










Saturday, February 08, 2014

Iraq and Woody Allen

First Iraq.  Salah Nasrawi (Ahram) observes:

  As Iraqi security forces backed by their Sunni tribesmen allies battled anti-government rebels in Ramadi and Fallujah in Anbar province this week, violence continued to soar in Baghdad and many other cities across Iraq.
The surge in violence has raised concerns about the continuing deterioration in the security situation in the country less than three months before a crucial parliamentary election. 

I don't know what to say, it's accurate.

It's also not surprising.

Before the assault started, back in December, C.I. pointed out that it would not reduce violence and that, based on previous patterns, all that would happen is that violence wouldn't increase outside Anbar.

No one wanted to address that when Nouri was just bellowing.

C.I. did address it.


And she called it and she was right.

And she seems to be one of the few voices in the US that can speak up and call out the War Crimes Nouri is carrying out.

A certain American 'writer' pissed me off this week.  I'm not tolerant the way C.I. is.

Since December, C.I. has written repeatedly, several times a day about the assault on Anbar.

She's written about it when no one in the US wanted to.

And this week, a 'writer' decides to write about Falluja.  And he has all these links in his rather timid and pedestrian article.

And not one of them goes to or acknowledges C.I.'s work.

But the writer has the nerve to e-mail it to C.I. and ask for her to amplify it.

Which she does.

I wouldn't have.

Her attitude was, "Falluja needs the attention."

She can stay focused.  I wouldn't have and I would have e-mailed that asshole back, "You have a lot of nerve asking me to publicize your article when you fail to include everyone but me."

Okay, Woody Allen responded to the crap and you can read it here.

I think it makes sense and I think he showed so much more class than trashy Mia Farrow.

I'm really starting to wonder if Mia isn't crazy.  I'm not joking.  I was thinking of how odd her behavior is.  She started this whole thing back up, it backfired and blew up in her face.

So that's crazy.

But I mean more like if she's got dementia or something else.

I saw a photo taken of her recently and the eyes had that look that some Alzheimer patients get.  My father was (and still is) a huge fan of Rita Hayworth's.  And I can remember his noting that strange look in Rita's eyes.

Anyway, this is probably my favorite paragraph in Woody's piece:

I pause here for a quick word on the Ronan situation. Is he my son or, as Mia suggests, Frank Sinatra’s? Granted, he looks a lot like Frank with the blue eyes and facial features, but if so what does this say? That all during the custody hearing Mia lied under oath and falsely represented Ronan as our son? Even if he is not Frank’s, the possibility she raises that he could be, indicates she was secretly intimate with him during our years. Not to mention all the money I paid for child support. Was I supporting Frank’s son? Again, I want to call attention to the integrity and honesty of a person who conducts her life like that.

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


Friday, February 9, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, the protests continue in Iraq, there's news on the Jewish archives, we continue to examine how Brett McGurk misled Congress about Iraq, we also note Human Rights Watch's report on the abuse of Iraqi women, and much more.


January 16th, Senator Pat Toomey introduced Senate Resolution 333 on behalf of himself and Senators Richard Blumenthal, Chuck Schumer, Mark Kirk, Ben Cardin, Marco Rubio, Pat Roberts, Tim Kaine, Barbara Boxer and Robert Menendez:.





