Friday, May 17, 2013.  Chaos and violence continue, today is said to have the highest death toll in eight months, a new protest takes place in Baghdad, Ammar al-Hakim visits the First Lady, the war on the AP continues, the House Ways and Means Committee holds a surreal hearing on the IRS scandal, and more. 


Today, Danny Schecter the-so-called 'News Dissector' writes, "It turns out there is much more to the story about the government investigating leaks to the AP. It turns out the news and the government had been negotiating, about when to release the story, and the AP had held its story for five days and was wrangling with the White House over who would break it suggesting that there may be questionable practices on both sides." Don't you just hate stupid?

Does it turn out that way?  Today?  Friday, it turns out that way?

The scandal broke Monday.  Check Monday's snapshot -- it's in there. "It turns out there is much more to the story," Danny huffs, breathless from waddling back from the fridge.  Not only did we, and anyone else with a brain, note that the AP had been in discussions with the government, but the article from a year ago (which prompted the investigation) noted it as well -- we pointed that out in Monday's snapshot: "As Goldman and Apuzzo noted in their original report, the White House and the CIA knew AP would be reporting this and AP delayed the story for a week at their request."

This is not new information.  Danny Schechter is a deeply disturbed individual. Failed careers at CNN and ABC (as well as online) clearly have a lot to do with his inability to register the world around him.  In 1979, The Progressive published Howard Moreland's landmark article "The H-bomb Secret: How we got it and why we're telling it."  The Progressive was in talks with the government.  They couldn't reach an agreement and that's why there was a lawsuit.  (The magazine rightly prevailed in the case.)  Woodward and Bernstein's Watergate stories?  The articles needed responses from the government for the paper to publish them.  That can be seen as negotiations as well.

He's a deeply stupid man, deeply.  I don't know the full extent of the conversations AP and the government had.  I don't really care.  I know that what happened was wrong and that you call it out.  Just like with the IRS scandal (which we'll address later in the snapshot).  Danny wants to poop on it because "Did the right-wingers now crying bloody murder ever speak up when the IRS harassed its enemies?"  Oh, heaven help us all.  That's the criteria for outrage from a media watchdog?  Because it sounds like the 'critique' offered by a three-year-old in the midst of a tantrum.

Did little Danny miss his afternoon nap?  Whether or not the other side spoke out about ___?  Who the hell cares?  I am not responsible for the actions of Generic Republican. I am responsible for my actions.  I can't control whether someone else is ethical, I can control whether I am.  What happened was outrageous. So you call it out.  Danny wants to go off on soft money.  Soft money corrupting elections? Yeah, we called out the IRS targeting on Monday and also managed called out the influence of soft money.  We've already been there.  For someone who writes a daily dissection, he sure is behind the times

On Benghazi, Danny dumps, "Former CIA analyst Melvin Goodman has come forward to question whether this office in Benghazi was really a consulate as we have been but an 'intelligence platform'  for use in a covert war that the sacking of the embassy became part of. "  Did Mel Goodman do that?  Wow.  What a genius.  Of course we noted that back in October when we attended the first hearing on Benghazi. See, US House Rep Jason Chaffetz kept saying during that hearing that things were being revealed in questions that shouldn't be and calling for the Chair to stop the revelations.  If you hadn't figure it out by then, when Chaffetz walked over to the Chair and neither appeared to know that people could hear them speaking, you should have grasped it then. If you didn't know it was a CIA outpost in October, I don't know what to tell you because I'm afraid you're brain dead.  It was also a 'consulate.'  It was a consulate that would, per Hillary Clinton's wishes, open before the end of 2012.  Maybe in six months when someone in the echo chamber Danny gets his spin from mentions that, suddenly he'll again be proclaiming, breathlessly, "it looks like there's much more to the story." Danny Schechter, stop dancing from foot to foot, go sit back on your potty chair, take care of your business and let the grown ups talk.


In peace news, the world's a little better today.  Eliana Raszewski (Bloomberg News) reports Jorge Videla has died in an Argentine prison ("from natural causes") where he was serving out his life sentence for running "the country's military junta from 1976 to 1981" -- The Dirty War which claimed the lives of thousands.  Raszewksi quotes  Ricard Gil Lavedra ("one of the judges who passed the [life] sentences in 1985") stating, "Videla will be remembered as a dictator whoplaneted death in Argentina.  He led the most bloody dictatorship that we ever had."  Adam Bernstein (Washington Post) observes of the dead despot, "He had spent his final decades consumed by legal battles stemming from the dictatorship and, in recent years, was convicted of human rights abuses such as the systematic abduction of infants from suspected left-wing radicals."  The Buenos Aires Herald also quotes Ricardo Gil Lavedra (who now serves in the Parliament) stating that "democracy judged him and gave him the opportunity for defense, an opportunity he refused to give to thousands of people. Unfortunately, he never showed remorse for what he did.  He is top responsible for a plan which ended the lives of thousands of Argentineans." In 1976, then-Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger visited the regime and declared that the thug "is a very dedicated, very intelligent man who is doing what is best for his country."  When does Kissinger go to prison?   The Buenos Aires Herald explains:


Rights groups say up to 30,000 people were "disappeared" - a euphemism for kidnapped and murdered - during the dictatorship, which began in March 1976 when Videla and two other military leaders staged a coup against President Maria Estela Martinez de Peron, the widow of former leader Juan Domingo Peron.
Argentina's left-wing guerrilla groups such as the Montoneros had been weakened by the time Videla came to power. He targeted union organizers, students, journalists and anyone else perceived to be associated with communism.


Human Rights Watch issued the following statement on the death:

Jorge Rafael Videla participated in the March 24, 1976 coup d’etat, and acted as de facto president of Argentina until 1981. According to local human rights groups, approximately 30,000 people were “disappeared,” thousands were tortured and arbitrarily detained, and hundreds of babies were stolen and illegally appropriated by other families during the military dictatorship that ended in 1983.
“Videla will be remembered as the man who headed the cruelest dictatorship in Argentine history,” said José Miguel Vivanco, Americas director at Human Rights Watch. “Fortunately, the Argentine judicial system did its job and held him accountable, allowing victims of his atrocities to have access to justice.”
In 1985, Videla was one of the first Latin American dictators to be convicted of crimes against humanity in the emblematic “Trial of the Military Juntas.” He was sentenced to life in prison.
Several important human rights cases were reopened after Congress annulled Argentina’s amnesty laws in 2003 and the Supreme Court confirmed that they were unconstitutional in 2005. Starting in 2005, federal judges struck down pardons that then-President Carlos Menem issued between 1989 and 1990 to former officials, including Videla, convicted of, or facing trial for, human rights violations.
Videla was convicted in a total of three trials, one in 1985, one in 2010, and a third in 2012 for his participation in human rights violations committed during the dictatorship, including torture, kidnappings, homicide, and illegal appropriation of babies. Videla died in prison, where he was serving his sentences.


Australia's ABC reports:

Videla showed little remorse for the systematic abuses that occurred during his presidency, a traumatic five-year upheaval still being felt today.
"Let's say there were 7,000 or 8,000 people who had to die to win the war against subversion," Videla said recently in a prison interview, according to journalist Ceferino Reato.
"We couldn't execute them by firing squad. Neither could we take them to court," Videla was quoted as saying.


In a 1995 piece entitled "Friendly Dictators" (Third World Traveler), Dennis Bernstein and Laura Sydell compiled a list of US-backed dictators

Soon after the coup that brought him to power in 1976 General Jorge Rafael Videla began Argentina's dirty war. All political and union activities were suspended, wages were reduced by 60%, and dissidents were tortured by Nazi and US-trained military and police. Survivors say the torture rooms contained swastikas and pictures of Hitler, Mussolini and Franco. One year after Videla's coup, Amnesty International estimated 15,000 people had disappeared and many were in secret detention camps, but although the U.S. press admitted human rights abuses occurred in Argentina, Videla was often described as a "moderate' who revitalized his nation's troubled economy. Videla had a good public relations firm in the U.S., Deaver and Hannaford, the same firm used by Ronald Reagan, Taiwan, and Guatemala. Videla also received aid from the World Anti-Communist League (WACL), through its affiliate, CAL (Confederation AntiCommunists Latinoamericana). CAL sent millions of dollars to Argentina from the US, including old anti-communist organizations with alliances with the Italian drug mafia. As part of its WACL affiliation, Argentina trained Nicaraguan contras for the US. Videla left office in 1981, and after the Falklands Crisis of 1982, he and his cohorts were tried for human rights abuses by the new government.

Since Reagan is mentioned, we should note Ronald Reagan (a president I didn't care for, to put it mildly) was sworn in as President in January 1981.  Point?  Videla left office later that year.  Point?  1976 is the last year of Gerald Ford's administration and, most importantly, Videla's human rights abuses -- ignored by the United States government -- take place mainly during the four year term (January 1977 to December 1980) of then-President Jimmy Carter.  With regards to Argentina, Reagan would basically embrace them but the Dirty War was largely over in Argentina, he embraced them and used them to fund his contras.  This would grow and grow until the illegal operation became public and was known as Iran-Contra which is considered the biggest blight on his presidency.

When the Dirty War was in full swing, Jimmy Carter was the US President.  Here's 'human rights saint' Carter vouching for the tyrant on September 9, 1977 after he entertained the War Criminal at the White House:

We discussed several items, but the two that we discussed at most length were, first, the question of nonproliferation of nuclear explosives. We are very hopeful that Argentina, which has been in the nuclear field for 25 years in the production of power, will join with other nations in this hemisphere in signing the Treaty of Tlatelolco to prevent any development of explosives. And I was very encouraged by what President Videla had to say.
The other item that we discussed at length was the question of human rights--the number of people who are incarcerated or imprisoned in Argentina, the need for rapid trial of these cases, and the need for Argentina to let the world know the status of the prisoners.
President Videla was very frank with me about pointing out the problems that have existed in Argentina and his commitment to make very rapid progress in the next few months. He wants Argentina to be judged not on his words alone, but on the demonstrable progress that he stated would be made.
We had a thorough discussion, and I think it was one of the most productive and most frank discussions that I've had with any leader.
I've had a chance to visit Argentina in the past and know the tremendous strength of your people and of your economy, the beauty of your nation, and the serious problem that presently exists in the opinion of the world about Argentina because of the repression of human rights and the terrorism that has existed there.
But we have great hopes that rapid progress might be made in alleviating this problem. And I was encouraged by what President Videla had to say.


