House-Senate Veterans Affairs Committee hearing

From this morning, that's  Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "The So-Called Presidential Debate".  And the faux debates kicked off tonight.

We'll have two more 'presidential' ones and one 'vice president' one.

But I'm blogging tonight about the House-Senate Veterans Affairs Committee hearing we attended today.

And this is an impressions type piece that I tend to do.  First, is the American Legion important in the veterans community?

I asked a member that at today's hearing.  I was told they represent close to 3 million veterans and are a few years short of 100 years old.

So I would say that's pretty important.

Why would I ask?

When a House and a Senate hold a joint hearing, I would expect more than five people to be present.

It was Senator Richard Lugar (who isn't on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee but knows the commander of the American Legion and was present to introduce him).  It was Senator Mark Begich of Alaska and Senator John Boozman.  From the House, you had US House Rep Michael Michaud.  And the only leadership from either the House Veterans Affairs Committee or the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee was US House Rep Jeff Miller who chairs the House Veterans Affairs Committee.

He made a point to reassure the people present that all members of both committees would be briefed on the testimony.

Boozman said that the military vote was the most important and needed to be the most protected to which I say, "Screw you, this is a democracy.  Every vote matters."

And from that, you'll get that I'm not someone who falls over myself to show respect or 'respect' to institutions.  So I hope that makes it clear that when I'm offended based on protocol, something really offensive has taken place.

I really felt that a lot more people should have been present and that it was insulting to the American Legion (whom I don't worship) that only 4 members of the two committees bothered to show for the presentation.

They were asked to make a presentation to the Committees so that the Committees could figure out what to do about various problems.

You invite someone to make a presentation, you need to be present.

If I try real hard to be fair, okay, the House has an excuse.  They're all up for re-election.  But only a third of the Senate is.  And other than Scott Brown (Mass.) and Bill Nelson (Fla.), is any senator in a tight race?

Incumbents almost always get re-elected.

So I felt bad for the American Legion, even with Chair Jeff Miller assuring them that everyone would be aware of the presentation -- he also noted that it was being webcast live and apparently some members of Committees may catch it that way.

The American Legion presented some issues.  I didn't get a sense that they had a way to solve the problems.  But not because they couldn't think of ways to improve things but because they have repeatedly made suggestions and the VA pretends to listen but continues doing the exact same thing.