Strongly recommending that the United States renegotiate the return of the Iraqi Jewish Archive to Iraq.
Whereas, before the mid-20th century, Baghdad had been a center of Jewish life, culture, and scholarship, dating back to 721 B.C.;
Whereas, as recently as 1940, Jews made up 25 percent of Baghdad’s population;
Whereas, in the 1930s and 1940s, under the leadership of Rasheed Ali, anti-Jewish discrimination increased drastically, including the June 1–2, 1941, Farhud pogrom, in which nearly 180 Jews were killed;
Whereas, in 1948, Zionism was added to the Iraqi criminal code as punishable by death;
Whereas, throughout 1950–1953, Jews were allowed to leave Iraq under the condition that they renounce their citizenship;
Whereas, as result of past persecution, few Jews remain in Iraq today, and many left their possessions and treasured artifacts behind;
Whereas the Ba’ath regime confiscated these artifacts, later dubbed the Iraqi Jewish Archive, from synagogues and communal organizations;
Whereas, on May 6, 2003, members of the United States Armed Forces discovered the Iraqi Jewish Archive, which included 2,700 books and tens of thousands of documents, in the heavily damaged and flooded basement of the Mukhabarat (secret police) headquarters;
Whereas, under great urgency and before adequate time could be dedicated to researching the history of the Iraqi Jewish Archive, an agreement was signed between the National Archives and Records Administration and the Coalition Provisional Authority on August 20, 2003, stating that the Iraqi Jewish Archive would be sent to the United States for restoration and then would be sent back to Iraq after completion;
Whereas, the Iraqi Jewish community is the constituency of the Archive and is now represented by the diaspora outside Iraq;
Whereas, the current Government of Iraq has publicly acknowledged the importance of the Archive and demonstrated a shared respect for the wishes of the Iraqi Jewish diaspora by attending the December 2013 burial of several Torah fragments from the Archive in New York;
Whereas United States taxpayers have invested $3,000,000 to restore the Iraqi Jewish Archive, and the National Archives and Records Administration has worked diligently to preserve the artifacts;
Whereas the National Archives and Records Administration is displaying the Iraqi Jewish Archive in Washington, DC, from October 11, 2013, to January 5, 2014, and in New York City from February 4, 2014, to May 18, 2014; and
Whereas the Iraqi Embassy to the United States has said that the Iraqi Jewish community, like other communities in Iraq, played a key role in building the country, shared in its prosperity, and also suffered exile and forced departure because of tyranny: Now, therefore, be it
That the Senate—
(1)
strongly urges the Department of State to renegotiate with the Government of Iraq the provisions of the original agreement that was signed between the National Archives and Records Administration and the Coalition Provisional Authority in order to ensure that the Iraqi Jewish Archive be kept in a place where its long-term preservation and care can be guaranteed;
(2)
recognizes that the Iraqi Jewish Archive should be housed in a location that is accessible to scholars and to Iraqi Jews and their descendants who have a personal interest in it;
(3)
recognizes that the agreement between the National Archives and Records Administration and the Coalition Provisional Authority was signed before knowing the complete history of the Iraqi Jewish Archive;
(4)
reaffirms the United States commitment to cultural property under international law; and
(5)
reaffirms the United States commitment to ensuring justice for victims of ethnic and religious persecution.


January 27th, other Senators began joining the resolution: Senator Jim Inhofe, Jerry Moran, Bob Casey, Daiel Coats, Orrin Hatch, Ed Markey, Roger Wicker, Chris Murphy, Roy Blunt, John Boozman, James Risch, Tom Coburn, Thad Cochran, Susan Collins, Chris Coons, Ted Cruz, Chuck Grassley, Mike Johanns, Patty Murray and Bill Nelson.  Rebecca Shimonsi Stoil (Times of Israel) reports today, "Late Thursday night, the Senate unanimously adopted the resolution" and that, barring "a re-negotiation of terms, the items are scheduled to be returned to Baghdad in June, a move that many fear will threaten their very existence."
There is a time issue.  As Josh Robin (Daily Beast) reports today, "A U.S. State Department official, insisting on anonymity, said in an email the Obama administration understands 'the sensitivities surrounding these items,' adding discussions are likely to intensify as the visit of the director of Iraq’s National Library and Archive approaches. The date for his trip hasn't been set."

Does US President Barack Obama understand "the sensitivities surrounding these items"?

And if so, why the hell should that reassure anyone.

What Josh Robin's reporting is not comforting and is, in fact, disturbing.

It's more foot dragging from Barack and his administration.

We need to include something right here.



US House Rep Brad Sherman:  There was bipartisan support for leaving a residual force in Iraq.  That required a Status Of Forces Agreement with the Maliki government.  And the Status Of Forces Agreement would have had to have included immunity for our soldiers so that they would not be subject to Iraqi courts.  We ask our soldiers, Marines, Airmen, etc. to take many risks.  One of them we don't ask them to take is the idea that their actions would be  held up to judgment in a court in Iraq or a court in Afghanistan for that matter.  We didn't get a Status Of Forces Agreement.  Some -- One theory is the administration blew the negotiations.   The other argu -- view is the Maliki government was in place when this government got there.  Maliki didn't have to give immunity to our troops and chose not to. We've seen that these immunity agreements are-are difficult for a host country to provide. [Afghanistan leader Hamid] Karzai isn't providing them.  And there are several elements of Iranian history going back seventy or eighty years when the Shah was held up to great ridicule for providing such immunity agreements.   Did we fail to get a Status Of Forces Agreement because we blew the negotiations or given the political reality starting with Maliki was there simply no way to get the immunity?


Brett McGurk:  Uh, first, you're keying on the history is really important here.  The history of immunity agreements, particularly in this region, is really what colors the entire debate.  The negotiation in 2007 and 2008 took almost 18 months.  And while we got those two agreements got passed -- the security agreement which allowed our forces to stay for three more years with immunity and a permanent Strategic Framework Agreement -- they barely passed.  And they passed on the last possible day and almost by the skin of their teeth.  And I was working on that issue with Ambassador [Ryan] Crocker for almost 18 months --

US House Rep Brad Sherman:  This was passing the Iraqi parliament?