Does Carter still think it was a good meeting with the despot, does he still "think it was one of the most productive and most frank discussions that I've had with any leader"?  Two years later (when there was no progress made) Carter did send an Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to Argentina September 6, 1979 -- nearly three years after he took office.  Assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs Patricia Derian headed that commission.  That was merely an investigation, a compiling.  The US government did nothing with the results.  Patricia Derian, however, returned to Argentina in 1985 to testify at the trials.

 Nothing changed.  You know who else gathered information?  Adolfo Perez Esquivel.   He was arrested for doing that in August 1977 and thrown into a prison where he was tortured.  His plight and his courage provided the spotlight from the world -- he was honored by, among others Pope John XXIII while he was imprisoned.  This is before Carter ever sends any commission to Argentina.  In May of 1978, he is finally released from the prison.  That's the same year, 1978 -- still before Carter's done anything other than entertain the despot at the White House, Amnesty International names Adolfo Perez Esquivel Political Prisoner of the year.  We're not done.  For his work, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1980.  Telesur TV catches up with him today.  He notes what was done went beyond Jorge Rafael Videla, that it was part of Operation Condor, a terror campaign implemented by right wing dictators in the Southern Cone of Latin America from 1976 to 1980 (Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Paraguqy and Uruguay).   The CIA, the FBI and the US Embassy were helpers in various countries.  In Argentina, in particular, Henry Kissinger was quick to convey, "The quicker you succeed the better. [. . .] If you can finish before Congress gets back, the better."  Click here for the National Security Archive for Kissinger October 1976 visit to Argentina (that's when he conveys the message quoted).



In Juan Mandelbaum's documentary Nuestros Desaparecidos (Our Disappeared), Patricia Derian asks:

What are the principles of this country?  Will we do anything to get what we want?  And the answer has always been yes, that's the sad fact of it.  We've done some wonderful things and helpful and saved people, restored governments.  But we have also -- also had a very dark side.

To be clear, she's not criticizing Carter.  She is criticizing others including Henry Kissinger.  She remains an ardent defender of Carter.  I'm the one pointing out Carter entertained the despot, made nice with him, and over half-way into his first and only presidential term, he sent an exploratory committee.  In the documentary, she notes that she was being given a tour of the Escuela de Mecaninica de la Armada and she states that she tells the officials she's knows they're torturing people on the floors below. She tells them, "I have a map, I know what's happening in every room."  Good for her.  Good for her for calling it out.  But, here's the thing, if Pat had the map and the knowledge, so did Jimmy Carter.  Unlike Pat, Carter had the power to do something.  He did nothing.  Sent a committee.  Wow.  The bravery.  (That's sarcasm.)  In the film, Pat talks about the torture which includes a woman being tortured and they put a rat into her vagina and then stitched it up.  That's what the committee could find and document.  In the fall of 1977.  And Carter did nothing.  Sent a committee which confirmed what was already known.  Did nothing after.

A lot of people do nothing.  Like today with regards to Little Saddam, Nouri al-Maliki, the prime minister and chief thug of Iraq who was installed by Bully Boy Bush in 2006 (the Iraqi Parliament -- who are supposed to be 'the deciders' on this -- wanted Ibrahiam al-Jafaari) and whom the Iraqi people thought they had rid themselves of in 2010 when they voted Iraqiya into first place in parliamentary elections (Barack backed the loser and had the US-goverment broker The Erbil Agreement to go around the country's constitution and the will of the people to give Nouri a second term).

In Iraq, Fridays mean protests -- this wave has been going on since December 21st.  More and more, peaceful protests in Iraq also mean a wave of attacks on participants by Nouri's forces. 

In Ramadi and Falluja, NINA notes that security measures were "tightened" and a security source tells them, "The security services have taken preventive measures to protect the worshipers in the unified prayer which are held in Baquba capital of the province, Balad Ruz, Mandali, Jalawla, and Qaratappa districts."  NINA reports thousands of protesters turned out in Ramadi and Falluja and quotes sit-in organizer Sheikh Mohammed Fayyad stating that the protesters are gathered to send a message to Baghdad that the protests are peaceful and are supported by the Iraqi people.

Nouri's forces did not protect in Baquba.  Iraqi Spring MC reports a Baquba bombing has left many dead.  Protesters and bystanders who attempted to help the wounded to the hospital were attacked and beaten by Nouri's SWAT forces.   SWAT forces also surrounded Baquba General Hospital to prevent people from donating blood.  Nouri's Tigris Operation Command forces ordered the hospital not to reveal the number of dead and wounded they are receiving.  Why is the Iraqi military being used against citizens, why is being used to harass medical providers?


The Washington Institute's Michael Knights argued a few days ago at Foreign Policy that the problem is de-centralization was put into the Iraqi Constitution but then ignored:


But starting in 2008, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki re-centralized power, leaning on an increasingly narrow circle of Shia opponents of the previous dictatorship. And like all successful revolutionaries, this clique is paranoid about counterrevolution and has set about rebuilding a version of the authoritarian system it sought for decades to overthrow. Maliki’s inner circle dominates the selection of military commanders down to brigade level, controls the federal court, and has seized control of the central bank. The executive branch is rapidly eclipsing all checks and balances that were put in place to guarantee a new autocracy did not emerge.
 The root of Iraq’s violence is thus not ancient hatreds between Sunni and Shia or Kurd and Arab, but between decentralizers and recentralizers – and between those who wish to put Iraq’s violent past behind them, and those determined to continually refight it. The demands that have been consistently stated by the Kurdish and Sunni Arab anti-Maliki opposition could not be clearer. First, the opposition demands devolution of fiscal authority to the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) and the provinces, encapsulated in a revenue-sharing law that will provide a formula for the proportion of the budget allocated to the KRG and provinces. Second, it demands the implementation of the system of checks and balances on the executive branch – particularly by empowering parliament and ensuring an independent judiciary. Third, it calls for a comprehensive truth and reconciliation process that provides justice for those damaged by Saddam’s regime, but stops short of collectively punishing Sunnis.


Did the world turn its back on Iraq?  Iraq's Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari tells Aleem Maqbool (BBC News -- link is text and video, quotes are from video),  "We've been several times to hell and back. But Iraq still needs the engagement the commitment of the international community to work out its recent difficulties."  Aleem Maqbool observes, "What Iraqis are asking is why there's not the urgency here and abroad to try to avert what many see as almost invetiable civil war?"  Aziz Alwan (Los Angeles Times) points out, "Sectarian tension among Iraq’s Shiite and Sunni elite have soared in the absence of compromise on the issues raised by Sunni protesters, including resolving the fate of thousands of Sunni detainees and addressing the continued marginalization of those who served in late dictator Saddam Hussein’s Baath Party."  Today the UN News Centre noted:

 

17 May 2013 – The top United Nations official in Iraq today urged Iraqi leaders to protect civilians following a wave of bombings over the past few days which have claimed more innocent lives.
“It is the responsibility of all leaders to stop the bloodshed in this country and to protect their citizens,” said the Secretary-General’s Special Representative in Iraq, Martin Kobler.
“Small children are burned alive in cars. Worshippers are cut down outside their own mosques. This is beyond unacceptable. It is the politicians’ responsibility to act immediately and to engage in dialogue to resolve the political impasse and put an end to this.”
According to media reports, two bombs near a Sunni mosque north of Baghdad killed at least 43 people and wounded more than 80 on Friday. One bomb reportedly exploded as worshippers were departing a mosque in the city of Baquba, while a second went off after people gathered at the scene of the first blast.
Hundreds of people have been killed or wounded in recent clashes across the country, including in Hawija, north of Baghdad, where government helicopters shot at militants hiding in the village, resulting in dozens of people killed or injured.
Mr. Kobler has repeatedly called on Iraqi authorities to take decisive measures to stop the escalating violence. Earlier this month, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged all Iraqis to come together and engage in inclusive dialogue to overcome the “deep political crisis” facing the country.
“Peace must come to this country now. The people of Iraq have suffered enough,” Mr. Kobler said. “We will continue to remind the leaders of Iraq that the country will slide backwards into a dangerous unknown if they do not take action.”


Returning to the topic of protests, Baghdad saw another target of a protest today.  All Iraq News notes that Moqtada al-Sadr is calling for the Bahraini Embassy in Baghdad be closed.  Alsumaria notes that "hundreds" of followers of cleric and movement leader Moqtada attempted to protest outside the embassy today in western Baghdad but were prevented from getting in front of the building by Nouri's forces.


Meanwhile All Iraq News reports Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq leader Ammar al-Hakim met today with First Lady of Iraq Hero Ibrahim Ahmed at her official residence in Sulaimaniya.  There, the First Lady "reassured" al-Hakim "on the health of President Talabani" and al-Hakim stressed that Jalal Talabani was both "a personal and national symbol for all Iraqis, not just the Kurds."  Last December,  Iraqi President Jalal Talabani suffered a stroke.