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

Wednesdy, October 3, 2012.  Chaos and violence continue, Nouri's got his eyes on more weapons, the US gets ready for a debate with some of the presidential candidates, the House and Senate Veterans Affairs Committees hold a joint-hearing, and more.     USA Today's Susan Page (link is text and video) has a column today on the presidential debates which kick off tonight for some candidates.  (Some?  As Isaiah notes his comic this morning, Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein and Libertarian Party presidential candidate Gary Johnson  will not be on stage, the duopoly does not want them invited.)   In her piece, Pages notes a number of topics she feels should be covered including, "President Obama can rightly claim to be an early opponent to the war in Iraq. But once troops were there, he was an opponent of the surge that ultimately proved successful. What has he learned from those two decisions that will make him a more effective commander in chief in the future?"  Before anyone points out that tonight's debate is domestic topics, Susan Page knows that, her column is about the three debates President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney will take part in.   There are many good questions Barack could be asked about Iraq including why he backed Nouri al-Maliki for a second term as prime minister after Nouri's State of Law came in second?  The country's Constitution was very clear on the process and how do you help a fledging democracy take root when you overturn the results of an election?  As John Barry's "'The Engame' Is A Well Researched, Highly Critical Look at U.S. Policy in Iraq" (The Daily Beast) notes: As Michael Gordon and Bernard Trainor charge in their ambitious new history of the Iraq war, The Endgame, Obama's administration sacrificed political influence by failing in 2010 to insist that the results of Iraq's first proper election be honored: "When the Obama administration acquiesced in the questionable judicial opinion that prevented Ayad Allawi's bloc, after it had won the most seats in 2010, from the first attempt at forming a new government, it undermined the prospects, however slim, for a compromise that might have led to a genuinely inclusive and cross-sectarian government."     Another question Barack should be asked is why he keeps talking about bringing the troops home from Iraq when (a) 15,000 troops were moved to Kuwait, (b) a small number of US troops were left in Iraq, (c) Barack just sent a small number of Special-Ops back into Iraq and (d) he's negotiating to send more US troops back into Iraq?     Last week,  Tim Arango (New York Times) reported, "Iraq and the United States are negotiating an agreement that could result in the return of small units of American soldiers to Iraq on training missions. At the request of the Iraqi government, according to General Caslen, a unit of Army Special Operations soldiers was recently deployed to Iraq to advise on counterterrorism and help with intelligence."  As  John Glaser (Antiwar.com) observes, "Most Americans have been led to believe that all US forces besides those guarding the massive American Embassy in Iraq have been withdrawn since the end of last year. But small units have remained in Baghdad to support elite Iraqi forces that report directly to the increasingly authoritarian Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki."  RTT News reports today, "U.S. military training for Iraqi security forces will continue uninterrupted despite failure of the Congress to approve money for it in a temporary spending bill now funding government operations, the Pentagon has said."  northsunm32 (All Voices) points out, "Pentagon officials had warned legislators that the failure to extend the authorization for the program could force the withdrawal of 220 of 296 personnel it currently had in Iraq working with the Iraqis. Obviously, this did not sway Congress. However, just as obviously, there is no plan to withdraw those personnel."   We'll come back to the topic of the US presidential elections at the end of the snapshot.  Right now, we'll stay with the US but move to veterans issues.  Last week, James Dao (New York Times) reported, "Numbers tell the story.  Last year, veterans filed more than 1.3 million claims, double the number in 2001. Despite having added nearly 4,000 new workers since 2008, the agnecy did not keep pace, completing less than 80 percent of its inventory.  This year, the agency has already completed more than 1 million claims for the third consecutive year.  Yet it is still taking about eight months to process the average claim, two months longer than a decade ago.  As of Monday, 890 pensions and compensation claims were pending."  That was last week.  Today?     James Koutz: We've seen many pilot programs and promises from VA. It's time to roll up our sleeves and really fix what's wrong with this system. As the Social Security Administration and other benefit programs can handle their claims in a timely manner, veterans cannot understand why the VA cannot. In the American Legion, we've made training our Service Officers a top priority. It's part of the job -- not something that gets in the way of the job. We bring our Service Officers together for training twice a year. They make recommendations based on a complex system they must navigate on a daily basis. They're the ones who can see the flaws in the VA's work-credit system that rewards quantity over quality. There simply has to be a better way to get this done. For instance, VA could start counting claims done right as a positive and claims done wrong as a negative so everyone could have a more accurate picture of what's reallly getting done in these regional offices. Veterans waiting past the realistic target date might be compensated with interest on their claims creating an incentive for VA also to get these claims decided on time. There are ways to work with the mechanics of this system and to make it serve the veteran and not the bureaucrats. We're willing to roll up our sleeves and work with you to find those ways.  The American Legion has people in the trenches who not only understand the problems but contribute to the solutions.  Veterans are tired of hearing how the government is working on ending a backlog that continues to grow.  Veterans and the American Legion want results and are willing to do whatever it takes to obtain them.  Remember, we're all partners in this.  Everyone knows the claims process is confusing for veterans and the American Legion is there with free services to help navigate the system and make things easier for both the veteran and the VA personnel who have decided their claims.  Nobody gets charged a penny for this service -- not the veteran, not the government.   [. . .]   Chair Jeff Miller:  I want to hone in, just for a bit, on the claims backlog because obviously that is a huge issue that's out there, that everybody in this room is concerned about. Congress is concerned about it. The Dept of Veterans Affairs is concerned about it. But it doesn't seem to be getting any better. [VA] Secretary [Eric] Shinseki has already said several times, you quoted it in your opening statement, that by 2015, they would, within 125 days, the idea was that everybody would have their claims ajudicated at 100%. Well it isn't happening. And unfortunately, we had a hearing just a couple of weeks ago where we kind of took a status check with VA: Where are you? Their focus was more on what they were turning out which is exactly what you talked about. And that's important. A million claims being adjudicated. But the backlog is growing. And if you're not keeping up with that backlog, it's certainly not going to assist and fix the problem. So, again, I would like to hear from you if you would, your perspective on what are the things that can be done? What can Congress do legislatively, if you will, to assist the problem? We all talk about the electronic medical record. But that is years away from being able to truly have that seamless transition. We're moving in that direction. But we've got folks, you know, today that are waiting one, two years waiting to have their claims ajudicated and we've put dollars forward, we've put bodies forward. It does not seem to fix the issue. So I'd like to hear what you think.   James Koutz: Well, Mr. Chairman, I think one of the things that we could do is do more hiring of ajudicators, do more hiring of the processers.  As you probably know, a lot of these claims that are coming back, they're not completed.  They need to be fully developed claims.  I believe like any other business, if you're in the backlog, then the only way to get the backlog taken care of is to hire more people.  And I understand the VA -- being a former, or still a commissioner of the Indiana Department of Veterans Affairs -- that it takes time to train an ajudicator or claims processer.  That'll take time.  But maybe we can -- and I don't know how much overtime they're working, if they're working overtime -- But I think they've got to do these claims more accurately because, when they come back, the first thing that we see is mistakes and that claim goes right back to the regional office and we're starting all over again from step one.  So I think that's the biggest thing, maybe get the accuracy where the Secretary said he would like to have it, 98% accuracy.  If we get to that number, then I think you'll see the backlogs claim be reduced.   Chair Jeff Miller: Do you know the percentage of the claims that your Service Officers put together or ajudicated complete?  I mean, they may not necessarily get the rating that they're asking for, but the percentage of packages that are completed?     James Koutz: I don't.  But Peter Gaytan, our executive director of our Washington office, probably can answer that for you.     Peter Gaytan:  Thank you, Commander.  Mr. Chairman, the American Legion takes very seriously, the quality of our work and our training of our Service Officres.  Twice a year, we put our Service Officers rigorous training to make sure that they have the qualifications, knowledge and skills to not only produce quality, fully developed claims that we submit to the VA but also to help reduce the backlog because it's got to be a team effort to do that.  We're going to have qualified, well trained officers to do this work.  Now your specific question on the number that the American Legion ajudicates or   Chair Jeff Miller: Or percentage.   Peter Gaytan:  I would like to defer to our National Veterans Affairs and Rehabilitation Commission VA Director Verna Jones who handles that area.   Verna Jones:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We actually received a report from the VA just last week.  And I can tell you the number of claims.  The American Legion handles  244,000 claims annually.  That's our number this year: 244,000.  Now I'm not sure of the exact percentage but the number is 244,000 claimsfor the American Legion nationally.   Chair Jeff Miller: Okay.  If you would, just for the record, if you could let us know, just trying to get a handle, you know, on how many claims are being done by the veteran themselves obviously using the veterans Service Officer.  The assumption, from my standpoint, would be that it would be better to go through a Service Officer in order to file your claim.  But I'm interested in knowing for no other reason then I think folks up here on the dais would like to hear it.     Today the US House Veterans Affairs Committee and Senate Veterans Affairs Committee held a joint-hearing which was a presentation by the American Legion.  The American Legion's National Commander James Koutz handled the presentation and he was accomanied by Verna Jones, Michael Helm, Peter Gaytan and Kenneth Governor.  The Chair of the House Committee is Jeff Miller who was present.  As he noted,  "the Congressional schedule changed a few weeks ago so a lot of members are not in Washington today."  Ranking Member Bob Filner is not seeking re-election to the Congress but is instead running for Mayor of San Diego. The scheduling change meant that he was not present.  US House Rep Mike Michaud was Acting Ranking Member.     Acting Ranking Member Mike Michaud:  I was troubled by the July report from CBS News that found suicide rates for our soldiers is up 80%.  Our veterans are returning from war with invisible wounds that need treatment but are discouraged from seeking treatment for various reasons.  As a nation, we can do better.  We must get this right.     He was referring to David Martin's report for CBS Evening News (link is text and video) report on the suicide rate in July: "July was the worst month ever for Army suicides.  Thirty-eight active duty and reserve soldiers took their own lives.  Among active duty troops, 2012 could turn out to be the worst year ever.  Behind the numbers are heartbroken widows who say their husbands sought help but couldn't get it."  And as disturbing is the number of veterans suicides.    Over the weekend and through Monday, the Austin American-Stateman began publishing the results of their investigative series on veterans deaths.  This was a six-month investigation focusing on the the deaths of Texas veterans and, in their overview article, they noted: ■ More than one in three died from a drug overdose, a fatal combination of drugs, or suicide. Their median age at death was 28. ■ Nearly one in five died in a motor vehicle crash. ■ Among those with a primary diagnosis of post traumatic stress disorder, the numbers are even more disturbing: 80 percent died of overdose, suicide or a single vehicle crash. Only two of the 46 Texas veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts with a PTSD diagnosis died of natural causes, according to the analysis. ■ The 345 Texas veterans identified by the VA as having died since coming home is equal to nearly two-thirds of the state's casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan. But that only includes veterans who have sought VA benefits, meaning the total number of deaths is likely much larger. That is from the overview article.   The paper also offered "Suicide among veterans receiving less attention than active-duty deaths" which tells the story of Iraq War veteran Ray Rivas who took his own life on a day when his wife, Colleen Rivas, described him being in "good spirits" and notes: An American-Statesman investigation into the deaths of 266  Texans who served during the Iraq or Afghanistan wars show that 45  committed suicide, making it the fourth-leading  cause of death behind illness, accidents and drug-related deaths. That percentage is more than four times higher than the general population: Suicide accounted for 3.6 percent  of all Texas deaths over the same period, compared with 16.9  percent of the veterans the newspaper studied. Rivas o.d.ed "on sleeping pills in a parking lot."  Iraq War veteran Eric Sessions died on his motorcycle and is part of  the report entitled "After returning home, many veterans get into motor vehicle accidents" which finds, "Next to illness and disease,  motor vehicle accidents such as Sessions' were the leading cause of death among the 266  Texas veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan whose histories were tracked by the American-Statesman. The motorcycle and car wrecks were responsible for 50  deaths, or 18.8 percent  of the total ― more than suicides or prescription drug overdoses."  