Brett McGurk: Yes, the Iraqi parliament.  Um, our legal requirements in, uh, in 2011 were that another follow up agreement would have to go through the Iraqi parliament.  It was the assessment of the Iraqi political leaders and also of our leadership that it was unlikely to pass and, therefore, the decision was made that our troops would leave by the end of -- by the end of 2011.  But we still have a permanent -- a permanent Strategic Framework Agreement.  That agreement has passed the Iraqi parliament, was ratified in 2008 and it provides us a strong basis for providing security systems to the Iraqis.  It does not provide us the basis for having boots on the ground in a training presence but we do train Iraqi special forces under our Office of Security Cooperation through the [US] Embassy [in Baghdad] and we're also in discussions with regional partners for having a training presence.


When we objected to McGurk as Barack's (failed) nominee for US Ambassador to Iraq, we pointed out the SOFA and the e-mails from the Cult of St. Barack poured in insisting that McGurk had nothing to do with the SOFA, some idiots even insisted that McGurk hadn't been in Iraq.  Then news emerged of how he cheated on his wife in Baghdad, under the Bully Boy Bush administration, by sleeping with then-reporter for the Wall St. Journal Gina Chon and they dropped that complaint in their e-mails but insisted McGurk hadn't been working on a new SOFA.

There he is his words.  But more importantly, his words prove (a) that we were right, Nouri is no hero -- suck on it and your lies, Scott Horton of Antiwar Radio -- and did not stop the SOFA and (b) it proves Senator John McCain is right about how it went down.

On (a), we've had to suffer with Nouri fan bois like Scott Horton.  Desperately immature boys gripping their tiny penises, in search of a Daddy and seizing on Nouri as a hero.  He is a tyrant.  As Leon Panetta made clear in Congressional testimony, Nouri was not the stumbling block.  The stumble was the Parliament.

Approval would not come from it, not enough to get a winning vote.

On (b), I'm not a fan of McCain's I have criticized him here many times.  He is a War Hawk and he's mean-spirited. But his argument has been that the current administration failed with the SOFA and he has criticized the way they attempted it.  He also attributes motive -- that Barack wanted to keep a campaign promise so he tanked the SOFA.  I disagree with the motive and I don't know how anyone but Barack proves or disproves the motive.

But Brett McGurk is talking about two SOFA's.  McCain's complaint was that Barack started late and that the negotiations were not serious.

That's true.  They started in the summer of 2011.  That was much too late.  As McGurk notes above, they spent almost 18 months -- he, then-US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker and others -- negotiating the first SOFA.

By contrast, not even six months were spent negotiating on a second SOFA before the October 2011 announcement that it hadn't worked.

The inept administration (and I'm glad they were inept with attempting a SOFA) still hasn't learned a damn thing.  Four months from now, the documents are scheduled to leave.  You can't postpone these talks.

But that's what the administration has done yet again.

Connolley questioned McGurk Wednesday at the House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.  The sole witness appearing before the Committee  was US State Dept's Deputy Assistant Secretary for Iraq and Iran Brett McGurk.  Committee Chair Ed Royce and Ranking Member Eliot Engel were among those noted in Wednesday's snapshot. with an emphasis on the Congress' opinion of Nouri (not good) and Camp Ashraf. Thursday's snapshot covered the hearing with regards to the Jewish archives.  This time, we'll report on a few other aspects and we may report on the hearing in at least one more snapshot.

Let's stay with Connolly and note this exchange.


US House Rep Gerry Connolly:  Elections in April?  Still on schedule?

Brett McGurk:  Uh, we, our team at the Embassy, is talking every day to the United Nations Assistance Mission-Mission in Iraq and the Iraqi High Electoral Commision which are planning the elections and the information I have received most recently is that we have tens of thousands of displaced families from Anbar Province.  We have been assured by those planning the elections that displaced people will still be able to vote and their vote will count as if they were in their home province.  So we are still confident the elections will be held on April 30th.  And our consistent position, our firm position, is that those elections have to be held on April 30th.  There should not be a delay.


Some fear a delay.  I'm fearful that Nouri's going to again prevent Anbar and Nineveh from voting -- as he did in the 2013 provincial elections.  Yes, after international pressure, they were allowed to vote in June.  The other provinces -- except for the KRG which votes on its own schedule in provincial elections and Kirkuk which Nouri prevented from voting -- voted in April.