 The incident took place late on December 17th (see the December 18th snapshot) and resulted in Jalal being admitted to Baghdad's Medical Center Hospital.    Thursday, December 20th, he was moved to Germany.  He remains in Germany currently.  Last week, questions arose regarding Jalal's health.  Friday,  All Iraq News noted that the PUK's Najm al-Din Karim declared that the rumors were false and that "Talabani enjoys good health and has continuous improvement" and "Talabani's health continues to improve day after day."  Monday morning, Nouri launched an effort to replace Jalal as president and by Monday evening it was being announced (by Kurdistan Alliance MP Muhsin al-Sadoun) that Jalal would be doing media appearances "shortly" -- though "shortly" was not defined as hours, weeks or months.    Al-Hayat (translation by Al-Monitor) reports that, in the disputed province of oil-rich Kirkuk, Arab tribes and political parties are saying replacing Jalal Talabani now would send the country further into crisis:

Sheikh Abdul Rahman Monshed al-Assi, a leader in the Arab Political Council, has called upon all related parties "not to lead the country and political forces toward a new conflict through the election of an alternative to Talabani.” He stressed the need to "refer to the constitution and not to exceed its content." The sheikh also demanded that "the nomination be done away from quotas and repartition of positions on a nationalist and sectarian basis, as this would harm the political process and cause crises."
Meanwhile, Arab tribal leaders have criticized "[the parties] for being ungrateful towards Talabani, who has been unbiased and patriotic. Throughout his presidency, Talabani has not dealt with issues on a sectarian basis."
In a statement to Al-Hayat, Sheikh Farhan al-Saadi said, "It is too soon for political blocs to talk about an alternative to President Talabani, as he is still in a difficult health condition."
Muqtada al-Sadr, on the other hand, has declared his support for the nomination of a replacement for Talabani and has called to speed up the measures in this regard. The United Nations Office in Iraq’s Kurdistan region has mentioned several reasons that would hinder the nomination of any alternative. In a statement issued by the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), Sokol Conde, head of the UN Office, said that the "no party alone can take the place of president Talabani. Governance in Iraq was built on the basis of consensus and partnership between political blocs and components, which imposes the attainment of national consensus on various issues."



Yesterday, the US State Dept issued the following:


Press Statement
There are over 3000 residents who need to be relocated.  These are the people who were housed in Camp Ashraf.  We call them Camp Ashraf residents because that is their history.  Moving them to Camp Liberty (Hurriya) was, in part, an attempt to strip them of their history.


US House Rep Kenny Marchant:  On July 25th, we had another Oversight Committee hearing  in which Commissioner Miller and I had an extended conversation about this very subject.  And that conversation is in this transcript, anyone can get it on the internet and read the questions but the questions were very specifically about Tea Party groups and their difficulties in getting their tax exempt status, the lengthy conversations that they were having, the questionaires that they were having to answer.  And, again, Mr. Miller in that exchange that you and I had, I came away with that, I felt, with the assurances by you and your office that there were no extraordinary circumstances taking place and that this was just a backlog and there was nothing going on.  Mr. Miller, was that your impression of the hearing that day?

Acting Commissioner Steve Miller:  Uhm, no sir.  What I said there and what I understood your question to be was -- again, we divide this world in two, there's a question of this selection process and there was a question of what was going on at the time of your question.  At the time of your question, what was out in the public domain and what I thought we were discussing was the letter.  As you called them, the questionaire.  Those were the overbroad letters that had been referred to continuously here. Uhm, again, I stand by my answer there. Uh, there was not, uh-h-h-h-h-h, I-I-I-I did talk about the fact that we had centeralized -- I believe, I'd have to take a look at it. But I was talking about the fact that we had fixed that problem.

Kenny Marchant:  But-but at that time, you knew, by that time, that there were lists being made, there were deliniations, there was discrimination going on and that there were steps being taken to try to correct it.  But you knew that it was going on at that time.

Acting Commissioner Steve Miller:  We had corrected it.  TIGTA was taking a look.  At that time, my assumption is TIGTA was going to be done with their report that summer. I was not going to go there because I did not have full possessions of all the facts, sir.


Any member of Congress who finds that 'answer' acceptable is an embarrassment.  A government official appeared before Congress to testify at a hearing and was asked about potential abuses.  He knew about abuses that the Congress didn't with regard to this subject and did not reveal them.  His lousy excuse about a report coming out? No.  He said (see above) that he had addressed it.  But report or no report, you don't conceal from Congress.  He played words games and he was dishonest.  As USA Today's Susan Page observed on the first hour of The Diane Rehm Showtoday, "Well, we have to go back and look at that, but he certainly left a misimpression among everyone who heard his answers. People heard him as denying it. Now, maybe it will turn out to be some turn of phrase that gives him an exit hatch. But I think it is hard for him to argue that he did not mislead."



That took place this morning in the House Ways and Means Committee hearing.  The Committee Chair is Dave Camp and the Ranking Member is Sander Levin.  Appearing before the Committee were J. Russell George and Steve Miller.  J. Russell George is an Inspector General for the Treasury Department while Steve Miller is the Acting Commissioner of the IRS.  The Acting Commission.  Wednesday, we carried in full the remarks from US President Barack Obama about the 'firing' of Miller.  Miller is not fired.  As was established in the hearing, he remains on the government payroll, he remains Acting Commissioner of the IRS.  He stated so himself today when questioned.


US House Rep Vern Buchanan: Were you terminated or fired?  What happened there?  Or are you getting ready to retire?

Steve Miller:  I was asked to resign and I will retire.

US House Rep Vern Buchanan:  Okay.

Steve Miller: Under the civil service rules.

[. . .]

US House Rep Tom Reed:  As you sit here today, you were not fired from your job.  And I can tell you, in my private experience, you would have been fired on the spot.  And all you were allowed to do is resign and retire?  And now you come here and try to say I did the honorable thing by falling on my sword' when nothing bad is going to happen to you.  You're going to get your full benefits.  You're going to get everything that's associated with your retirement as an IRS employee.

Steve Miller: [Laughing] Nohting bad is happening to me, Congressman?

US House Rep Tom Reed:  Financially.  You're allowed to retire.  That's the level of accountability in Washington, DC now. You're still acting [Commissioner].  You came here on the taxpayer dollar today. You're getting a paycheck for being here today.  Correct?  Correct?

Steve Miller:  [Pause]  Correct.


There is no accountability.  And he laughed.  He found the exchange funny.  He had many 'cute' moments.


US House Rep Peter Roskam: Why did you say you have notes if you don't have notes?

Steve Miller:  Sir, please.

US House Rep Peter Roskam:  Do you have notes or don't you have notes?

Steve Miller: (voice dripping with sarcasm) I don't know.




US House Rep Lynne Jenkins stated at one point during the hearing,  "I'm sad and I'm sick to my stomach that Americans could be targeted by a government agency based on their political beliefs."  Miller was not sick, he laughed, he found things amusing.  But why wouldn't it.  He's getting away with everything he wanted.
 
There's no reason to believe Miller was being honest or knows what's going on.  One of the people 'disciplined,' the press has noted this week, received an oral warning.  Oops.  Miller asked about that stated, "The oral counseling that was provided?  It turns out that that person might not have been involved."  This is a huge scandal. He is the official in charge -- still in charge, still on the job -- and he knew he was appearing before Congress but he still doesn't know who was at fault?

Is there any accountability at all?  By his testimony, not at all.  In the most outrageous moment, in response to questions asked by US House Rep Ron Kind, Miller declared, "We now have possession of the facts with respect to the TIGTA report.  Now is the time we should be looking at that, now that we have the facts."   What?  No, actually, the time to look was before the TIGTA report.  By the time the Inspector General of the Department is finding fault, you've failed at your job.  You should have corrected it and, as we know, the IRS knew long before the TIGTA report.  But, Miller insisted to Kind, that now is the time, now that the Inspector General's report has been released.  No, supervisors -- including Miller -- should have addressed it, should have found out the problems, should have found out who was involved.  Other signs of incompetence?  He didn't know that, in addition to political groups, churches were targeted.  He appeared before the Committee, after the report was released, to 'answer' questions and he didn't even know that churches were among the targeted.  What does he do all day?  He also made clear that though he doesn't "believe it should happen," he doesn't believe it's illegal.  Maybe he had been fired, as we were led to believe he was, he might have cared a little damn more.

And let's also be clear, this isn't the only IRS problem.  The IG has released one report.  As IG Russell George's remarks made clear, there are other ongoing investigations about the IRS and this issue.  Those investigations cannot be discussed because they are ongoing.  Again, this was established in George's exchange with US House Rep Tom Reed. ("That is an accurate statement, sir," George agreed.)

US House Rep Aaaron Schock had a number of issues to raise about what the IRS did. A pro-life was group was asked about the content of their prayers and Miller couldn't weigh in on wehter or not that was an appropriate question for the IRS to ask.  Another pro-life group was asked if they taught "both sides of the issue."  As anyone knows, I'm firmly pro-choice.  That does not mitigate my offense at these questions the IRS asked and, especially with regard to prayer, they crossed a line.  It's a damn shame Steve Miller didn't know how to respond but a clear indication he was never up for the job. Schock noted another pro-life group was asked to reveal what writing would be on signs they carried at a protest?  Again, Miller had no comment.

Popular responses from Miller included: "I don't know," "I don't believe so," "I have no reason to believe . . .," "I don't think so," "I don't have exact knowledge on that," "I'm really not sure" and "I'd have to go back and check."  He wasn't sure if he had notes.  He wasn't sure about timelines.  He was sure about this or about that. 

Tonight, Marcia will cover the hearing at her site, Kat at her site, Wally will cover it at Ann's site and Ava will cover it at Trina's site.



iraq
alsumaria
xinhua
fang yang
bloomberg news
 the washington post
 iraqi spring mc

Monday, May 20, 2013.  Chaos and violence continue, the US government continues The War on the First Amendment, a Fox News reporter is the latest revealed target, Iraq is slammed by bombings, Parliament plans an emergency session to address the issue tomorrow, Nouri tells people to boycott the session, photos of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani surface over the weekend, US President Barack Obama extends Bully Boy Bush's "National Emergency with Respect to the Stabilization of Iraq" Executive Order (no one in the US press covers this or asks about it), Jay Carney tries to sneak an 'update' (revision) past White House reporters today on the IRS scandal, it goes so badly he talks Iraq, and more.