The paper also offers "Which veterans are at highest risk for suicide?"  The Military Suicide Research Consortium's Peter Gutierrez agrees that "relationship problems, legal problems, mental illness, depression" are the same in the civilian world and among service members and veterans but feels the civilian population is less likely to suffer from Post-Traumatic Stress and Traumatic Brain Injury.   Afghanistan War veteran KC Dobson's took her own life last year, "Her Army photos show a beaming, freckle-faced young woman in fatigues, her dark hair pulled back in a bun. But her smile masked what family members said was emotional and physical pain that dogged her throughout her deployment to Iraq and after her 2010 discharge." Other reports by the paper are "Researches look into possible causes of current 'epidemic' of suicide and PTSD" and "Scores of recent Texas war veterans have died of overdoses, suicides and vehicle crashes, investigation finds" -- all articles share the byline "by American-Statesman Investigative Team."   For today's hearing, Senator Mark Begich was Acting Senate Committe Chair for the hearing and Senator John Boozman was Acting Ranking Member.  One of the issues various groups -- and the American Legion is no different here -- is paying attention to is possible sequestration.  What?  What NPR has been calling the "fiscal cliff."  Marilyn Geewax (NPR's The Two Way) observed this week, "Unless Congress passes legislation in a lame-duck session, taxes will be higher by a half-trillion dollars next year, costing the average household nearly $3,500 a year, according to a just-released report by the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center."   The VA is not supposed to be effected in terms of services to veterans.  The White House has stated there may be some administrative shuffling or losses but it won't effect care -- if sequestration takes place.  If it does, let's hope the veterans have been told the truth.     James Koutz:  The American Legion understands our nation is in a budget crisis, the likes of which has not been seen in over a generation.  First and foremost, our nation's veterans are deeply concerned about the national security in the face of drastic defense spending cuts. Equally important to the American Legion is protection of veterans and veterans programs administered in other federal agencies.  Thank to the timeless work of this Committee -- and especially you, Chairman Miller --  Congress and the White House have reassured us that VA will be exempt from sequestration.  Unfortunately, many programs that are important to veterans are funded by agencies outside the VA: Arlington National Cemetery, the American Battle Monuments Commission, the Joint Prisoners of War - Missing in Action Accounting Command and the Dept of Labor's Veterans Program, HUD and others.  Veterans are seriously concerned  these important government functions will be compromised or cut in order to make ends meet. [. . .]  The American Legion has been promised that the budget would not be balanced on the backs of veterans. If cuts ot the Department of Defense erode TRICARE, diminish quality of life for our troops, or put more pressure on our National Guard and reserve components, it is clear that an unfair portion of responsibility is falling upon the shoulders of America's current and future veterans.     Based on what others cover (Ava plans to cover the hearing at Trina's site tonight, Wally at Rebecca's site and Kat at her own), tomorrow's snapshot may include other aspects of the hearing.    Meanwhile Columbia University professor David L. Phillips (at Huffington Post) advocates for the US increasing their ties to Iraqi Kurds:   Iraq's Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has shunned U.S. interests. He also pursues polarizing policies, which fuel sectarian and ethnic conflict between Iraqis. Baghdad scorns Iraq's constitution, preferring confrontation to power-sharing. It systematically encroaches on Kurdish territory, inflaming tensions along "disputed internal boundaries." The Iraqi government uses its security apparatus to trample the rights of Iraq's Sunnis and target political opponents. It acts as a proxy for Iran, facilitating the transfer of weapons from Tehran to Syria. In contrast, Iraqi Kurds are unabashedly pro-American. Not a single American has died in Iraqi Kurdistan since Saddam's overthrow in 2003. Iraqi Kurdistan has functioning democratic institutions, a vibrant civil society, and an independent media. While corruption is still a problem, Iraqi Kurdistan is less corrupt than most neighbors. The U.S. shares values with Iraqi Kurds, who are America's best and only friends in Iraq. The United States should deepen security cooperation with the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG). While Baghdad rejected a status of forces agreement with the United States, the KRG welcomes it. The Pentagon's sale of Abrams-A1 tanks and F-16 fighter jets to Baghdad should be cancelled. Such weapons will most likely be used against Iraqis, rather than to protect Iraq from Iran and other rogue regimes with which Baghdad has cozy relations.   I understand the point he's making but, to be clear, Jeremiah Small died in the KRG March 1, 2012.  The 33-year-old American was there teaching history and English lit.  In Iraq today the violence continued.  All Iraq News reports that Iraqi police shot dead 3 people ('suspects') outside Baghdad, near Ghazaliya,  1 'suspect' was shot dead outside of Mosul, and an armed clash in Baghdad left 1 person dead.  AFP adds a Baghdad roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 Iraqi soldier with two more injured, a Suwayrah roadside bombing claimed 1 life and left three people injured, a Kirkuk car bombing left seven people injured and 1 "high-ranking official in the transport ministry was assassinated by unknown gunmen".  In non-violence deaths, Al Rafidayn notes 2 people in Sulaymaniyah died of cholera.  Yes, it is time for the annual cholera outbreak in Iraq.  It happens every year.  The US press used to cover it, used to pretend to care.  The World Health Organization explains, "Cholera is an acute intestinal infection caused by ingestion of food or water contaminated with the bacterium Vibrio cholerae.  It has a short incubation period, from les than one day to five days, and produces an enterotoxin that causes a copious, painless, watery diarrhoea that can quickly lead to severe dehydration and death if treatment is not promptly given.  Vomiting also occurs in most patients." In the science section of Monday's New York Times, there was an article on cholera.  The best way to end cholera is potable water. While Iraq's not seen vast sums used to rebuild basic infrastructure, Rudaw notes one segment Nouri's been happy to throw money at: Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki is expected to visit Russia to sign a $5 billion deal to procure weapons for the Iraqi military.  A member of Iraqi parliament's committee of defense and security told Rudaw that Maliki is planning to ask the Russians to deliver 20 to 40 helicopters and a number of missiles to penetrate into mountainous areas. Maliki's first visit to Russia as Iraq's prime minister has sparked different reactions across the country. Many Iraqis, especially Kurds, have voiced concern about Maliki's plans and are alarmed by what they describe as his "unilateral" and "autocratic" style. Shwan Taha, a Kurdish member of Iraqi Parliament, said, "The arming policy is random and affected by corruption."  Taha said that, despite billions of dollars spent on arming the Iraqi military, "Iraq's weapon needs have not been met yet." The weapons purchases are alarming some Iraqis.  The possibility that Iraq might make significant purchases from Russia is also not going over well with the US government.  But file it under one of Nouri's many problems currently.   Dar Addustour reports that last week's assault on the prison in Tikirt has resulted in  searches of other Iraq prisons and the confiscation of smuggled cell phones.  All Iraq News notes that 1 of the Tikrit prison escapees was arrested today.  The news outlet notes that there are conflicting reports but as many as 250 prisoners may still be at large after last week's attack.   Al Mada adds that Nouri's council of ministers decided that the protection of the prisons -- which is done by federal police -- should fall under the Ministry of Justice.  The federal police fall under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of the Interior.  Why the shift? Who knows but what it looks like is Nouri's trying to hand off to someone to be the fall guy.  The Ministry of Justice has a Minister heading it (Hassan al-Shimari).  Nouri is the one heading the Ministry of Interior (and Ministry of Defense and Ministry of National Security)  because he never nominated anyone to head those ministires.  He was supposed to.  The Constitution required not only that he present nominees to Parliament but that they be confirmed.  But when you're the pet of the White House, laws don't really matter.  Further indicating that distraction is the goal, All Iraq News reports that State of Law MP Abdul Salam al-Maliki is claiming that they have evidence that politicians were involved in the Tikrit prison break.  If they had evidence, they would have already presented it.  This is more spin from Nouri's State of Law.  As Iraqis are supposed to ponder which politicians could be involved, the hope is they'll be too distracted to notice what a complete and utter failure Nouri's government has been. More problems for State of Law and Nouri, Wael Grace and Mohammad Sabah (Al Mada) report that there are splits in the National Alliance over the infrastructure bill.  Moqtada al-Sadr's bloc has already made their opposition public.  Grace and Sabah report that Irbrahim al-Jaafari, leader of the National Alliance, is also opposed to it currently and that there is talk of forming a new bloc.       In the US, it is a presidential election year.  Bruce Dixon (Black Agenda Report) will be voting for Jill Stein.  He explains:     I'm an old guy now, past sixty but not yet senior enough for Medicare, and I've been in the movement a long time. Younger people sometimes ask me what to do. After telling them not to respect their elders all that much --- we didn't respect them that much 45 years ago either --- the main thing I tell them is that movement leaders and participants back in the day had visions and horizons longer than the next election cycle or the one after that. They were prepared to fight whether they had allies in city hall, the legislature or the courts or not. Unlike today's NAACP and NAN, they developed agendas without the guidance of corporate funders and their recommended professionals. We've proved we can elect as many Democrats as we want, all the way up the food chain without changing much here at the bottom. I know this well. I gave more than 20 years of my own life to electing better Democrats, helping Democrats run better campaigns, and registering more Democrat voters. I met Barack Obama 20 years ago on one of those gigs in Project VOTE Illinois, where he was state director and I was one of three field organizers who signed up 130,000 new voters and flogged them out to the polls that year. We elected Harold Washington, and a lot of state legislators and a few Congressional reps. The Democratic party will still let you work for it, but once in office, big money calls the shots. It's time to leave that house and build a new one. It's an uncomfortable truth: the present US political system is largely people-proof and democracy-proof. The time and treasure we've sunk into supporting Democrats the last seventy years is gone. It's a horse we raised and watered and fed that somebody else has ridden off and it won't be back. I still believe my voice and my vote mean something. Kwame Toure used to say the thing to do is find an organization you're in substantial agreement with and join it, or if it does not exist, start one and recruit your neighbors. So I've joined the Georgia Green Party, and I'm recruiting those of my neighbors who still believes that unemployment and mass incarceration have to be addressed, that illegal wars and deportations must be stopped, that Wall Street must be reined in, and that gentrification and privatization have to be stopped. Most voters who call themselves Democrats, in fact millions of those voting for President Obama believe exactly these things already, but are substantially disinformed about what their elected officials actually DO. I was at a demonstration in support of Chicago teachers Saturday, and some participants seemed to assume that the president was on their side, that maybe they could enlist figures like Rev. Al Sharpton to aid their struggle to mobilize people against the inroads of school privatizaters. It fell to me to tell them the bad news --- that Sharpton took a half million dollar bribe years ago to jump on the charter school bandwagon, that he toured the country with Newt Gingrich and Arne Duncan beating the bushes for high stakes testing and charters, and the administration is actually the enemy on this one. Eventually they and many like them, if they want a party that stands up for what they believe, will have to become Greens. It's my job to make sure that happens. So I'll watch the debates, sure. The crooks who run them won't let Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate on the same stage with the corporate candidates. So I'll watch Democracy Now's coverage, in which Jill Stein and another candidate in real time answer the same questions as they do. My colleague Glen Ford will be a guest at Occupy The Debates in Baltimore as well.   Democracy Now!'s live coverage tonight begins at 8:30 PM EST (7:30 Central, 5:00 Pacific). You can stream it online. (Or check Pacifica, Free Speech Television and other places you regularly find the show).   And on this week's  Black Agenda Radio (here for this week's broadcast) which airs on Progressive Radio Network each Monday from 11:00 am to noon EST, Bruce Dixon noted the Occupy the Debates:.       One answer to the lack of real discussions presented us by the rigged "commission" on presidential debates will be Occupy The Debates, a project undertaken by Occupy activists in multiple cities, in which a live meeting will entertain live questions from a live audience.  Occupy the Debate's first scheduled public meeting will be in Denver CO, the same night as the first so-called "debate" between the two corporate candidates.  Occupy the Debates will be streamed live on the internet that evening, and will include the participation of Black Agenda Report co-founder Glen Ford.  Several occupy movements around the country are expected to follow suit and organize their own local events over the next few weeks. For more information on real debates on real issues, visit Occupy the Debates either on Facebook or at www.occupythedebates.org -- that's www.occupythedebates.org.       iraq the daily beast john barry antiwar.com john glaser the new york times tim arango northsunm32 all voices the cbs evening news with scott pelley david martin cbs news the austin american-statseman james dao bruce dixon