Yesterday, we noted this from last month's "Will Nouri call off elections in provinces he's unpopular in?" (January 25th):


Duriad Salman and Ammar al-Ani (Alsumaria) report al-Nujaifi gave two interviews today, the first to Sky News and the second to Alsumaria.  Osama al-Nujaifi noted Nouri cannot continue to act unilaterally, that there are checks and balances in the system and he was concerned that Nouri thinks he's "singular" when it comes to decision making and that this could lead Nouri to attempt to postpone the upcoming election citing "poor security."  Nouri did just that last year.  And he wasn't supposed to.  He ruled that Anbar and Nineveh could not vote.  Under pressure from the US, specifically Secretary of State John Kerry, Nouri relented and, months later, allowed the two provinces to vote.
He never should have been allowed to postpone them.  He doesn't have that power.  The Independent High Electoral Commission is the only one that does and, as their name notes, they are supposed to be "independent."
If Nouri tries to keep provinces from voting, it will be worse than last time and it will be worse then cancelling the election all out.  It will be corrupt.
He penalized the two provinces he was most disliked in last year.  Those were provincial elections, citizens were voting on who to represent them in their provincial governments (think state governments if you're in the US and confused).  These parliamentary elections are like federal elections.  And if Utah wasn't allowed to vote to send people to the House and Senate, it wouldn't be a real election in the US.
In a later report, Duriad Salman and Ammar al-Ani report that the 'independent' commission is now saying that one or more provinces could be prevented from voting in the parliamentary elections.



The idea is being floated.  Twice, Brett McGurk was asked about elections.  We noted one in yesterday's snapshot and another today.  Never once did McGurk inform Congress that this idea was being floated -- let alone that the IHEC declared that it could possibly happen.

There will not be free or fair elections unless everyone votes on the same day.

Today, All Iraq News reports that Iraqiya MP Salim Dali declared the attack on Anbar Province was Nouri's attempt to delay the parliamentary elections.  He tells All Iraq News:
The government is trying to disturb the situation such as the situation in Anbar starting from arresting MP, Ahmed al-Alwani, which will negatively affect holding the elections.

More than 200 thousand refugees have left Fallujah city which raises the question about the way of holding the elections in this city and the other cities of Anbar. 
Witnessing the same situation of the former elections where they were postponed in Nineveh and Anbar provinces.


Iraqiya, for those who don't know or forgot, defeated Nouri's State of Law in the 2010 elections which should have resulted in Iraqiya leader Ayad Allawi being the prime minister.  But Nouri refused to step down after losing -- for eight months he refused to step down bringing the government to a halt (this is known as the "political stalemate" and set a record at the time for the longest period in any country between elections and the forming of a government) and he had Barack's backing so he got away with it.  Barack ordered US officials to negotiate a legal contract (The Erbil Agreement) that went around the Constitution and the Iraqi voters (and any notion of democracy) which decreed a second term for Nouri.


In this year's planned elections, it is the post of prime minister, Mustafa Habib (Niqash) reports, that is the supreme prize:


The ultimate goal for almost all parties competing in the elections, due to be held at the end of April, is clear though:  the Prime Minister’s chair. After eight years of leadership from current prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki it is clear to most ordinary Iraqis, and therefore also to their politicians, that this is the most powerful position in the country. Over the past decade the executive branch of Iraq’s government has shown that it seems to have more power over what goes on in the country than Iraq’s parliament.

And how will the next Iraqi Prime Minister be chosen? Doubtless the person will be chosen by the members of political alliances that form after the upcoming federal elections. Right now the shape of those alliances are far from clear cut. Additionally the fact that Iraq’s current Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is so deeply unpopular and that his mostly Shiite Muslim political alliance has been crumbling, alongside the differences in opinion among Iraq’s Sunni Muslim politicians, means that voters will definitely see some new alliances formed.


Analysts inside and outside the country are already coming up with a number of scenarios they believe may occur.


If Brett McGurk were honest, not only would he have informed the Congress on Wednesday about the IHEC stating it would be acceptable to deny a province the right to vote in the parliamentary elections, he would have also noted that in the two previous parliamentary elections, the desires and wishes of the Iraqis were ignored as the White House imposed Nouri as prime minister in 2006 and again in 2010.

Brett's not an honest man.  As his ex-wife can probably attest, he struggles with the truth.  But turns out, he's got a sense of humor.  Warped, yes, but a sense of humor.  We'll note this long exchange but, believe me, the set up pays off, you will howl.


US House Rep Juan Vargas: I personally am very concerned about the Christian community.  The Christian community has been slaughtered.  I mean the Christians that we saw killed on Christmas. You know, very unified attacks on Christians, 37 murdered.  The Chaldean community  before the war was about a million Chaldean Christians.  Now I think there's less than half, maybe a third of that,.  We're very thankful in San Diego that many Chaldeans have been able to come to San Diego and a great community is forming there and continues to form. I'd like to hear from you what we can do and what we should do and what we're not doing to help not only the Christian community, but especially the Christian community, but other communities as well.  I mean, what-what else should we be doing?