In the US, The War on the First Amendment continues.  Last Monday brought the shocking news that the US Justice Dept had secretly seized two months of phone records from the historic, 167-year-old news organization the Associated Press.  This was over a 'leak' supposedly.  But the Justice Dept knew of the 2012 report over a week before it was published.  The Justice Dept also felt that they would ignore laws requiring them to at first work with the AP and resort to secret seizure only after that.  Instead, they moved to secret seziure and when the records were seized no one still knows.  (It could have been 45 days prior to them notifying the AP.  But it could have been as much as 90 days.)  No one knows.  This is not a free society, this is not an open society.  This is an offense and it's outrageous.

Yesterday, another attack in The War on the First Amendment is revealed.   Ann E. Marimow (Washington Post) breaks the news of the Justice Dept targeting Fox News' James Rosen over press reports he filed on North Korea.  They not only seized his phone records, they also sezied his personal e-mails and "used security badge access records to track the reporter's comings and goings from the State Department." First Amendment attorney Charles Tobin tells the Post, "Search warrants like these have a severe chilling effect on the free flow of important information to the public. That's a very dangerous road to go down."  CNN explains, "The case centered on the leak of intelligence about North Korea in 2009, in which analysts predicted the possibility of a nuclear test if the U.S. enacted further sanctions on the regime. Fox News reported on that analysis on June 11, 2009."  Free Speech Radio News reports it this way:

Dorian Merina:  More information has surfaced on the Department of Justice's surveillance of journalists. The Washington Post reports that the DOJ spied on Fox News DC correspondent James Rosen after he wrote an article in 2009 about North Korea's nuclear program. Not only did investigators review his phone records, they also tracked his security badge to find out when he visited the State Department and they got a search warrant allowing them to read his personal Gmail correspondence. The warrant identifies Rosen as a reporter, but also alleges that as a recipient of leaked information he is a co-conspirator, subject to charges that are punishable by up to 10 years in prison. So far, no formal charges against Rosen have been filed.


  Ned Resnikoff (NBC News) adds:



The revelation that the DOJ would classify a journalist as an un-indicted co-conspirator under the 1917 Espionage Act is “even a bigger deal” than the department’s seizure of Associated Press  phone records, said Ben Wizner, director of the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy and Technology Project.
"A line has been crossed that has always been a very critical bulwark,” he said. “That’s the line between government leakers and media publishers." No journalist has ever been prosecuted under the Espionage Act, what has traditionally "only been used against those who gave or sold secrets to the enemy."


The Project on Government Secrecy's Steven Aftergood tells Ann E. Marimow, "Asking for information has never been deemed a crime.  It's a line that has not been crossed up until now."
Fox News Vice President of News Michael Clemente issued a statement today noting, "We are outraged to learn today that James Rosen was named a criminal co-conspirator for simply doing his job as a reporter.  In fact, it is downright chilling.  We will unequivocally defend his right to operate as a member of what up until now has always been a free press."  US Senator Marco Rubio's office sent out the following today:




 Digging around the story, Garance Franke-Ruta (The Atlantic) notes Rosen but also wonders who else in the press has the government gone after?  She writes, "In an August 2010 report on the indictment of Stephen Jin-Woo Kim on charges of 'disclosing national defense information in June 2009 to a national news organization, believed to be Fox News,' several other reporters were mentioned in relation to the DoJ leak investigations, in addition to Rosen."  She notes Siobhan Gorman (Wall St. Journal) and Richard Silverstein (Tikun Olam) were two others mentioned.  Philip Klein (Washington Examiner) wonders if it goes beyond this case and AP:

Last year, Bloomberg reported that Attorney General Eric Holder “has prosecuted more government officials for alleged leaks under the World War I-era Espionage Act than all his predecessors combined, including law-and-order Republicans John Mitchell, Edwin Meese and John Ashcroft.” The administration has also received a failing grade for its ignoring of Freedom of Information Act requests.
Taken together, all such actions have a toll. They mean that federal officials are less likely to blow the whistle on government wrongdoing and that journalists are less likely to obtain damning information that they can pass along to the public. The suggestion by the DOJ that Rosen broke the law, if followed to its logical conclusion, would mean the end of investigative journalism in America.


Mother Jones' David Corn Tweeted:





For that observation, he got blowback and had to try and provide a Twitter tutorial on Freedom of the Press:

1. 
   
2. David Corn‏@DavidCornDC5h

   Should DOJ have characterized Woodward as criminal co-conspirator for getting info from Felt or NYT reporters for accepting Pentagon Papers?

   Expand
3. David Corn‏@DavidCornDC6h

   A reminder to Fox/Rosen haters: Bush-Cheney national security abuses uncovered by nat. sec. reporters who could now be at risk.

   Expand
4. David Corn‏@DavidCornDC6h

   To Fox-hating tweeps, one doesn't have to defend Fox/Rosen to note DOJ is moving into a troubling area-criminalizing reporter-source contact

   Expand
5. Mother Jones‏@MotherJones6h

   An Inside Look at How DOJ Goes After Reporters, Not Just Leakers http://bit.ly/16FrlgE 

   Retweeted by David Corn

   Expand

Why did Corn have to perform a tutorial?  Because of the nonsense pushback of "Don't Say Nothing Bad About My Baby."  Writing about the scandal of targeting the AP, Craig Aaron (The Progressive) noted last week:

The probe appears to be unprecedented in its scale and scope. But as Trevor Timm of the Freedom of the Press Foundation notes: “In five years, the Obama administration has prosecuted more leakers under the Espionage Act than all other administrations combined, and virtually all these prosecutions have engulfed journalists one way or another.”
The initial reaction of the Obama administration was evasion from Attorney General Eric Holder and squirming by White House Spokesman Jay Carney -- who became flustered when the briefing-room lapdogs started to snarl.
Pro-Obama messengers were instructed to act concerned the reporters might have tipped off the terrorists and -- if that didn’t work -- to shout “Valerie Plame” a lot. But that mostly served as a reminder of how much the most transparent administration ever™ was outdoing another famous Dick: Dick Cheney.


As many have noted, you can see the pushback nonsense at CJR again today.  But who takes CJR seriously anymore?  Rhonda Roland Shearer's expose "CJR Reporter Lying, Exploiting a Source? What's happening at Columbia Journalism Review?" revealed CJR doesn't check their facts, they humiliate a private citizen and won't apologize or correct their errors, they allow a 'reporter' to do a stunt to make a documentary and they treat it as news, they defend their 'reporter' lying to newspaper reporters . . . The list never ends.

In the world of real journalism, there is concern.  Connie Schultz (Orlando Sentinel) notes:

 
Meanwhile, journalists around the country are asking, "What the heck is going on?"
It should be the question on every concerned citizen's mind. It breaks my heart that we need this reminder: A thriving — and free — press is often the only check on representative government. Already, potential government whistle-blowers have lost their nerve and never will pick up that phone.

It's a point New York Times investigative reporter Mark Mazzetti makes to Greg Sargent (Washington Post) today, "There’s no question that this has a chilling effect.  People who have talked in the past are less willing to talk now. Everyone is worried about communication and how to communicate, and [asking if there] is there any method of communication that is not being monitored. It’s got people on both sides -- the reporter and source side -- pretty concerned."  Jordy Yager and Mike Lillis (The Hill) point out, "Obama himself has made no apologies for the Justice’s sweep of AP phone records."

He issued no apologies for that.  But late Friday, he did issue the following:





Office of the Press Secretary

Notice -- Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to the Stabilization of Iraq

On May 22, 2003, by Executive Order 13303, the President declared a national emergency pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706) to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by obstacles to the continued reconstruction of Iraq, the restoration and maintenance of peace and security in the country, and the development of political, administrative, and economic institutions in Iraq.

The obstacles to the continued reconstruction of Iraq, the restoration and maintenance of peace and security in the country, and the development of political, administrative, and economic institutions in Iraq continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States. For this reason, the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13303, as modified in scope and relied upon for additional steps taken in Executive Order 13315 of August 28, 2003, Executive Order 13350 of July 29, 2004, Executive Order 13364 of November 29, 2004, and Executive Order 13438 of July 17, 2007, must continue in effect beyond May 22, 2013. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency with respect to the stabilization of Iraq declared in Executive Order 13303.
This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to the Congress.




THE WHITE HOUSE,
     May 17, 2013.




Why is a US president issuing declarations -- national emergency ones -- about the supposed 'free' Iraq?  Oh, that's right.  It's not really free of the US.


 Violence slams Iraq today.  Brisband Times notes (in a video report),  "Washing the blood off the streets, the clear up begins after another deadly day of violence in Iraq."  Fiji Broadcasting Corporation observes, "Baghdad was the worst hit."  This morning,  Al Jazeera noted, "Eight car bombs in mainly Shia districts of the Iraqi capital, Baghdad, killed 20 people on Monday."   By the end of the day, AP reported the bombing toll was up to 10 and the death toll to 48 (with over 150 injured).  On this AP video report, a Baghdad man states, "We have become accustom to such explosions.  We have seen blasts every day. These attacks will never frighten us, God willing."  As Baghdad is slammed with bombings, it's worth dropping back to the May 10th snapshot:

Alsumaria reports that cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr declared his sympathy for the Iraqis who've lost family members as a result of the purchase and use by Nouri's government of 'magic' wands -- which have been known not to work since 2009.  Moqtada urged the families who lost loved ones and those who were injured as a result to sue the person who purchased the items. (That would be Nouri.)  April 23rd (see the  April 24, 2013 snapshot), James McCormick, the man who made and sold the wands, who was on trial for those wands, was pronounced guilty on three counts of fraud.  And still Nouri has allowed -- no, insisted that the wands be used.   May 2nd, McCormick was sentenced to a maxium of 10 years.  Jake Ryan (Sun) quoted Judge Richard Hone stating, "The device was useless, the profit outrageous and your culpability as a fraudster has to be placed in the highest category.  Your profits were obscene.  You have neither insight, shame or any sense of remorse." And yet last Friday, Ammar Karim (AFP) reported that the 'magic'  wands to 'detect' bombs (and drugs and, no doubt, spirits from the other world) are still being used in Iraq.  He spoke with a police officer in Baghdad who admits that everyone knows that they don't work but that the police are under orders to use the wands.