Heart Fanatic for $7.99

When I alert about a sale someone always stumbles onto the post three weeks later and wants to e-mail me, "The sale is off!"

The sale was on when I posted.  I'm even putting it in the title.  If you don't discover this post while the sale is going on, that's on you.






What's that? The cover of Heart's new album Fanatic.  An amazing album!!!!!

And it's at an amazing price right now: $7.99 to download at Amazon.


So go download it now if you don't have it already.  Don't e-mail me three weeks from now whining.

Matt Wardlaw (Ultimate Classic Rock) has an interview with Ann that's too good to excerpt from so I'll just note his intro:

It’s been a really good year to be a Heart fan, thanks to a trio of exciting releases. The band put out ‘Strange Euphoria’ in June, a career-spanning box set loaded with familiar tracks but also stacked deep with a number of previously unreleased rarities.

September brought the release of ‘Kicking & Dreaming,’ a new book, written with journalist Charles Cross, which lays out the Heart story, presented in the words of Ann and Nancy Wilson for the first time ever.

‘Fanatic,’ the new Heart album which is in stores on Oct. 2 swings the pendulum of perspective from looking back in a retrospective sense to one that is firmly driving forward. Heart’s Ann Wilson indicated that the new album would be more of a rock-based project and ‘Fanatic’ certainly doesn’t disappoint.

We spoke with Ann to discuss the inspiration behind the band’s new music and how working with producer Ben Mink, coupled with her recently acquired sobriety, has brought a fresh energy to the band’s recordings.

If you're a Heart fan, you'll want to read it.  In fact, read it while you download the new album.  It kicks ass.