Brett McGurk: Uh, Congressman, thank you.  I-I've visted the Chaldean community in Michigan.  I would welcome the opportunity to come to your district to visit the community there.  Uhm --

US House Rep Juan Vargas: You're invited then.

Brett McGurk: Uh, extremist groups, as I've mentioned, are threatening Christians, Muslims, everybody in the region.  It is a phenomenon throughout the region, this is a regional problem. And one thing we're trying to do is work with the Christian leaders in Iraq is make sure that they have the resources they need from the central government and also the Kurdish Regional Government and making sure that there areas are as secure as possible.  In Iraq, the Chaldeans and other Christian minority groups are located in the Ninewah Plains.  Uhm, there is an al Qaeda extremist presence south of there.  We are working to try to make sure that local people, Christians in that community, have the resources they need to protect themselves and to police their own communities.  And we've made some progress there in that area over the last six months.  In the north, in Erbil and the Kurdish Region, uhm, when I was in Iraq a few months ago, I spoke to, as I mentioned earlier, with Archbishop [Bashar] Warda of the community there and linked him up with the Prime Minister so that they could talk about schools for the community and making sure that they're getting the resources that they need from the Kurdish Regional Government.  What we can do is a neutral group in Iraq with relationships between everybody because we've been there for ten years and are seen as a neutral player, one of the very few, is try to make sure that the connections are made between the governments provincial, regional and national. so that the Christian and minority communities have the resources they need to protect themselves but also for schools and for children and for everything else.

US House Juan Vargas:  Now I do have to say that I've heard from many that the central government, they claim that the central government is not doing much of anything at all to help the Christians.  In fact, just the opposite, that they leave them exposed, that their churches are exposed, that the schools are exposed.  I mean could you comment on that?  That they haven't been doing enough, not nearly enough, to protect the Christian community and especially the churches?

Brett McGurk:  Uhm, since a series of church bombings if I recall correctly in 2009 or 2010, uh, the Iraqis have really buttressed the Christian sites in Iraq.  Uhm, but as you mentioned, there are still attacks --

US House Rep Juan Vargas:  The Christian attacks, I believe, killed 37 --

Brett McGurk:  That's right

US House Rep Juan Vargas:  Christians.

Brett McGurk:  I have found the prime minister, when you discuss this issue with him, fairly emotional about wanting to protect Christians just like everyone else in his country.

Just like everyone else in his country?

Oh, that Funny Man Brett McGurk.

The killers of journalists go unpunished.  I will assume Congress is noting their own disdain for the press by refusing to cover that reality in any of the last five Congressional hearings on Iraq.

Yesterday, Human Rights Watch issued their 105-page report (PDF format warning) "‘No One Is Safe’: Abuses of Women in Iraq’s Criminal Justice System,"  Does Brett want tell us how much Nouri cares about women in Iraq?

Before he preps that joke, he might want to read the report.  If that's too much work for him, he can just start with the opening of the report's summary:




In May 2012, Hanan al-Fadl (not her real name) was grocery shopping in a market in central Baghdad when security forces dressed in civilian clothing seized her, bundled her into a car, and drove her to the office of a state institution, she told Human Rights Watch. 
There, she said, they beat her, shocked her with electric cables, and drenched her in cold water in an effort to force her to admit that she had taken a bribe. Hanan, a manager at a state-affiliated company that approves construction projects, said she realized she was paying the price for refusing to waive through a project in which the contractor had used sub-standard materials. “I made a mistake,” she said. “I didn’t know someone important in the government had a stake in the project.” Beaten and tortured for hours, Hanan said she refused to confess—until her interrogators threatened her teenage daughter. 

They pulled up her picture on my mobile, and said, “Is this [name withheld]?” They knew her name, where she went to school, everything. They said “We can take her just like we took you.” I would have said anything at that point. 

After holding her for more than a day, security forces took her to a judge, who refused to acknowledge bruises and swelling on her face, she said. She did not have a lawyer. Four months later, a Baghdad court convicted her of forgery and sentenced her to three years in prison, based solely on her “confession” and the testimony of a “secret informant.” When Human Rights Watch visited Hanan, she had been detained in Baghdad’s Central Women’s prison for more than a year. 
Hanan is one of thousands of Iraqis imprisoned by a judicial system plagued by torture and rampant corruption. Last April, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay issued a scathing indictment of Iraq’s “not functioning” justice system, citing numerous convictions based on confessions obtained under torture and ill-treatment, a weak judiciary, and trial proceedings that fall far short of international standards.



Or maybe Funny Brett would prefer to dive deeper into the report?  Say page 19 through 22?