Last Saturday,   NINA reported,  "Leader of the Sadrist Trend, Muqtada al-Sadr, demanded Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to apologize and stand before Parliament to answer about the deal of the explosives detection instruments."  Moqtada suspects some Iraqis were bribed in this deal and wants names he also demands that the 'magic' wands stop being used immediately stating that they are "an insult to the Iraqis' intelligence."  Moqtada and Iraqiya have called for Nouri to appear before Parliament and explain why the wands were purchased, who profited from them and the various details of the deal that was made for them.

Al Mada reports that the Ministry of the Interior claimed today that they would recover all the money spent on the magic wands.  Ministry of the Interior Inspector General Aqeel Turaihi states that they have known and acknowledged since October 2010 that the magic wands do not work.

Regardless of whether money is recovered for the purchase, as Moqtada al-Sadr points out, lives have been lost and people have been injured.

So in 2010, it was known that the magic wands were not working?  No.  It was known before that.  May 11th,  Alsumaria reported  that new documents from the Ministry of Interior (reproduced with the article) demonstrate that a Ministry committee said the wands were not working and, in 2009, recommended that they not be purchased anymore.  There were calls for Nouri to appear before Parliament to answer questions.  He needs to.  But he has refused all calls so far -- despite the Constitution on this issue.  He continues to violate and ignore the Constitution.   Kitabat  also coverd the revelations about the 2009 recommendation at length here.  May 12th,   Alsumaria reported Parliament's Integrity Committee held a hearing to determine the details surrounding the purchase of these wands and Committee Chair Bahaa al-Araji states that the Integrity Commission appeared before the Committee and offered names of "top officials" involved.  Mohammad Sabah (Al Mada) reported that even after Nouri was personally warned by a British commander "Colonel Powell" that the devices did not work, an order was still place and Al Mada reproduced that order -- it came from Nouri's office. Last Thursday, National Iraqi News Agency reports that Iraqiya MP Nada al-Jubouri is calling for an emergency session of Parliament to address yesterday's bombings, "These repeated security breaches came as a result of the lack of a way to detect car bombs, which claim the lives of people, in addition to the weakness of the intelligence information."  May 3rd, Ammar Karim (AFP) reported that despite the wands being found not to work, despite the conviction and sentencing of their seller and maker in a British court, the wands were still being used in Baghdad.  May 2nd, the seller and maker was sentenced:

The Belfast Telegraph notes that [James] McCormick "showed no reaction as he was told his 'callous confidence trick' was the worst fraud imaginable."  Jake Ryan (Sun) quotes Judge Richard Hone stating, "The device was useless, the profit outrageous and your culpability as a fraudster has to be placed in the highest category.  Your profits were obscene.  You have neither insight, shame or any sense of remorse."


The use of these 'magic' wands in Iraq still is criminal.

We're done with Baghdad violence but Iraq is more than just Baghdad.  National Iraqi News Agency reports a Mosul roadside bombing injured a police officer and civilian, 2 Basra car bombings claimed 13 lives and left fifty injured, a Samara car bombing claimed 13 lives and left nine people injured, a Mosul mortar attack claimed 1 life and left another person injured,  and an Anbar attack left 8 police officers dead.  Xinhua adds, "Twelve kidnapped policemen were killed and four were wounded in overnight clashes between the abductors and the Iraqi security forces in Anbar province, a provincial police source said on Monday. The Iraqi army and police forces carried out a joint operation on Sunday night in the desert area between Baghdad and Jordan to free kidnapped policemen, and the troops clashed with their kidnappers, the source told Xinhua on condition of anonymity."  And Alsumaria reports a Tikrit car bombing has claimed the lives of 2 Iraqi soldiers and left fifteen more injured.  Sinan Salaheddin (AP) counts 95 violent deaths across the country today.



Through Saturday, Iraq Body Count counts 412 violent deaths so far this month.  That means IBC has 13 more days this month to count deaths.  The violence is increasing in Iraq.  Tomorrow Parliament is supposed to hold an emergency session to explore the security problems.   Le Monde notes the violence comes as Nouri al-Maliki is accused of refusing to share power.

All Iraq News reports State of Law has announced, via MP Ibrahim al-Rikabi, that they will not be attending the emergency session.  State of Law is Nouri al-Maliki's political coalition.  It came in second to Iraqiya in the 2010 parliamentary elections. Last July, Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) observed, "Shiite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has struggled to forge a lasting power-sharing agreement and has yet to fill key Cabinet positions, including the ministers of defense, interior and national security, while his backers have also shown signs of wobbling support." Nouri's failure to fill those positions goes a long way towards explaining how violence has increased.  Press TV reminds, "The United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) said on May 2 that April was the deadliest month in Iraq since 2008 as terrorist acts killed over 700 people and injured more than 1,600 across the country."  Ali al-Timimi is an MP with Moqtada al-Sadr's bloc.  He tells All Iraq News that he doubts State of Law will attend since Nouri has refused calls to appear before Parliament to discuss the security issue before.  He stated that they should "attend the session to stop shedding the Iraqi blood."  Aziz Alwan and Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) report Nouri's going further than just boycotting the session:

 In the aftermath of Monday's bombings, Maliki warned lawmakers to stay away from a parliamentary session scheduled for Tuesday by his rivals to discuss the spiraling violence. He accused politicians he refused to name of being behind the unrest, and he threatened to send their names to the courts for arrest if they were not already wanted, saying some instigators of violence were trying to hide behind parliamentary immunity.

While evading Parliament (and the Constitution), Sky News reports Nouri plans to discuss security with his Cabinet tomorrow.   Last July, Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) observed, "Shiite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has struggled to forge a lasting power-sharing agreement and has yet to fill key Cabinet positions, including the ministers of defense, interior and national security, while his backers have also shown signs of wobbling support." Those positions should have been filled at the end of 2010.  It is now 2013 and they remain empty.  They remain empty as violence grips Iraq.  This is not unrelated.  This goes to the violence and it goes to the incompetence of Nouri al-Maliki.  He refused to nominate people for Parliament to approve because he wanted to seize control of the three positions. The security situation falls on Nouri.




In other news, Saturday Al Mada rans a photo of Jalal Talabani seated outdoors with his medical team and notes the team states the Iraqi President's health has continued to improve and he will return to Iraq shortly. Last December,  Iraqi President Jalal Talabani suffered a stroke.   The incident took place late on December 17th (see the December 18th snapshot) and resulted in Jalal being admitted to Baghdad's Medical Center Hospital.    Thursday, December 20th, he was moved to Germany.  He remains in Germany currently.  Two weeks ago, there were new rumors swirling about his health and, this past week,  Nouri al-Maliki attempted to have Jalal stripped of his post.  (Parliament rejected the notion.)

 Jalal is also the head of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), his political party.  They ran several photos and noted Jalal and his medical team were photographed in the German hospital's garden.  If you use the link, you can also see Kurdish reaction to the news about Jalal's improved health (those pictured are overjoyed).  At the website of the Kurdistan Regional Government, KRG President Massoud Barzani congratulates Jalal Talabani on his improved health and wishes for his return in "health and wellness at the nearest time possible." Nouri's warm wishes must have gotten lost in the mail.


Today, at the US State Dept, Secretary of State John Kerry announced (link is text and video) the release of a new report.

Secretary of State John Kerry:   Well, thanks for being here today for the release of the 2012 International Religious Freedom Report. I am pleased to be here with our Ambassador-at-Large, Suzan Johnson Cook, and I want to thank her and her entire cohort here for their terrific work in helping to put this together. She is doing – they are doing a superb job of advancing religious freedom abroad. 
I also want to acknowledge the hard work of a whole bunch of State Department employees both here in Washington and at a lot of posts around the world, because all of them collect the information and do a lot of work throughout the year in order to be able to put this report together. This is not a one- or two-week affair. It’s a long one-year process, ongoing.
Fifteen years ago, I was very proud to join my colleagues in the United States Congress in passing the International Religious Freedom Act, the law that mandates the preparation of this State Department report. This report, as many of you know, shines light on the challenges that people face as they seek nothing more than the basic religious freedom, the right to worship as they wish. And its release here today is a demonstration of the abiding commitment of the American people and the entire U.S. Government to the advancement of freedom of religion worldwide.

The report covers the globe.  We'll note this from the Iraq section:







Today at the State Dept press briefing, Iraq wasn't even a topic.  However, it did come up at the White House press briefing leading spokesperson Jay Carney to make the lengthiest remark on Iraq he's made in a long, long time.


Jay Carney:  Well let me say that we strongly condemn the attacks in Iraq perpetrated over the last several days.  And we are deeply concerned by the frequency and the nature of recent attacks including bombings today, attacks on Iraqi security forces in Anbar over the weekend and a series of attacks on both Sunni and Shia neighborhoods and mosques.  The targeting of innocent people in an effort to sew instability and division is reprehensible.  Our condolances go out to the victims of these attacks and their families.  Over the weekend, US officials in Baghdad and Washington were in contact with a wide range of senior Iraqi leaders to urge calm and help resolves ongoing political and sectarian tensions.  These talks have focused on specific steps to avoid further violence and resolve key issues peacefully through dialogue and the political process. The US remains committed to supporting Iraq's democratic system and urges Iraq's leaders to continue working towards a peaceful resolution of tensions through dialogue.