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

Tuesday, October 2, 2012.  Chaos and violence continue, Nouri blusters about Turkish war planes, the US Defense Dept 'finds' money to pay for US troops in Iraq, Jalal does a listening tour, and more.     Yesterday, Josh Rogin (Foreign Policy) broke the following news, "In its final act before leaving town earlier this month, Congress passed a continuing resolution (CR) that failed to reauthorize the main mission of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq (OSC-I), despite Pentagon warnings that the move could force the military to withdraw hundreds of U.S. troops who are still in Baghdad helping to develop the Iraqi security forces and working with them on counterterrorism.  The authority for U.S. forces to train and assist the Iraqi security forces expired Sunday."  Never fear.  When it comes to destruction, it will always be paid for.  Lolita C. Baldor (AP) reports that the Defense Dept has announced it has the money to cover the costs "in its temporary budget."  Of course, it does.  Of course.  Kristina Wong (Washington Times) adds that George Little, Pentagon spokesperson, declared the move was "a temporary bridge while we seek a longer-term way ahead for [the Office of Security Cooperation-Iraq] in the fiscal year 2013 National Defense Authorization Act, which we expect to be taken up by Congress later this year."   Some day the broadcast media will cover what's going on.  It may be a 100 years from now, but some day they will.  In the meantime, we're supposed to pretend it's not taking place.  Iraq War veteran Mike Prysner is with March Forward! and he speaks with Press TV about Iraq (link is video and transcript):   Mike Prysner:  The whole strategy behind the US' so-called withdrawal of US forces from Iraq was the ability to leave in its place forces that would maintain and protect the interests of the US government, namely US control over Iraq's resources and the dividing up of Iraq's oil among various major British and US oil companies, and French and German as well. The Iraqi government exists today, and the Iraqi forces exist today to maintain the status quo, to maintain the new government that the United States felt worthy of sending to leadership. The security in Washington means that the interests are secured, that US bases are secured, that US contracts are secured. And if anything threatens that, they want the Iraqi government to crush it with violence, to torture people, to attack demonstrations and so forth. We should remember that if the Iraqi security forces are not to the task that the US has assigned for them -- we have to keep in mind that President Obama himself said when he was giving the speech celebrating the end of the Iraq war, he said very plainly that our commitment to Iraq has not ended.     At Foreign Policy, Peter Feaver argues it's time to examine Iraq in terms of Barack.  Apparently, Feaver wasn't bowled over by the foreign policy 'analysis' The NewsHour provided last week (as Ava and I pointed out, PBS stacked the deck by inviting a reporter and an 'independent' analyst who Tweeted insults about Mitt Romney before his appearance on The NewsHour). I can agree with him on the issue of examining Barack's actions with regards to Iraq.  I don't agree with Feaver that Fred and Kimberly Kagan should be listened to on Iraq because they've "earned the right to a respectful hearing on" the topic.  But I will agree that they should be listened to since they are the immediate in-laws of State Dept's spokesperson Victoria Nuland.   It's always comical to watch the Cult of St. Barack huff and puff about the neocons and grasp how ignorant the Cult is and how unaware they are of just how many neocons populate Barack's administration.  Victoria Nuland, married to Robert Kagan) is one such neocon and she was Dick Cheney's right hand during the planning of the Iraq War.  Didn't stop the administration from giving her a job -- a high profile one in fact.  So if she speaks for the State Dept, and she does, Peter Feaver, there's the reason to listen to his sister-in-law Kimberly and brother-in-law Fred Kagan.  And for those who think she was working with the State Dept when she helped Cheney, no.  Just because the State Dept has vanished her Bully Boy Bush days doesn't mean we have done the same.  From November 24, 2004:   Kagan's wife works as Cheney's deputy national security adviser. That's Ms. Nuland' s title. So in effect, Ms. Nuland's employed by "team B" -- she's apparently not working on team B's campaign, but she works for team B. Potentially, Kagan has a vested interest in the outcome of the 2004 election.   As you may remember, back then it was NPR covering for Nuland, erasing her from the scene while letting Robert Kagan go on the air to explain what was wrong with then presidential contender John Kerry -- explain what was wrong from an 'independent' stand point because NPR didn't think the listeners had a right to know the man ripping apart Kerry and praising Bush wasn't so independent, that his wife was Dick Cheney's Deputy National Security Adviser.   Dick Cheney.  The name that still sends shudders down the spines of many Democrats.  But Barack let her and a lot of other neocons into the administration.   Iraq needs to be evaluated.  Don't express the press to rush to do that because evaluating requires facts and it's Iraq's Dar Addustour, and not NPR, that reported today on the New York Times article mentioning that the US just sent a unit of Speical-Ops back into Iraq and how there are negotiations between the White House and Iraq to returns US troops to Iraq in larger number.  Dar Addustour is referring to Tim Arango's report from last week, "Iraq and the United States are negotiating an agreement that could result in the return of small units of American soldiers to Iraq on training missions. At the request of the Iraqi government, according to General Caslen, a unit of Army Special Operations soldiers was recently deployed to Iraq to advise on counterterrorism and help with intelligence."   Meanwhile AFP reports that Nouri's Baghdad-based government is calling for an end to the treaty between Iraq and Turkey that currently allows Turkish war planes to bomb northern Iraq (Turkey bombs what they say are suspected PKK camps).  Ali al-Dabbagh, Nouri's spokesperson, is quoted stating, "The cabinet decided to reject the presence of any foreign bases or forces on Iraqi land and to reject the entry of any foreign military forces into Iraqi land."   Ahlul Bayt News Agency continues that al-Dabbagh declared that the government recommends Parliament cancel any existing contract and refuse to extend any agreements.   The Tehran Times adds, "According to the Turkish parliament, the military is authorized to conduct operations inside Iraq's airspace under the pretext of targeting hideouts of Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) militants. These operations have intensified after the withdrawal of the United States from Iraq, which is not yet capable of securing its airspace."  AFP notes, "A high-ranking Iraqi official said the decision was aimed at Turkish military bases in the north Iraq province of Dohuk, one of the three provinces that make up the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG)" and that, "Ties between Iraq and Turkey have been marred by a flurry of disputes, including Ankara's refusal to extradite Iraqi Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi, who has been sentenced to death in absentia by an Iraqi court."  Reuters reminds that, "The Baghdad government's power over Iraq's autonomous Kurdistan region is limited."   The announcement came as Al Jazeera reported, "Turkish security forces have killed 12 Kurdish rebels in fighting, including two women who attempted to infiltrate from neighbouring Iraq, local security sources said."     Just yesterday, September was hailed as the most violent month in Iraq in two years, while today violence continues as does fear and silence.  On fear, Alsumaria reports that in Basara accusations are being tossed around following the assassination last Thursday of former Governor (2005 to 2009) Mohammed Misbah Waili with some accusing a clan within the province and the clan accusing unnamed foreign powers.   On the silence, Mohamad Ali Harissi (AFP) reports that Sunday's violence (at least 33 dead, at least 106 injured, according to AFP's count) was met with silence and that no sympathy was expressed or violence noted on the websites of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, President Jalal Talabani or Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi, that -- like the three politicians -- state TV channel Iraqiya focused on football and ignored the violence, that the bulk of the papers ignored the violence and the official government paper al-Sabah waited until page four to mention the violence and then under the headline "Bagdad Operations [Command] announces foiling an attempted terrorist plot with eight car bombs."  Al Rafidyan carries the AFP report here.  Today, Alsumaria reports the corpses of 3 men wearing fire fighter uniforms were found in Baghdad and that a Baquba roadside bombing left 2 people injured, an armed attack in Kirkuk that left 1 street cleaner and two other people injured, a Falluja roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 police officer and left another person injured, 2 corpses were discovered in Tirkt.   In addition, Alsumaria reports a Kirkuk armed attack which left 2 people dead.   On the subject of Kirkuk, All Iraq News reports that Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi and UN Secretary-General's Special Envoy to Iraq's Martin Kobler's deputy Gyorgy Busztin  met to discuss the issue of elections in disputed Kirkuk.  Fearing that no law will be passed in time for provincial elections, al-Nujaifi stated that they will leave it to the three presidencies (President of Iraq Jalal Talabani, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and al-Nujaifi) to resolve the issue.Considering the record for political resolutions in Iraq, that seems more than a bit optimistic. Optimism is what Jalal Talabani seems full of currently as he works Baghdad.  Al Mada reports Talabani continues meeting with the leaders of various poltical partices, blocs and forces -- yesterday with the head of the National Alliance Ibrahim al-Jaafari and the head of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq Ammar al-Hakim.  Jalal is on a listening tour.   Which is fitting since his ceremonial post comes with few actual powers. All Iraq News notes that Ammar al-Hakim talked about the need for a national dialogue when he met with Talabani.   Reallly?  Then maybe al-Hakim should have supported the call for a National Conference.  Remember that?  December 21st, Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi and President Jalal Talabani were both calling for a National Conference.  Nouri stalled it and circumvented it.  He couldn't have done that on his own.  Little Buddy Ammar helped him a great deal.   All Iraq News reports MP Mohammad Iqbal is calling on Talabani to pressure the blocs to modifty their course.  Nice suggestiong but when has Talabani ever had the spine to pressure anyone?        It didn't have to be that way.  As NPR's Deborah Amos observed in the spring of 2010, speaking at Harvard's Shorenstein Center, the ground had been changing in Iraq in 2009 and early 2010 with a move towards secular parties.  Amos is the author of one of the finest books on the Iraq War,  Eclipse of the Sunnis: Power, Exile, and Upheaval in the Middle East.        Debora Amos:  It was quite possible as you looked at the new configuration that there would be a move away from the dominance of the Shi'ite parties. That there would be some reconciliation.  They [Iranian regime] were not happy about that and they have been very public about the fact that they want no Ba'athists -- [Iranian President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad said this in a public speech, no Ba'athists will ever run Iraq again.  They clearly backed the Shi'ite religious parties and the politics of the country was shifting a bit.  In the middle of all of this arise one of the most remarkable politicians in Iraq and he's played all kinds of roles in that country including a spoiler.  And he dropped a political bombshell into the political process of that country and this was in January when Ahmed Chalabi's protege Ali Faisal al-Lami who is the executive director of the de-Ba'athification Commission, they blacklisted 500 candidates and they disqualified them by accusing them of either being Ba'athists or having links to the Ba'athist Party.  Not every name of the 500 was Sunnis but the attack was clearly against these new, secular, mixed parties.  That's where most of the names came from.  But there were enough Sunnis that this aggrieved minority felt what they were looking at was a witch hunt.  And that's the reaction that you're seeing now -- that they feel like they're being targeted.  What's interesting is both Chalabi and al-Lami are candidates themselves and they were running on the Shi'ite Islamist Party.  In talking to analysts about Iraq, what they say is it was a move worthy of Karl Rove because it was both brilliant and cynical at the same time. And what is showed was a complete understanding of the weaknesses of Iraq's political culture.  In addition, it took Washington completely by surprise.  They never saw it coming.  And so there reactions have been slow and ineffective.  And as the political theater has played out in Iraq, this election which should have been about corruption, about lack of services, about security, about the role of Iran, about the drawdown of American troops which -- all combat troops are to be withdrawn by August of 2010 -- what this election has become about what I said: Warning wind.  This could be the strategey -- this anti Ba'athist, 'Ba'athists are under the bed, Ba'athists are coming to get you' -- this could be the comeback strategy for the Shi'ite Islamist parties who have nothing to show in terms of services and governance but can certainly win on the votes of fear.  It is a complete reversal from where the country was  just a year ago.  And it shows how weak the political culture is that it could take an event like banning 500 political candidates to turn this whole election into a referendum on Ba'athists -- which was essentially rendered defunked in 2003.  It may propel these parties back into office but it is as likely to put off political reconciliation because we are as far away from that today as we were in 2007.     It could have been so different.  Political reconciliation still hasn't taken place.  It could have been so difficult.  Amos says the White House was taken by surprise.  Again, it's past time that this administration's actions with regards to Iraq were analyzed.       Why was Iraq ignored?  Why wasn't the White House able to provide Iraq with a stable ambassador?  Barack's been in the White House less than four years and he's had four nominees for Ambassador to Iraq -- three were confirmed (Chris Hill, James Jeffery and most recently Robert S. Beecroft) and one withdrew (Brett McGurk).       Iraq needed stability.  Why was the White House unable to provide that?  The White House couldn't even provide an ambassador who could serve out a four year term.  Why did the White House refuse to back the Iraqi people who voted Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya first in the 2010 parliamentary elections, not Nouri's State of Law?  Why didn't the White House show respect for rule of law, for democracy and for free and fair elections?     Last week, John Barry's "'The Engame' Is A Well Researched, Highly Critical Look at U.S. Policy in Iraq" (The Daily Beast) posted: Washington has little political and no military influence over these developments. As Michael Gordon and Bernard Trainor charge in their ambitious new history of the Iraq war, The Endgame, Obama's administration sacrificed political influence by failing in 2010 to insist that the results of Iraq's first proper election be honored: "When the Obama administration acquiesced in the questionable judicial opinion that prevented Ayad Allawi's bloc, after it had won the most seats in 2010, from the first attempt at forming a new government, it undermined the prospects, however slim, for a compromise that might have led to a genuinely inclusive and cross-sectarian government."     It would be really great if the press could do their job and ask the questions that need to be asked but we really don't have a free and fair press in the United States.  We have a press that's encouraged to play favorites instead of encouraged to do their jobs which is how for two years they avoided asking the question of how, if the US government wanted to bring democracy to Iraq, the White House could ignore the Iraqis who went to the polls, risked violence to register their vote because they believed the lies of the US government.  They went to the polls, they voted and they found their votes overturned by the US government.     A real press, a functioning press, would've asked questions.  No one did.  Don't you find that strange?     Gail Collins can act like a trashy whore writing about the Romney family dog repeatedly in one wasted column after another, but she can't ask the needed questions?  She's a whore who works the street her pimp tossed her out on, don't mistake her for a journalist.     It's amazing that a unibrowed professional nutcase like Gail Collins is repeatedly allowed to waste the country's time telling and retelling the story of the dog while ignoring the Iraqi people and their will was overturned, how democracy was subverted and how that happened not in spite of but because of the White House.       Yeah, Barack's got a lot of questions to answer but, no, they won't ask the questions in the pretense that passes for a free and fair media in the United States.     Don't expect the questions at any of the faux debates this month either.  Nellie Bailey and Glen Ford are the hosts of the weekly  Black Agenda Radio (here for this week's broadcast) which airs on Progressive Radio Network each Monday from 11:00 am to noon EST.  This week, Black Agenda Report's Bruce Dixon addressed the so-called presidential debates.  Excerpt:     Bruce Dixon: The so-called Presidential Debate Commission is a private corporation founded by leaders of the two corporate parties, who choose the format, the location, the moderators and the questions, and who explicitly draw up the rules to exclude candidates and parties other than Republicans and Democrats.  Although the broadcast airwaves have existed longer than the sun and cable networks everywhere run beneath the public roads and streets, US law lets private corporations determine on their own what political messages reach the population by controlling news and demanding large sums of money for a few seconds of commercials. These large amounts of money can only be gotten from the same plutocratic shot calling individuals and corporations who make the careers of Republicans like Mitt Romney and Democrats like Barack Obama possible.  How irresponsible, how locked down, how deceitfully scripted and divorced from the real world in which most of us live are these presidential debates?  Besides everything the candidates agree upon, and who runs the so-called debate "commission," all you need to know is that one of the marquee sponsors of the 2012 presidential debates, and the 2008 ones as well, is an industry front group called the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity.  Both Republican and Democratic presidential candidates are deep in the pockets of "clean coal," as they are in the pockets of Big Ag, Big Insurance, military contractors, Wall Street and other centers of real power.  One answer to the lack of real discussions presented us by the rigged "commission" on presidential debates will be Occupy The Debates, a project undertaken by Occupy activists in multiple cities, in which a live meeting will entertain live questions from a live audience.  Occupy the Debate's first scheduled public meeting will be in Denver CO, the same night as the first so-called "debate" between the two corporate candidates.  Occupy the Debates will be streamed live on the internet that evening, and will include the participation of Black Agenda Report co-founder Glen Ford.  Several occupy movements around the country are expected to follow suit and organize their own local events over the next few weeks. For more information on real debates on real issues, visit Occupy the Debates either on Facebook or at www.occupythedebates.org -- that's www.occupythedebates.org.         Lastly,  Senator Patty Murray chairs the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee (which holds a joint-hearing this week with the House Veterans Affairs Comittee).  Her office notes: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Matt McAlvanah Monday, October 01, 2012 (202) 224-2834 Chairman Murray's Statement on IG Report Detailing Waste at VA Conferences (Washington, D.C.) – Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray, Chairman of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee, released the following statement after the Office of Inspector General at the Department of Veterans Affairs released a report on their investigation into two conferences in Orlando run by VA's Office of Human Resources and Administration. "I am deeply dismayed by what the Office of Inspector General has found regarding these conferences. The blatant waste of taxpayer dollars and government employees improperly accepting gifts cannot, and will not, be tolerated. "The IG report highlights failures in areas that have continually been problems for VA, including contracting and human resources. I expect the Department to act quickly to address these longstanding shortcomings." ###   Matt McAlvanah Communications Director U.S. Senator Patty Murray 202-224-2834 - press office 202--224-0228 - direct matt_mcalvanah@murray.senate.gov News Releases | Economic Resource Center | E-Mail Updates   Senator Patty Murray's office   Senator Murray's YouTube Channel   Senator Murray's Press Office Twitter Account   RSS Feed for Senator Murray's office           iraq foreign policy josh rogin kristina wong dar addustour the new york times tim arango glen ford bruce dixon black agenda radio nellie bailey afp mohamad ali harissi all iraq news alsumaria al rafidayn al mada niqash waheed ghanim deborah amos

Heart rocks on

That's Isaiah's latest The World Today Just Nuts "The 2,000 Mark"  and yesterday I posted "Kat's Korner: Heart Walkin' Good,"

My review of Heart's new album led to an e-mail from Cowan who wanted to know if I was being straight about the new Heart album -- Fanatic is released tomorrow.