Human Rights Watch found that security officials in the Interior and Defense ministries round up women, especially family members of male suspects, without an arrest warrant, deny women access to a lawyer, and fail to bring detained women before an investigative judge according to Iraq’s Code of Criminal Procedure. At least 15 female detainees, their families, and lawyers told Human Rights Watch that they were detained as a part of a round-up of an entire family or village. Security officers conducted warrantless raids in neighborhoods and detained some residents for several days.  
Ten women reported that security forces questioned them not about their activities, but about their relatives. 34 Security forces released some of the women without ever charging them, and charged others with “covering up ” for their husbands or other male family members, effectively punishing them for familial associations rather than any wrongdoing. 
A former judge, who asked not to be identified, said: 

If someone is arrested as part of an emergency operation, no matter how urgent, an investigative judge must still issue an arrest warrant.  In exceptional cases, where there is an explosion, for example, the arresting unit can collect testimonies at the scene while they await the issuance of arrest warrants. But what happens in fact is that they arrest them and later have a judge provide a warrant that justified the arrest.  

He added that security forces “often arrest a large number of people in an area where an incident occurs without an arrest warrant.” 
A lawyer, who asked not to be identified, said that this practice was especially frequent in arrests of women. “They arrest the women just to get at one person – their husband, or their brother,” he said.  Another lawyer who also requested anonymity said: 

Individual officers have taken the law into their own hands to arrest the wife and children to put pressure on the husband, but the wife is not responsible.  ...If a man is arrested and won’t confess, they bring his wife in. 


Arrests of women because of their relationships to suspects, without any evidence that they have committed a crime, amount to collective punishment, and violate international human rights law’s guarantee of the rights to liberty of person and the right to a fair trial.  These prohibit arbitrary detention and require that detention only be in accordance with clear domestic law, that detainees be in formed immediately of the reason for their detention and are promptly brought before a judge and charged with a criminal offense. Such arrests also violate Iraqi laws protecting these rights, including provisions of Iraq’s Constitution and Code of Criminal Procedure.  
On November 3, 2012, federal police invaded 11 homes in the town of al-Tajji, 20 kilometers north of Baghdad, and detained 11 women and 29 children overnight in their homes. The lawyer representing the women told Human Rights Watch that people were detained from every house in the village.  
After detaining 12 of the women and girls, aged 11 to 60, for several hours in their homes, police took them to a police station where they held them without charge for four days.  Throughout their detention, police put plastic bags over each of their heads until they began to suffocate, and electrocuted and beat some of them, according to the women’s accounts. 
Majida Obeidi, 22, detained as part of the Tajji operation, told Human Rights Watch that at around midnight on November 3, a large number of security forces raided the village and invaded the house where she was staying with her four young children and her husband’s 12-year-old second wife.  Some wore the uniform of the National Guard, others were Special Forces, and some wore civilian clothes, she said. 


I think there were about 10 or 15 soldiers. Zahra [the second wife] and I were alone in the house with my children. They blew open the doors and streamed in. They demanded to know where my husband was, but they didn’t know his name, and they asked where we kept the weapons. They looked for the weapons under the floor and ripped bricks off the house but they didn’t find anything. 

They held them overnight in her home, and then took Majida and her children, along with 11 other women and 25 of their children, to the federal police brigade headquarters in the Kadhimeyya compound, also known as Camp Justice, in Baghdad. Police held them there for four days, and then transferred them to the al-Shaaba al-Khamsa detention facility in the same compound. Police released the children after three days, but detained 12 of the women for a month before bringing them before an investigative judge. Majida said the officers repeatedly questioned her about her husband, and then accused her of being a terrorist.

Why don’t you show us the bodies of the Shia you slaughtered -- where have you hidden them?” They said horrible things to me.... I don’t want to repeat them. They called me daughter of a bitch, daughter of a whore. 

The judge charged the women with terrorism under article 4 of the Anti-Terrorism Law for “covering up” for their husbands. 
A high-level government official confirmed the details of the women’s detention and added that according to the brother of one woman, a colonel in Kadhimeyya offered to release his sister if he paid him US$6,500.  The statements of dozens of officials, lawyers, detainees, and their families indicate that bribery of this nature is common. The brother paid, but the colonel did not release his sister.

Nouri's 'concern' for Iraqi women isn't just appalling, it's criminal and the US government is in violation of the law by providing him with financial aid and weapons.

Do you wonder about the US press?  Not one member has bothered to ask the State Dept (which is over Iraq, in the executive branch) about this report or the legal implications of it.

Not one.