His desire to speak to Iraq today may have been motivated by his desire to run out the clock after a difficult series of questions and responses.   Today's press conference by Jay Carney was about, 'Forget what I told you about the IRS scandal on Friday, this is what I'm telling you today.'  Many more people knew about it than Carney revealed last Friday and his excuse today?  None offered.  His attitude was, 'Well, you're being told today.'  Michael O'Brien (NBC News) explains:

White House press secretary Jay Carney, in a bid to further the administration's public response to revelations that the IRS had singled out conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status for additional scrutiny, disclosed at his daily press briefing that White House counsel Kathy Ruemmler was informed of the report on April 24. She, in turn, told senior White House staff -- including chief of staff Denis McDonough -- of the then-incomplete report, though Carney said those details were never conveyed to Obama.


Julianna Goldman and Roger Runningen (Bloomberg News) point out, "Carney's comments today are at odds with what he told reporters last week, when he said the White House counsel 'only found out about the review being conducted and coming to conclusion by the inspector general'."

It was a long weekend for Jay Carney and apparently drinking may have been involved.   Anita Kumar and Kevin G. Hall (McClatchy Newspapers) report that when asked today, Carney couldn't explain the differences between Friday's remarks and today's, "I can't remember specifically.  I'm not sure that I knew it at that time."  (That was in response to National Journal's Alexis Simendinger attempting to get Carney to walk her through the process.)


"The president wants those who are responsible for this to be held accountable," insisted Jay Carney.  "He has zero tolerance for this. He believes that it's very important that the IRS carry out and implement our tax laws in a neutral and fair way and that Americans need to be confident that that's happening."  If that's the case, you fire the IRS Commissioner.  You don't stand before the American people on Wednesday announcing that a resignation of the IRS Commissioner has been asked for and received only for them to find out on Friday that nothing has been done despite the 558 words by Barack Obama on the matter.  We covered the House Ways and Means hearing that Action IRS Commissioner Steve Miller testified at in Friday's "Iraq snapshot" and "IRS: 'Not corrupt, just incompetent'," while Ava reported on it in "Guacamole and the IRS (Ava)," Wally in "Big lie revealed at House Ways and Means hearing," Kat in "The other Steve Miller appears before Congress," and Marcia in "No accountability for the IRS scandal,"  and we roundtabled on it with Dona for "Report on Congress."  From that hearing:


US House Rep Tom Reed:  As you sit here today, you were not fired from your job.  And I can tell you, in my private experience, you would have been fired on the spot.  And all you were allowed to do is resign and retire?  And now you come here and try to say I did the honorable thing by falling on my sword' when nothing bad is going to happen to you.  You're going to get your full benefits.  You're going to get everything that's associated with your retirement as an IRS employee.

Steve Miller: [Laughing] Nohting bad is happening to me, Congressman?

US House Rep Tom Reed:  Financially.  You're allowed to retire.  That's the level of accountability in Washington, DC now. You're still acting [Commissioner].  You came here on the taxpayer dollar today. You're getting a paycheck for being here today.  Correct?  Correct?

Steve Miller:  [Pause]  Correct.



Asked about Miller today, Carney hemmed and hawed and insisted that since he was testifying, he needed to be on the job.  (The press immediately rejected that lie.  Fox News' Ed Henry noted that Miller being a private citizen can continue to testify before Congress.)  Carney insisted, "He's resigned from that post.  The fact is he's resigned entirely from the IRS."  He is still on the job.  That's not a resignation.  And it certainly isn't accountability.


Accountability isn't also lying and misleading Congress and refusing not to own up to it.  From Friday's hearing:



US House Rep Kenny Marchant:  On July 25th, we had another Oversight Committee hearing  in which Commissioner Miller and I had an extended conversation about this very subject.  And that conversation is in this transcript, anyone can get it on the internet and read the questions but the questions were very specifically about Tea Party groups and their difficulties in getting their tax exempt status, the lengthy conversations that they were having, the questionnaires that they were having to answer.  And, again, Mr. Miller in that exchange that you and I had, I came away with that, I felt, with the assurances by you and your office that there were no extraordinary circumstances taking place and that this was just a backlog and there was nothing going on.  Mr. Miller, was that your impression of the hearing that day?


Acting Commissioner Steve Miller:  Uhm, no sir.  What I said there and what I understood your question to be was -- again, we divide this world in two, there's a question of this selection process and there was a question of what was going on at the time of your question.  At the time of your question, what was out in the public domain and what I thought we were discussing was the letter.  As you called them, the questionnaire.  Those were the over broad letters that had been referred to continuously here. Uhm, again, I stand by my answer there. Uh, there was not, uh-h-h-h-h-h, I-I-I-I did talk about the fact that we had centralized -- I believe, I'd have to take a look at it. But I was talking about the fact that we had fixed that problem.


 
US House Rep Kenny Marchant:  But-but at that time, you knew, by that time, that there were lists being made, there were delineations, there was discrimination going on and that there were steps being taken to try to correct it.  But you knew that it was going on at that time.

 
Acting Commissioner Steve Miller:  We had corrected it.  TIGTA was taking a look.  At that time, my assumption is TIGTA was going to be done with their report that summer. I was not going to go there because I did not have full possessions of all the facts, sir.





We noted Friday:


Any member of Congress who finds that 'answer' acceptable is an embarrassment.  A government official appeared before Congress to testify at a hearing and was asked about potential abuses.  He knew about abuses that the Congress didn't with regard to this subject and did not reveal them.  His lousy excuse about a report coming out? No.  He said (see above) that he had addressed it.  But report or no report, you don't conceal from Congress.  He played words games and he was dishonest.  As USA Today's Susan Page observed on the first hour of The Diane Rehm Showtoday, "Well, we have to go back and look at that, but he certainly left a misimpression among everyone who heard his answers. People heard him as denying it. Now, maybe it will turn out to be some turn of phrase that gives him an exit hatch. But I think it is hard for him to argue that he did not mislead."

Two US Senators are already refusing to accept Miller's 'logic.'  Christi Parsons and Lisa Mascaro (Los Angeles Times) report today:

The leaders of the Senate Finance Committee sent a bipartisan letter to the IRS on Monday calling on the acting commissioner to disclose a raft of information on the matter, including any signs of communications between the IRS and the White House.
“Targeting applicants for tax-exempt status using political labels threatens to undermine the public’s trust in the IRS,” Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) wrote in a letter co-signed by Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), the committee’s ranking Republican. “Lack of candor in advising the Senate of this practice is equally troubling.”
Senators have been hearing complaints from nonprofit civic organizations for two years, Baucus wrote.




iraq
 alsumaria

national iraqi news agency
al mada
the washington post
free speech radio news
dorian merina
the los angeles times
lisa mascaro
 kevin g. hall
mcclatchy newspapers
 aziz alwan
ned parker

Tuesday, May 21, 2013.  Chaos and violence continue, one of the protest organizers in Anbar is assassinated, Nouri has a 'big shake up' (AFP) that amounts to nothing, Zebari puts on brave face for American TV, a public servant announces (through her attorney) she will plead the Fifth in a Congressional hearing tomorrow (IRS scandal), Congress discusses pending veterans legislation  and if the White House is being fully honest about Benghazi why have they not released the State Dept's September 14th communications with NSS?


Starting with The War on the First Amendment. As disclosed I know and like Attorney General Eric Holder.  We're not highlighting a radio program that can be seen as calling Holder out.  We aren't highlighting it and linking to it.  Not because I'm trying to cover for Eric but because if you're wrong and I know you're wrong we don't include you.

Someone billed as a journalist declared of Holder's decision to recuse himself, "He's talking about how he has regular interactions with the press and he did not think it would be appropriate for him to be the head of this investigation Yet that doesn't really make any sense . . ."  No, that wouldn't make sense.

That's also not what Holder told Congress.  We covered it last week  with the "Iraq snapshot" and "Eric Holder's childish tantrum," Ava covered it with "Biggest embarrassment at House Judiciary hearing," Wally with "Competency tests for Congress? (Wally)," Kat with "Outstanding participant in the House Judiciary hearing?," and Marcia with "The shameful Eric Holder."

I see the 'expert'  covered the hearing too.  And I read over his coverage and couldn't stop groaning.  It's beyond wrong.   It raises issues that it never resolves (although they were resolved in the hearing) and it's just incredibly wrong.  We could spend a whole snapshot on how wrong it is.  We won't.

I talked to two friends who cover Justice to find out how this could be confusing?  Before he testified to Congress, Holder held a press conference, the day before.  During that press conference, I'm told, he stated his reasoning for recusal at the start of the press conference: It was because he faced questioning from the FBI  (June 2012).  Later, during that press conference he repeated that over and over and "at one point, made an offhand comment" in the press conference (one reporter, backed up by the other) about how he does interact with the press.  Did either of them see that comment as a reason for recusal?  No.

He told Congress why he recused himself.  Our 'expert' went on the radio and left out the reason Holder gave the Congress and the reason he stated repeatedly in the press conference.  If 'expert' wants to pursue that angle (Holder said he was in "frequent contact with the media" in the conference), have at it.  But don't ignore the reason that Holder recused himself -- either out of your own ignorance or your inability to tell the truth.  Reading the coverage the 'expert' did (it's glorified Tweeting) of the hearing last week, I can say that will not highlight that 'expert' ever again.  I do not trust him.  I'm not sure if he's stupid or just dishonest.  But his coverage is appalling.  We will pick this topic up on Saturday night.

If Holder's guilty of something, he will be called out here.  I've already made a point to call him out for being partisan and hostile when appearing before Congress last week.  I'm not going to play favorites.  But I'm also not going to distort what Eric says or include information about him that I know to be false.