Yes, I was being straight.

As a general rule, I'd rather not slam an album.

An artist has to be really pompous to get me to write a bad review.  And even after I've written it, I will pull it before it goes up.  I slaughtered Madonna's 2008 album.  It was awful.  Hard Candy.  I said it was about as up to date and of the moment as something you'd find at the bottom of your grandma's purse.

And you never read that.

How come?  I was getting ready to post it and Ava said, in passing, "You know Madonna's supporting Hillary, right?"  I didn't.  That was my excuse not to post it.  Those of us supporting Hillary were getting savaged constantly.  That's part of the reason we will never go to Barack.  We remember all the nasty sexism.  But I used that as my excuse not to post the review.

And you know how lazy I am.  That was a completed review.  It only needed typing.  I trashed it.

If someone's pompous, I will take them out.  But for the most part, I avoid reviews that are anti just because if I don't like something the last thing I want to do is write about it.

With Heart, I had reviewed a masterpiece, Red Velvet Ride.  And I thought that was the last Heart review I would ever do.  I didn't expect them to do better than that album and I honestly didn't expect them to match it even.  It was just such a career high for them.  And then comes Fanatic which really is classic Heart with additional wisdom and skill.  Fanatic is an amazing album, one of the best for any group.

I'm not joking about it being the number one album of the year currently.  If I was writing my year-in-review piece right now, Heart would top it.


I love the Wilson sisters so, to be honest, if their album had sucked, I would've just ignored it.

I wouldn't have done a review.

And I felt I said everything with Red Velvet Ride.  So this album, Fanatic, is so great that it forced lazy me to write a review I hadn't planned on writing.  It forced me to get off my lazy ass and write.  It's that great.  If you have been a Heart fan, you are going to be so in love with this album.

You hear 'labor of love" and then you listen and you think, "Why was it called that?"  But Heart's new album really feels like a labor of love.  There's so much love on the album in fact, primarily a love of kick-ass rock and I don't think Alice In Chains could rock this hard right now.  I don't know anyone that could.  Rock on, Heart.