Ali Mamouri (Al-Monitor) notes the report:


A separate HRW report, released Feb. 6, 2014, documented cases of abuse against Iraqi women — both Shiite and Sunni — during detention. The report revealed that thousands of Iraqi women have been arrested and detained illegally, and many have suffered torture and been raped. The report concluded that corruption was rampant in the Iraqi judiciary, for a number of convictions based on confessions under duress have been recorded. Moreover, the documents demonstrate that international laws and conventions are not followed in Iraqi courts.
Surprisingly, Iraqi officials accusrd HRW of relying on false and biased information, even though they referred to HRW reports when Saddam Hussein was in power and they were in opposition to the regime.
In the latest developments on such matters, Iraq's Court of Publishing and Media issued two arrest warrants in early February 2014: the first against Judge Munir Haddad, who approved the death sentence of Saddam Hussein; and the second against Iraqi journalist Sarmad al-Tai, a known critic of the government’s political and economic performance.
The warrants charged them with “defaming” Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. In the instance of Tai, it was the first time the defamation charge has been used since 2003. Tai was even charged based on laws issued under the former regime. 
Maliki’s media adviser, Ali al-Moussawi, defended the warrants, saying, “The prime minister is an Iraqi citizen, and like anyone he may defend himself through legal and judicial means. … That would strengthen the role of law and the judiciary because everyone is subject to them.” 



Let's go back to Wednesday's hearing.



US House Rep Gerry Connolly: And if I understand your testimony correctly, we're now relying on tribal support to dislodge the occupying forces in Falluja.  How in the world -- Isn't that an indictment of the investments we've made in the Iraqi military  and its inability to hold its own territory secure?

Brett McGurk:  Well the Iraqi military would have the equipment and the numbers to go into Falluja tomorrow and clean out the streets.  Uh, we believe that were they to do an assault like that would actually exaserbate the problem --

US House Rep Gerry Connolly:  I guess, excuse me a second, Mr. McGurk, I don't mean -- But before you get there, how did it happen in the first place?  How is it that the Iraqi government was not able to secure something as symbolically important if not really important as Falluja?

Brett McGurk:  Uhm, Congr -- As I tried to explain in my testimony, there was a series of incidents throughout 2013 including a protest movement which kind of added to the political instability in the -- in the region.  And in Falluja in particular, it is an area, as we know, any outsiders coming in to Falluja are resisted and that includes the Iraqi army, it includes us, wit includes, we hope now, these al Qaeda extremists.  All I can say is we are where we are right now and we're helping the Iraqis develop a plan right now developing a plan -- one that will lead -- I say, "tribal fighters" but what I really mean is that the local people, local population who know the street are able to actually identify the foreign elements and push them out.  But right now in Falluja, it's a mix of al Qaeda, former insurgent groups and former Ba'athists networks who are in control of the streets there.  It has always been a difficult place.  And, uh, so it's always been a difficult territory.

US House Rep Gerry Connolly:  The tribal support we're relying on, what is their attitude toward the Maliki government?  I mean because doesn't some of that support, cooperation, isn't some of that a reflection of how they view the central government?

Brett McGurk:  Yes.  There's certainly -- there's tremendous mistrust in the area of Falluja towards the central government, there's no question about that.

US House Rep Gerry Connolly:  And does that impede our work to try to dislodge the occupation forces in Falluja?

Brett McGurk: Uh, it does.  It makes -- it makes it harder.  As I said,  some tribes are actually working with the extremists, some are now working to oust them, many others are on the fence.  And that's why it is incumbent  on the central government, through resources and through dialogue and communication to mobilize the population against them.

Brett says the protest movement -- which was sparked by the torture and rape of women and girls in Iraqi prisons and detention centers -- "kind of added to the political instability."

The protest against the torture of women contributed?

You have to be pretty ____ dumb and a real whore -- and we all know Brett's a whore -- to get away with that one with a straight face.

No, Nouri's treatment of women absolutely added to the political instability.



Even in the face of  Norui calling them "terrorists," in the face of Nouri's assaults, in the face of the violence, nothing can stop the ongoing demonstrations that kicked off December 21, 2012 and have continued ever since.  Including today.


  1. الجمعة الموحدة في منطقة العامرية غرب العاصمة بغداد.


Protesters turned out in Amiriya today.  Yes, they do protest in that section of Baghdad and let's all just pretend that Nouri ordering two mosques raided in Amirya today had nothing to do with that.

Iraqi Spring MC notes that protests also took place in Baiji, Jalawla, Baquba and Rawa.


For 'fun,' Nouri ordered the military to also raid two mosques in western Baghdad (Amiriya).

No where is sacred in Nouri's Iraq, everyone is a victim and everyone is a target.

There is no respect for anything, certainly not for human life.  Nouri makes that clear every day.

Nouri's forces conducted 110 bombings in Anbar today, NINA notes.