Last week, The War on the First Amendment's big revelations were that the Justice Dept had secretly seized the phone records of a 167-year-old news institution.  Phone records for April and May 2012 were secretly seized.  Tuesday, May 14th, Today, AP executive editor Kathleen Carroll appeared on MSNBC's Morning Joe (link is video) and spoke about this assault on the First Amendment with hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski and guests journalists Carl Bernstein (of Watergate fame) and  Mike Barnicle.

Kathleen Carroll:  Well obviously, we're distressed that the Justice Dept felt the need to seize our records and not tell us about it and certainly distressed as our CEO said in his protest to the Justice Dept that the scope of the inquiry's so huge.  More than 100 journalists for the AP work at the places whose phone numbers and phone records were seized by the Justice Dept.


This week's revelation is that the Justice Dept targeted Fox News reporter James Rosen.  The ACLU's Gabe Rottman explains the problems that emerge with the targeting of Rosen:

 
In recognition of the special status of news gathering under the First Amendment, a federal law—the Privacy Protection Act—bars federal investigators from demanding materials from reporters unless there is probable cause to believe that the reporter himself has committed a crime. That's exactly what the FBI claimed here—that "Reporter has committed or is committing a violation of [the Espionage Act], as an aider and abettor and/or co-conspirator." (The Espionage Act is the primary statute used to target "leaks," and bars the unauthorized disclosure of classified information if the person doing the disclosing has reason to know disclosure could harm the United States).
What's astonishing here is that never before has the government argued that simple newsgathering—that is, asking a source to comment on a news story—is itself illegal. That would, quite literally, make virtually any question by a reporter implicating classified information a potential felony. The logic behind the FBI's warrant application would extend even to a reporter asking a question at a public press briefing at the CIA, Pentagon, or State Department. If the question is designed to elicit the disclosure of classified information, and prompts that disclosure, I don't see how the reporter couldn't be held responsible under the FBI's rationale.
Additionally, the FBI was able to keep the existence of the warrant secret from Rosen because it argued he'd committed a crime. That's similar to what happened with the AP, where the Department of Justice presumably invoked the exception to the notice requirement under DOJ guidelines, which allow for delay when notice could imperil the investigation. However, the delay provision is extremely strong medicine, because delaying notice means that the news outlet is unable to go to a court to challenge the request before the records are turned over. Consequently, the delay provision opens the door to significant abuse, as government agents have an incentive to delay notice because it allows them to avoid going in front of a judge to justify their request.



Through yesterday, Iraq Body Countcounts 564 violent deaths so far this month and they have 11 more days in the month to count.  Including today when Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reports a Tarmiya suicide bomber claimed the lives of 3 Iraqi soldiers (seven more injured), a Tuk Hurmato car bombing which claimed 5 lives (forty-three more injured), and 3 Kirkuk roadside bombings which claimed 6 lives (twenty-five more injured).  Mustafa Mahmoud, Isabel Coles and Alistair Lyon (Reuters) quote Kirkuk survivor Mahmoud Jumaa stating, "I heard the explosions, but never thought this place would be targeted since these animals have nothing to do with politics, nothing to do with sect, nothing to do with ethnicity or religion." Alsumaria notes that in Ramadi a leader of the ongoing demonstrations died from a car bombing.  NINA identifies him as Sheikh Malik al-Dulaimi and adds that he," along with other capable tribal chiefs of Anbar, took care of supplying tents, food and other requirements to the protestors in Ramadi."  Nouri issued no statement demanding that the killers responsible for Sheikh Malik al-Dulaimi be brought to justice.  Nouri issued no statement condemning the killing of al-Dulaimi.    Kareem Raheem (Reuters) counts over 40 dead from violence today.

The National notes:


First to blame for the increasing bloodshed, which killed at least 86 on Monday alone and 352 so far this month, is Iraq's prime minister, Nouri Al Maliki.
"Mr Al Maliki failed to contain the rising sectarian tensions in the early stages, resorting instead to security solutions and rejecting dialogue with his opponents," the editorial noted.
Mr Al Maliki ignored the demands of residents in Anbar province, where the largest sit-ins and protests have been taking place.
A Shia Muslim, Mr Al Maliki is accused by Sunnis of being biased towards his sect in terms of official posts. The bomb and gun attacks on Monday targeted mainly Shia areas, including in the capital Baghdad.
In a statement reported yesterday, the Iraqi premier said: "I assure the Iraqi people that the [the militants] will not be able to bring us back to sectarian conflict," pledging an overhaul at the high and middle levels of his security apparatus following its failure to stop the attacks.
A statement like this shows how Mr Al Maliki is still "in denial", since the crisis is about political failure, rather than security flops, Al Quds Al Arabi argued.

 AFP makes much of Nouri's 'big shake up in security command' yet all they can list is that a someone over the security in the city of Baghdad lost his post.  Woah! What a shake up.  All Iraq News notes that's the only position changed (Lt Gen Abdul Amir Kamel will replace Lt Gen Ahmed Hashim).


Meanwhile Abbas al-Mahmadawi flaunts ignorance.  He's the Secretary General of Iraq's Abna Al Iraq coalition.  (At one point, this was a term for Sahwa aka Sons of Iraq.)  According to Press TV, "Britain and the US are responsible for the growing number of bombings in Iraq because of their sales of fake bomb detects to the country, Secretary Genera of Iraq's Abna Al Iraq coaltion Abbas Al Mahmadawi says."  England did not sell the 'magic' wands.  A British citizen did and the UK put him on trial, convicted him and sentenced him.

The US government did not sale any magic wands and no US citizen was in charge of that company.  I believe it was also the US press that first raised objections about the wands.  At the start of November 2009, Rod Nordland (New York Times) reported on these 'bomb detectors' in use in Iraq: "The small hand-held wand, with a telescopic antenna on a swivel, is being used at hundreds of checkpoints in Iraq. But the device works 'on the same principle as a Ouija board' -- the power of suggestion -- said a retired United States Air Force officer, Lt. Col. Hal Bidlack, who described the wand as nothing more than an explosive divining rod."


It's amazing that Abbas is too cowardly to blame Nouri al-Maliki.  From yesterday's snapshot:

So in 2010, it was known that the magic wands were not working?  No.  It was known before that.  May 11th,  Alsumaria reported  that new documents from the Ministry of Interior (reproduced with the article) demonstrate that a Ministry committee said the wands were not working and, in 2009, recommended that they not be purchased anymore.  There were calls for Nouri to appear before Parliament to answer questions.  He needs to.  But he has refused all calls so far -- despite the Constitution on this issue.  He continues to violate and ignore the Constitution.   Kitabat  also coverd the revelations about the 2009 recommendation at length here.  May 12th,   Alsumaria reported Parliament's Integrity Committee held a hearing to determine the details surrounding the purchase of these wands and Committee Chair Bahaa al-Araji states that the Integrity Commission appeared before the Committee and offered names of "top officials" involved.  Mohammad Sabah (Al Mada) reported that even after Nouri was personally warned by a British commander "Colonel Powell" that the devices did not work, an order was still place and Al Mada reproduced that order -- it came from Nouri's office. Last Thursday, National Iraqi News Agency reports that Iraqiya MP Nada al-Jubouri is calling for an emergency session of Parliament to address yesterday's bombings, "These repeated security breaches came as a result of the lack of a way to detect car bombs, which claim the lives of people, in addition to the weakness of the intelligence information."  May 3rd, Ammar Karim (AFP) reported that despite the wands being found not to work, despite the conviction and sentencing of their seller and maker in a British court, the wands were still being used in Baghdad.


Nouri was told they didn't work and he ordered them anyway.  They're still being used -- and they don't work.

Wait, it gets better.

Al Mada reports that Nouri held a press conference today and announced that the magic wands work.  Back when Karim reported they were being used, I noted Nouri's plan to sue the maker just lost standing.  Any chance that it still had legal standing is now gone.  Nouri stood up and Baghdad and declared that the rip-off devices work.  That's money Iraq will now never get back.  It doesn't matter that they don't work.  Ignoring years of warnings, Nouri continues to use them.  It no longer matters, he's lost standing to sue.

What an idiot.  Dar Addustour has him insisting that these 'magic' wands can detect bombs 20 to 40% of the time.  No, they can't.  This was established in a court of law.  What an idiot.  Robert Booth (Guardian) reported May 2nd:

McCormick sold 7,000 fake bomb detectors based on useless golf ball finders to the Iraqi government and other international agencies for prices ranging from £1,600 per unit to £19,000.
They cost McCormick less than $50 (£32) and police believe sales to Iraq alone were worth more than £55m, buying McCormick a mansion in Bath, holiday homes abroad and a yacht.
Judge Richard Hone told McCormick: "Your fraudulent conduct in selling so many useless devices for simply enormous profit promoted a false sense of security and in all probability materially contributed to causing death and injury to innocent individuals."

Get it? They didn't work.  They were never going to work.  They had nothing to do with bombs but were invented to be golf ball finders and were useless at even that.


Why didn't Nouri appear before Parliament today?  Because he has blood on his hands and he knows it.  Instead of getting honest, he's now insisting that the magic wands work.

Christiane Amanpour (Amanpour, CNN) spoke with Iraq Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari about the situation in Iraq and he stated, "The government has its own failing.  I'm not here to give you a rosy picture or to portray unrealistic picture.  But the country is not crashing."



Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujafi also held a press conference.  All Iraq News reports that  he called out Nouri for ordering State of Law MPs not to attend today's emergency session.  He calls it a violation of the Constitution.  National Iraqi News Agency notes that al-Nujaifi "added that there is no personal problem between him and Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, confirming that the problem lies in the lack of respect from al-Maliki to the legislative authority."   Alsumaria reports State of Law is screaming for al-Nujaifi to resign. (State of Law is Nouri's political slate.  In the 2010 elections, Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya beat State of Law.)  Alsumaria notes cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr has weighed in but their brief report doesn't make clear on whose side. He apologizes to the Iraqi people for what is happening and blames government officials -- Iraqiya and State of Law both?  Nouri for calling for a boycott of the emergency session?   It's not clear.