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

Monday, October 1, 2012.  Chaos and violence continue, there are US troops in Iraq (who knew! -- not the bulk of the US press which keeps lying), the Sadr bloc wants the National Alliance to explore replacing Nouri as prime minister, the amnesty law was scheduled for a vote today but no vote took place, John Kerry is proven right again, and more.       Josh Rogin (Foreign Policy) reports this afternoon:   In its final act before leaving town earlier this month, Congress passed a continuing resolution (CR) that failed to reauthorize the main mission of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq (OSC-I), despite Pentagon warnings that the move could force the military to withdraw hundreds of U.S. troops who are still in Baghdad helping to develop the Iraqi security forces and working with them on counterterrorism. The authority for U.S. forces to train and assist the Iraqi security forces expired Sunday.       B-b-but, everyone says all US troops left Iraq!  September 2nd, Scott Horsley declared on Weekend Edition (NPR), "There are no more US troops in Iraq."  And Horsley's NPR's correspondent for Barack Obama's re-election campaign so he should know, right?   He damn well should know but he's just one more whore passing themselves off as a reporter (which is why we awarded him "Biggest Damn Liar of the Week" at Third).  Why is so damn difficult for the US media to report the truth?  Are they that vested in whoring for Barack Obama?  We've noted the truth here and lived to tell.  We've received thank you e-mails from the families of US troops still in Iraq, glad that someone, anyone, doesn't repeat the lie, doesn't pretend that their loved ones aren't in Iraq.  Why the hell does the media lie?    John Glaser (Antiwar.com) observes:   Most Americans have been led to believe that all US forces besides those guarding the massive American Embassy in Iraq have been withdrawn since the end of last year. But small units of up to 300 troops have remained in Baghdad to train Iraqi security forces and provide aid and support, allegedly for counter-terrorism operations. In reality, US troops have been providing this support to elite Iraqi forces that report directly to the increasingly authoritarian Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. They have essentially been used as a secret police force for Maliki to attack, detain, and torture his political opponents and crack down harshly on public dissent.     Some are just stupid.  Case in point, Roger Cohen, columnist for the New York Times and the bare remnants of the International Herald Tribune, who writes today:  "He has extracted the United States from a costly war (Iraq); [. . .]."  Just how stupid are you, Roger Cohen?  And shouldn't you be required to read your own damn paper?   Last week, Tim Arango (New York Times) reported, "Iraq and the United States are negotiating an agreement that could result in the return of small units of American soldiers to Iraq on training missions. At the request of the Iraqi government, according to General Caslen, a unit of Army Special Operations soldiers was recently deployed to Iraq to advise on counterterrorism and help with intelligence."   Repeating: How stupid are you, Roger Cohen?  And do you even read the paper that pays you a salary?  You look like an ass in front of the whole world and that's on you because you can't even read the coverage from your own paper.   Of course, Roger may not be stupid, he may just enjoy whoring like so many of his peers.     Regardless, the American people are not being informed by the alleged news media.  Despite Tim Arango's report, there were no headlines about the negotiations for a return, there were no headlines about more Special-Ops going into Iraq (Tom Hayden did cover the Special-Ops aspect in a blog post at The Nation -- no, that doesn't seem like a lot but it's more than The Progressive, Democracy Now!, In These Times, et al did.).   So much gets ignored including yesterday's attacks which mainly served to remind the country of how few US outlets have reporters in Iraq.  Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) notes Iraq witnesses its second deadliest day of the month on Sunday. (September 9th was the deadliest day).   BBC (link is text and video) offered, "Civilians were among those killed and injured in the attacks around the capital, but the aim of the attackers seems to have been to kill as many security personnel as possible, wherever they could reach them, says the BBC's Rami Ruhayem in Baghdad."  Jamal Hashim (Xinhua) counted 34 dead and 85 injured while explaining, "In and near the Iraqi capital, eight car bomb explosions and gunfire attacks killed up to 25 people and wounded 59 others, according to the police reports." Kareem Raheem, Suadad al-Salhy and Sophie Hares (Reuters) added, "Two more policemen were killed when a car bomb went off in the town of Balad Ruz, 90 km (55 miles) northeast of Baghdad, and bomb planted in a parked car in al Qaeda stronghold Mosul killed a civilian." Most reports floated al Qaeda in Iraq as the culprit.  The Irish Examiner quotes MP Hakim al-Zamili who sits on the Security and Defense Committee stating, "Al-Qaida leaders have no intention of leaving this country or letting Iraqis live in peace.  Thus, we should expect more attacks in the near future. The situation in Iraq is still unstable ... and repetition of such attacks shows that our security forces are still unqualified to deal with the terrorists."   Today Alsumaria reports that Moqtada al-Sadr's bloc has stated that Nouri's prime responsibility as prime minister is to ensure security and that he's failed at that.  So in today's press conference they announced the need for an emergency metting by the National Alliance to explore Nouri's fate.  All Iraq News reports the Sadr bloc is questioning whether it isn't time to replace Nouri due to the continued violence.      If the series of assaults were part of the Islamic State of Iraq's Breaking The Walls campaign, they will no doubt claim credit in the next few days.    July 22nd, the Islamic State of Iraq released an audio recording announcing a new campaign of violence entitled Breaking The Walls which would include prison breaks and killing "judges and investigators and their guards."  (They also threatened to attack America on US soil.)  They are only one group in Iraq resorting to violence.  On the continued violence, Mohammed Tawfeeq offered this framework, "The violence comes just days after dozens of prisoners broke out of a jail in the northern Iraqi city of Tikrit. Among those who got out Thursday were several al Qaeda members on death row, according to authorities. The jailbreak occurred when armed men detonated two car bombs at the gates of Tasfirat jail. The explosions triggered clashes with security forces." September in Iraq ended with a wave of violence.  Mohammed Tawfeeeq (CNN) reports last month was the deadliest month in Iraq "since August 2010" according to figures supplied by the Ministry of the Interior which states there were 365 deaths.  AFP adds, "It was the highest monthly toll given by the government since August 2010, when figures showed 426 people were killed and 838 wounded in attacks." All Iraq News notes the ministry's figures for number injured is 683. Which outlet tabulating came the closest to the number provided by Iraq's ministries?  The Associated Press counted "nearly 200 people" and  AFP's tally for the month is 253 killed.  365?  Looks like everyone got it wrong and -- Oh, wait.  Iraq Body Count's total was 356.  By Price Is Right logic (closest without going over), Iraq Body Count wins.  And if those number succeed in demonstrate anything, hopefully, they indicate that it's past time for the press to return to citing IBC in their monthly look-back pieces.     A question to ask is why, after a non-stop pattern of undercounting deaths each month, the Ministry of the Interior suddenly didn't low ball? Is the Ministry under control of Nouri at war with him?  Or, more likely, did Nouri okay an accurate number being released?  After months and months when the official number from the Iraqi government was 100 or more short with each release, what's going on? If I were someone who had stated that getting most US troops out of Iraq was a good thing and I was in negotiations with the White House to bring some troops back in, I think I'd need to make an argument that they were needed.  One way I'd do that would be by noting the high fatalities. Maybe that's what's going on, maybe not. But the violence continues today. Alsumaria notes a Falluja bombing today has claimed the life of 1 soldier and left two more injured, a Diyala Province bombing that claimed the lives of 2 women and 1 man, and a Baghdad armed attack killed 1 person.  All Iraq News identifies the person killed in Baghdad as the Administrative and Financial Director of the Parks Dept.  and they note a Mosul home invasion in which 1 woman and her daughter were killed,  1 Iraqi soldier was injured in a clash near the Syrian border with unknown assailants.  KUNA notes a Baghdad car bombing claimed 1 life and left four people injured and a Tikrit bombing claimed 2 lives and left three people injured.  Alsumaria also reports that a Kirkuk roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 farmer (Mohammed Sawadi) and a Salahuddin Province roadside bombing left two police officers injured. Today's attacks come as Iraq's still recoiling from yesterday's attacks which  claimed 34 lives and left at least eighty-five injured.   Al Mada notes that a member of Parliament's Committee on Security and Defense declared that the bombings will continue for as long as the political crisis does.  Iraq has been a political stalemate for over a year.      Let's revisit those elections.  Deborah Amos is a journalist for NPR.  She wrote a [PDF format warning] paper in June of 2010 about the March 2010 elections and Iraqi media.  In the March elections, Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya had bested Nouri's political slate State of Law.  Amos:   In the 2010, campaign, Maliki's party was primarily a sectarian political list of Shiite candidates with a few Sunni political figureheads.  In contrast, Allawi's political coalition was a cross-sectarian list.  While Allawi is a Shiite, he headed a party consisting of Sunni political leaders from western and northern Iraq and some Shiite politicians who believed it was time to move beyond sectarian politics if Iraq is to achieve national unity. In Iraq's short history of free elections, Shiite candidates have a demographic advantage.  Shiites are approximately 60% of the population, and Iraqis voted almost exclusively along sectarian lines in the 2005 national elections and the 2009 provincial vote.  Maliki also had a media advantage.  The state-run national news network did not accept paid campaign advertisements, but freely broadcast extensive reports of Maliki's election appearances and campaign speeches in evening news bulletins.  On the eve of the vote, state TV broadcast a documentary highlighting the Prime Minister's visit to security checkpoints around the capital.  Maliki is widely credited with an improvement in the day-to-day security in the capital and in the south, but his pre-election inspection of the security checkpoints was seen as a long campaign ad.  According to domestic media monitorying reports of state-runtelevision, Al-Iraqiya, Maliki's political coalition received by far the "highest positive coverage" when compared with all other political parties in the campaign. When it came to the vote, Allawi demonstrated that sectarian voting patterns could be broken.  A small percentage of Shiites voted for a party that included Sunnis on the ticket which helped deliver the two-seat lead.  Prime Minister Maliki charged widespread fraud and demanded a recount to prevent "a return to violence."  He pointedly noted that he remained the commander in chief of the armed forces. Was Maliki threatening violence?  Was he using the platform of state-run media to suggest that his Shiite-dominated government would not relinquish power to a Sunni coaltion despite the election results?    Yes, that is what he was doing.  And he had the White House's backing.   But let's pause for a moment to note that Amos is the author of one of the finest books on the Iraq War,  Eclipse of the Sunnis: Power, Exile, and Upheaval in the Middle East.  Too many books supposedly about the Iraq War disappear the Iraqis -- not so with Deborah Amos' book.         Following the March 2010 elections, there was an 8-month political stalemate when Nouri al-Maliki refused to let the winning slate Iraqiya have first crack at forming a government (the Constitution gave Iraqiya that right).  With the White House's backing, Nouri brought things to a standstill.  In November 2010, the US brokered a contract known as the Erbil Agreement.  It was a list of concessions by Nouri in exchange for getting a second term as prime minister despite his State of Law coming in second in the elections.  Leaders of all the political blocs -- including Nouri -- signed off on the contract.  Nouri used it to grab a second term and then trashed it, insisting that elements would be implemented shortly.  By the summer of 2011, Iraqiya, the Kurds and Moqtada al-Sadr's bloc were calling for the Erbil Agreement to be implemented.  This is the current political stalemate.  It is upgraded to a political crisis in December 2011 when Nouri's previous crackdowns on Sunnis and Iraqiya members moves to Baghdad with him targeting Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi and Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq.  Worth noting again from last week, John Barry's "'The Engame' Is A Well Researched, Highly Critical Look at U.S. Policy in Iraq" (The Daily Beast): Washington has little political and no military influence over these developments. As Michael Gordon and Bernard Trainor charge in their ambitious new history of the Iraq war, The Endgame, Obama's administration sacrificed political influence by failing in 2010 to insist that the results of Iraq's first proper election be honored: "When the Obama administration acquiesced in the questionable judicial opinion that prevented Ayad Allawi's bloc, after it had won the most seats in 2010, from the first attempt at forming a new government, it undermined the prospects, however slim, for a compromise that might have led to a genuinely inclusive and cross-sectarian government."   The White House could have stood by democracy and will of the people but elected not to.   