It didn't always turn out the way tyrant Nouri al-Maliki hoped.  But when does it ever?

Even so he must be licking his paws in sorrow because, while he's happy to bomb and kill civilians, it's hard to picture him humping someone's leg excitedly when he heard the news that, as Iraqi Spring MC reports, Nouri's helicopters accidentally bombed some of Nouri's forces to the north of Falluja -- bombed and killed.


As if he wasn't already having enough problems recruiting volunteers for his killing squads.

That's not all he bombed.  Iraqi Spring MC reports he bombed the power station in Falluja and the city is now without electricity.

That qualifies as a War Crime as well.  But he's gotten away with collective punishment (a War Crime) because so many have been too stupid or too scared to call him out.

The death and dying continue.


National Iraqi News Agency reports Falluja General Hospital received 5 dead and twenty-injured people as a result of Nouri's shelling of the city (the dead and wounded included children and women),  Nouri's military shot dead 4 people in eastern Ramadi, a Sadr City car bombing left 2 people (one a police member) dead and seven more injured, 1 person was shot dead in Muqdadiyah, a Hammam al-Aleel roadside bombing left the brother of the area's police chief injured, an armed clash in Garma left 6 rebels dead and four Sahwa injured, Joint Operations Command declared they shot dead 2 suspects in Mosul, a Baiji car bombing targeted Maj Gen Hamid Mohammed Kemer didn't harm the officer but left three soldiers injured, 1 candidate with the Ahrar bloc was assassinated in Baghdad (Ghazaliya area), and clergy members Sheik Shehab Mahmoud al-Hamdani and Sheikh Abu Noah al-Hamdani were shot dead in Hamman al-Aleel. All Iraq News adds a Tuz Khurmato bombing killed 4 people and left twenty-three more injured.



One of the  only ones to really confront Brett and his lies on Wednesday was US House Rep Dana Rohrabacher.


US House Rep Dana Rohrabacher:  Let me just say that the idea that -- we're talking about Camp Ashraf -- it just seems to me that fundamentally you're suggesting that our approach to stop the massacre, the ongoing massacre of the people at Camp Liberty that we basically have to go to the Maliki government and ask them?  The problem is they're not providing enough security.  The Maliki government is responsible for these deaths.  I don't understand.  The military -- the Iraqi military invaded Camp Ashraf and murdered people.  These are the people under Maliki's command did that.  They recently went into the fifty or so that were left at Camp Ashraf, tied their hands behind their back and shot them in the back of the head. And it was Maliki's own military, we know, who did that.  We know that the Camp Ashraf and these people were attacked numerous times by the Iraqi military.  This isn't rather Maliki and his people are not protecting the MEK.  This is a crime against humanity.  These are unarmed refugees and which Maliki's own troops are murdering.  And I'm not talking about rockets we don't know where they come from, we're talking about actual -- by the way, I would suggest  that they probably know about those rockets as well -- Maliki, let's make it very clear, as far as I'm concerned and as far as many people in Washington are concerned,  Maliki is an accomplice the murders that are going on.  And as an accomplice, we should not be treating him as begging him to have a residual force of US troops in order to help his regime?  I don't understand why the United States feels -- why we feel compelled to be part of all of this?  Why do we feel compelled that we have to go in and be in the middle of this fight between people who are murdering each other?  Thirty to forty suicide bombers a month? Thousands of people are losing their lives to this insanity.  Why should the United States, tell me, this is my question, why does the United States feel that we need to become part of this insanity?  And does that not instead turn both of the parties against us?

Brett McGurk:  Uh, Congressman, the suicide bomber, uh , phenomenon is complete insanity.  Uh, I agree with you.  When you look at Iraq and look at the region and you define our interests -- and I don't go to any leader and beg for anything.  We protect and advance US interests as we define them.  And in Iraq, whether you like it or not, oil, al Qaeda, Iran, vital US interests are at stake in Iraq.


Note where Brett went first: Oil.

It's always oil with the War Hawks.

Let it be noted that unlike so many of his colleagues, Rohrabacher didn't ply Brett with compliments, gushing of how he informed he was (he wasn't and neither were they or they would have asked better questions) or thank him for his service, etc.

Brett's a whore.  A whore knows how to seduce.  And from the distance, for example, the members of Congress mistake smarmy for charm and fail to notice that the forelock in the front is now separated from the rest of the hair on Brett's head by a deep island of scalp or the bald spot in the back.

Dreaming of all the pleasure I'm going to have
Watching you hairline recede 
My vain darling
-- "Just Like This Train," written by Joni Mitchell, first appears on her Court & Spark

Joni was singing of the supremely vain -- so vain, he might think the song was about him, might he?, might he? -- James Taylor; however, it also applies to Brett.