Dar Addustour notes that Parliament met today with four bills on their schedule -- the infrastructure bill and the amnesty bill among them. The two were on Thursday's schedule as well, along with the line of credit (not on the schedule today). There was a walk out by Iraqiya and the Kurdistan Alliance over the infrastructure bill and that ended the session on Thursday. Before the session started, Al Mada reported that the infrastructure bill was seen as the most important and that the Kurdistan Alliance was stating they had not been persuaded to support it. Alsumaria notes that, first, votes were postponed due to the failuer to meet a quorum and now the vote on the infrastructure bill has been kicked back to October 9th. All Iraq News adds that State of Law is accusing Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi of burying the bill, arguing that he could have had a quorum at several points in today's session but refused to call for a count when that was possible.     AKnews becomes the latest press outlet to go out of business.  This means even more in Iraq where an independent press should be thriving.  The outlet serving the Kurdistan region was started in October 2008 and it was a daily outlet.  Sunday the General Director of AKnews Bedran Ahmed Habeeb reported, "AKnews will stop boradcasting and at the time of writing these words it has already been shut down.  I'm deeply sorry that due to heavy financial burden, we had to close down AKnews.  During my carrier I have worked in many cultural foundations and established many by myself.  Among all the foundations I established, I was happy with AKnews.  I believe it would, most than all foundations, serve a message which I carried since a very young age: rescuing my country from the oppression and establishing a prosperous and free community. At the beginning I thought expending money for this high goal should not be measured.  However, the cost for running this news agency was beyond the capacity of Aras Publishers which founded AKnews.  AKnews was a completely independent news agency.  In the almost four years of operating, we never bent, even slightly, for a political party, unless there was something which passed through by mistake."   At the end of June 2010, Deborah Amos authored [PDF format warning] "Confusion, Contradiction and Irony: The Iraqi Media in 2010," a paper for Harvard's Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy.  Amos noted that "nearly 16 million" -- in a country of approximately 30 million -- have exposure to the TV news media.    Iraq's media landscape had become a mirror of Iraq's political-sectarian divisions. This divide had driven the country to devastating violence from 2005 to 2007 and now has evolved into a political power struggle with satellite television ownership representing the power players.  There are no neutral outlets.  In a landmark 2007 study, researcher Ibrahim Al-Marashi described Iraq's media as powerful sectarian empires" coalesced around ethno-political groups in Iraq who have print, radio and TV communications at their disposal."     In the emerging Iraq, every press voice is needed and necessary.  The closure of AKnews is very sad news.   Very sad also describes Victoria Nuland.  The US State Dept spokesperson -- Dick Cheney's right-hand during the lead up to and early days of the Iraq War (helped with planning, messaging and so much more) -- Victoria Nuland tried to smack down US Senator John Kerry last month.  Maybe that's how she got Cheney's attention but all it did with John Kerry is prove him wrong and prove her hopelessly out of her league.   It starts with a September 20th Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on the nomination of Robert S. Beecroft to be US Ambassador to Iraq. We covered that hearing in the Wednesday and Thursday snapshots. Kerry's questioning is in the Wednesday snapshot. Like others on the Committee, he was frustrated with the use of Iraqi air space to carry goods into Syria. (The Senate, like the White House, believes this is taking place. Nouri al-Maliki's government denies that it is.)     Chair John Kerry: Can you share with me an answer to the issue I raised about the Iranians using American airspace in order to support [Syrian President Bashar] Assad? What are we doing, what have you been doing -- if anything, to try to limit that use?       Charge d'Affaires Robert S. Beecroft: I have personally engaged on this repeatedly at the highest levels of Iraqi government. My colleagues in Baghdad have engaged on this. We're continuing to engage on it. And every single visitor representing the US government from the Senate, recently three visitors, to administration officials has raised it with the Iraqis and made very clear that we find this unnaceptable and we find it unhelpful and detrimental to the region and to Iraq and, of course -- first and foremost, to the Syrian people. It's something that needs to stop and we are pressing and will continue to press until it does stop.       Chair John Kerry: Well, I mean, it may stop when it's too late. If so many people have entreated the government to stop and that doesn't seem to be having an impact -- uh, that sort of alarms me a little bit and seems to send a signal to me: Maybe -- Maybe we should make some of our assistance or some of our support contingent on some kind of appropriate response? I mean it just seems completely inappropriate that we're trying to help build their democracy, support them, put American lives on the line, money into the country and they're working against our insterest so overtly -- agains their own interests too -- I might add.       Charge d'Affaires Robert S. Beecroft: Senator, Senator, I share your concerns 100%. I'll continue to engage. And, with your permission, I will make very clear to the Iraqis what you've said to me today -- and that is you find it alarming and that it may put our assistance and our cooperation on issues at stake.       Chair John Kerry: Well I think that it would be very hard. I mean, around here, I think right now there's a lot of anxiety about places that seem to be trying to have it both ways. So I wish you would relay that obviously and I think that members of the Committee would -- would want to do so.       Kerry and the Committee were in agreement on this.  Victoria Nuland would comment Thursday in the US State Dept press briefing.       QUESTION: But you've been protesting all along about this issue. Yesterday, Senator Kerry warned Iraq. Are you going to further pressure Iraq and warn about the aid to Maliki government?     MS. NULAND: Well, Senator Kerry has obviously made his own statements. We do not support linking U.S. assistance to Iraq to the issue of the Iranian over-flights precisely because our assistance is in part directed towards robust security assistance, including helping the Iraqis build their capability to defend their airspace. So there's a chicken/egg thing here.   What a sad and inexperienced State Dept.  This was the only pressure that the US had in the diplomatic tool kit.  Kerry was willing to use the tool kit, Victoria Nuland was more concerned with appeasing Nouri al-Maliki.  As we noted in the September 21st snapshot:   It's a shame she couldn't back up Kerry and it's a shame she couldn't have just said she'd get back to them on it. Instead, she had to waive the white flag. Always. Reuters reported today, "Iraq denied permission to a North Korean plane bound for Syria to pass through Iraqi airspace last Saturday because it suspected it could be carrying weapons, a senior official said on Friday." On Friday, they announce the denial six days prior of a North Korean plane? Why? Because they feel and fear the pressure from the proposal John Kerry and others on the Committee floated. So now they're making some sort of effort to say, "Well, we're at least doing this." And making it because they want the US money. So, Alsumaria reports, Nouri told US Vice President Joe Biden on the phone today -- I would say whined -- that he was being doubted about his Syrian position by US officials and that this wasn't fair. Point being, John Kerry and the Committee knew what they were doing. Again, it's a shame that Nuland was so quick to raise the white flag at the State Dept yesterday. Already, Kerry and his Committee floating the idea has had impact. It's not yet where they want it, but it could get there. If Nuland and company would stop undercutting the Senate. There's more here but we'll pick it up next week, hopefully on Monday. Nuland doesn't have the sense to be embarrassed but if anyone has bragging rights today, it's John Kerry and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee which, in less than 48 hours, have accomplished more than all the talk and talk and talk with Nouri that the State Dept's done for months now.     Yesterday, Reuters reported, "Iraq will ask Syria-bound Iranian planes passing through its airspace to land for random inspections after Washington said they could be ferrying arms to Damascus, the Iraqi foreign minister said in an interview."  Maybe next time, the State Dept should be a little less eager to try to slap down John Kerry?  He's three years shy of the thirty year mark for service in the Senate.  Might he know a thing or two about diplomacy?  You'd think a Democratic administration would grasp that it's not really smart to pick fights with a Democratic Senator -- but maybe Victoria Nuland thinks she's still working for Dick Cheney?  Who knows.  Yet again, Kerry has been proven correct.  Events have demonstrated that he was right to float the notion that US funds could be denied.  It would be really big of Nuland to note that Kerry was correct in a State Dept press briefing but I won't hold my breath.       On a personal note, we are delinking from Courage to Resist.  Fair or not, I've had it with the brother and sister team of Rebecca and David Solnit.  When they insulted and trashed two friends of mine and I got stuck commenting on their book, I high roaded it and stayed focused on that awful book.  In part because of Courage to Resist but in part because no one was going to read that damn book.  And no one did.  And there have been other things I've overlooked.  But I really have an allergy to the freaks who hide in political closets.  I especially have an allergy when these freaks -- non-Democrats -- decided they are the Democratic Party's enforcers.  No offense, Rebecca, but Democrats don't need non-Democrats telling them what to do.  And 360.org may be all the craze of American Communists and Socialists who hide in the closet but we have no interest in that crap-ass group.  Lambert of Corrente linked to this strong piece at L'Hote by Freddie which led to people using the links and discovering that Rebecca Solnit's trying to play enforcer for the Democratic Party.   Rebecca, if she really wanted to help Barack, should probably close her mouth and stop speaking.  Though Barack will take any voter's vote gladly, Team Obama doesn't really want to be associated with or linked to the Red vote -- that's caused them more p.r. problems than anything else, you can check with David Axelrod on that.     Is that really reason to ban her and her brother David?  Actually, it is.  Your vote is your vote.  We have stressed this repeatedly.  People like Rebecca who long for totalitarian regimes don't respect the people or the will of the people so that would be enough all by itself.  But David was already on my s**t list.  He got there last week, as did Courage to Resist, when they posted something that was not helpful to say the least.    There are US war resisters in Canada.  They deserve support.  I'm not really sure how the so-called report on Skyler James that went up helps war resisters in Canada.  I'm confused  mainly because it doesn't help them.  Maybe I'm missing some subtext not having a Marxist ring to decode Bob Meola's text?   I asked a friend who's a centrist military attorney to look at it.  He doesn't believe any of Skyler James' charges and accusations.  I then shopped it around to three friends in DoD.  I wasn't looking to find out if the charges were true or not (I'll take Skyler James at her word), I was trying to see what the reaction was to those who don't already support war resisters.  And the reaction was no one believed Skyler's claims of mistreatment -- which means that the Canadian government most likely won't either.    So when you leave her claims of no toilet paper and having trouble catching a ride to the mess hall and other things aside, what you're left with is Skyler James left Canada, returned to the US and wasn't tortured, wasn't even imprisoned.  She was free to roam the base.   If you're missing it, that's not how life was for Robin Long.  Nor for Clifford Cornell.  It's probably not how life's going to be for Kim Rivera.  But it certainly does help the Stephen Harper's government's argument that war resisters are not treated unfairly.  "After three and a half months of being back in the states," Skyler tells Courage to Resist, "and doing paper work to do a Chapter 10 in lieu of a court martial, Colerman finally put in the paper for the Chapter 10 discharge in lieu of court martial.  About a week later, Adrian Haddad, my civilian attorney let me know that it was approved."   How does that help the war resisters in Canada?  It doesn't.  It, in fact, makes Harper's case for him. Skyler James wasn't your typical war resister.  She was resisting the Afghanistan War, for one thing, and not many did that who publicly went to Canada.  But most importantly, she is a lesbian.  Because of what she was claiming when she went public in Canada, it's very doubtful the US military would risk dragging the process through the press.  Skylar was victimized in the military because of who she was and that victimization is why she was hustled out of the military quickly.  It's a real shame Courage to Resist couldn't be bothered with that.   Instead they've written and posted online what can be evidence for the Canadian government when they try to to deport the next US war resister.  When Alyssa Manning argues to the courts that the war resister will suffer harsh treatement, Immigration Minister Jason Kenney can just introduce the Courage to Resist article into the record.  I'll tell you how it reads to people who don't support war resisters because I heard it from everyone I showed the article to.  Skyler James was taken to the base  Fort Campbell while the military determined what to do.  On the base, she was not locked up.  She was not restricted in movement.  She freely traveled around the base.  On Memorial Day weekend she partied (and they believe she was drugged or she did drugs).  None of that helps war resisters in Canada.  I have no idea why the useless article was run by an advocay group.  Or a so-called advocacy group.  And if you're wondering why Canadians -- not Courage to Resist -- floating applying pressure to Barack to save Kim Rivera, it's because Cowards Don't Resist won't stand up to Barack.  I'm tired of the Solnits and their faux actions.  They've compromised whatever integrity they did have.         iraq foreign policy josh rogin antiwar.com john glaser dar addustour al mada the new york times tim arango  cnn mohammed tawfeeq deborah amos kuna all iraq news alsumaria afp