Following yesterday's violence in Basra and Baghdad, the Iraq Times reports professors and teachers belonging to the National Alliance coalition are asking that Nouri be dismissed as prime minister as a result of the continued violence and unstable security.  Moqtada's bloc is part of the Shi'ite National Alliance (as is Nouri's State of Law).  The report notes an MP from Moqtada's bloc said Nouri needs to resign or appear before Parliament. He's been denounced for the way he's managed Iraqi security.  As Sheikh (Dar Addustour) has a column on the whole matter that strives for balance and notes that the Parliament was directly elected by the people (not true of the prime minister) and that Nouri should show respect for democracy and for the state institutions.


Meanwhile, Alsumaria reports prisoners at a Rifai prison are on a hunger strike over conditions at the prison and the inability of the judiciary to set court appearances. There is no mention of average wait of these prisoners but Iraqis have been waiting years for court appearances.  This has been a complaint by Iraqis for years now.  There has been no improvement.  Which is one of the reasons Nouri's Baghdad court shouldn't have grabbed ahold of investigating the Hawija massacre.  They have enough on their plate already.





May 10, 2013, IRS official Lois Lerner attempted to deceive the American people.  Fully aware that the Treasury Dept was about to issue an Inspector General report finding abuse, IRS Director of Exempt Organizations Division Lerner staged a fake 'honesty' session.  As Glenn Kessler (Washington Post) noted in his Fact Check Sunday, Lerner asked her friend "Celia Roady, a tax attoreny [. . .] to ask her a question about the targeting" of conservative groups" at an ABA conference.   Chip Reid (CBS News -- link is text and video) reported May 10th on the IRS targeting of political groups:

The IRS strongly denied the charges -- until Friday.
At a lawyers' conference in Washington, Lois Lerner, a senior IRS career employee who overseas tax exempt organizations, admitted that agency employees singled out particular groups for extra scrutiny using key words with political overtones.

Lerner staged the event, making a mockery of the ABA and the American people.

Friday,  the House Ways and Means held a hearing which Action IRS Commissioner Steve Miller testified at and we covered it in Friday's "Iraq snapshot" and "IRS: 'Not corrupt, just incompetent'," while Ava reported on it in "Guacamole and the IRS (Ava)," Wally in "Big lie revealed at House Ways and Means hearing," Kat in "The other Steve Miller appears before Congress," and Marcia in "No accountability for the IRS scandal,"  and we roundtabled on it with Dona for "Report on Congress."  A key exchange from the hearing:


US House Rep. Thomas Young:  Mr. Miller I want to know why all of this happened. You and Ms. [Lois] Lerner said over the past week that IRS officials started targeting Americans for their political beliefs in March of  2010.  That was after observing a surge in applications for statuses 501 (c) (4) -- so that was your rationale. To support this claim, you both cited an increase of about 1500 in 2010 to nearly 35,000 in 2012.  But data contained in the IG audit says the targeting began in March 2010 before this uptick.  In fact, the audit also says, on page 3 that the number of 501 (c) (4) applications for all of 2010 was actually less than in 2009.   Mr. Miller, you said here today that you accept the IG's finding of facts --

Steve Miller:  Mmm-hmmm.

US House Rep. Thomas Young: How do you reconcile the facts I've just laid out showing no uptick in 501 (c) (4) applications with your stated motivation for targeting conservative groups?


Steve Miller:   So I'll have to go back and look at the numbers, sir, but I think there was an uptick.  And whether --

US House Rep.  Thomas Young: You've already indicated here, sir, that you agreed with the finding of facts in the IG report.  It says there was no uptick. 

Steve Miller:  I don' t--

US House Rep. Thomas Young:  How do you reconcile the two?

Steve Miller:  I've got to look at the numbers, sir, I can't speak to that.

US House Rep. Thomas Young:  So you don't agree with the IG report?

Steve Miller: I'd have to look at the IG report.



Kessler notes Lerner made the May 10th claim in her public remarks and that it is -- as US House Rep Young argued on Friday -- false.

In shocking news today, Richard Simon and Joseph Tanfani (Los Angeles Times) report that IRS official Lois Lerner, who was less than forthcoming with the Americans (to put it mildly), now intends to plead the Fifth Amendment this week when appearing before the Congress of the United States.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subjected for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. 

So Lerner wants to refuse to answer the questions of the people's representatives and to do so claiming that she refuses to self-incriminate herself?  Which most will see as an admission of guilt -- greater guilt than what is known.

The Fifth Amendment is often invoked to protect one's self from the government.  Invoked by a sitting government official?  That's novel.

It gets better.  She's hired an attorney, a criminal defense attorney, William W. Taylor III.  Her attorney is insisting that appearing before the Committee would "embarrass or burden her."   Tough.  She's a government official paid by the US taxpayer.  She wants to refuse to testify and invoke the 5th Amendment, she needs to do it in public.  If it "embarrass"es her, that's too damn bad.

Shane Goldmacher (National Journal) reports that House Oversight and Government Reform Chair Darrell Issa "has issued a subpoena to Lerner anyway." Goldmacher notes US House "Rep. Sander Levin, the top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee, has called for her to resign."



Turning to the issue of Benghazi.  September 11, 2012, an attack there left four Americans dead: Glen Doherty, Sean Smith, Chris Stevens and Tyrone Woods.  As revelations emerged about e-mails the White House got embarrassed.  Now you have a ton of  partisan prostitutes and idiots weighing in and it gets so very confusing.  I actually read through every damn one of them today.  Mainly because whiny Bob Somerby can't stop lying.  But, please, keep it up.  Independents see the administration lying on this.  The more partisan prostitutes keep dismissing it, the larger the number of independents will be who break with the administration over that.  Somerby's so stupid.  He's attacking Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes and MSNBC's entire line up except Chris Matthews for not wasting airtime dropping grenades on Benghazi.  Did it ever occur to him that MSNBC knows this is a losing battle based on the polling?  That talk show hosts are using their time to defend the administration in ways they see as productive?  Or that after nine months, Susan Rice is a dead issue.

She is not innocent as Bob Somerby -- who never attends Congressional hearings or reads source documents (including the e-mails released) -- maintains.  As with Bully Boy Bush and his administration selling the illegal war, the occasional caveat was offered -- by that crooked administration and by Rice.  The totality of their presentation was false and that's true of Susan Rice.  More importantly, Susan Rice isn't liked.  The American people have been polled.  But Bob wants Rachel Maddow to drop everything on her show and spend the next weeks making it all about 'poor Susan Rice.'   All that will do is stir up hostility towards the administration.  Opinions were long ago set.

It's nonsense.  All he offers is nonsense.

Today, he's enraged that the e-mails might have been paraphrased.  Who does the idiot think saw the e-mails?  We were at the hearing -- repeated hearings -- where House Republicans asked for the e-mails to be released.  We were there when they complained to Secretary John Kerry that they weren't allowed to make copies of them.  That they had to go to a room to view these non-classified documents.

Republicans leaked news of the e-mails but unless there was a Sandy Berger stuffing e-mails into his or her pants to get them out of the control room, why are you surprised that these were paraphrased e-mails?

That's right, because you come in late on the story, you've never done an honest bit of work on it, you've just read a few partisan accounts from your echo chamber, but you think you know everything.

I'm sick of the stupidity.

The White House has apparently not released some of the pertinent e-mails.

I can make that assertion because I read over those that have been released.  I'm a little shocked that nobody's picked up on what Icky Vicky says in one e-mail.


Dan Pfeiffer went on the Sunday chat and chews and lied leading others to lie.  He attacked Jonathan Karl's ABC report (which Bob Somerby announces he'll chew on -- Bob will never chew on how he attacked Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson because Bob is friends with Matt Cooper who was part of the outing of Valerie Plame).  This led to the whopper from 'comedian' Jon Stewart on The Daily Show last night, "Now even the press is messing up.  'Hey, look, we found an e-mail where the State Dept demands talking points be edited to reflect political concerns.  Oh, I'm sorry.  We just looked at it again, it's a Groupon."  Oh, how the monkey got laughs.

But is the below funny:


I just had a convo with [deleted] and now I understand that these are being prepared to give to Members of Congress to use with the media. 
On that basis, I have serious concerns about all the parts highlighted below, and arming members of Congress to start making assertions to the media that we ourselves are not mking because we don't want to prejudice the investigation.
In the same vein, why do we want Hill to be fingering Ansar al Sharia, when we aren't doing that ourselves until we have investigation results... and the penultimate point could be abused by Members to beat the State Department for not paying attention to Agency warnings so why do we want to feed that either?  Concerned.

Victoria Nuland sent that e-mail September 14, 7:39 pm.  And "deleted" is "CIA OCA."  You'll find that out as you read on through the e-mails because later copies have it written in.

"Why do we want Hill" Congress "to be fingering Ansar al-Sharia, when we aren't doing that ourselves" at the State Dept in public briefings since the attack?  She's also worried about providing the truth which "could be abused by Members" of Congress "to beat the State Department for not paying attention to Agency warnings so why do we want to feed that either?"

Concerned?  Of course she is.  Six months of warnings were ignored.  She didn't want that getting out to the public.

Jon Stewart made an ass out of himself and misled the American people.  The good thing is, all it did was give partisan Democrats a chuckle.  The independents know better.  And every time someone lies on Benghazi on behalf of the administration, the White House loses the support on this issue of more and more independents.  So keep lying if your goal is to ensure that the 2014 and 2016 elections are ones where Dems lose independent voters.  (I'm not a fan of Rachel Maddow.  But she actually knows what she's doing in this case.  Benghazi is not redeemable with independents at this point.  Your best move is to cover other topics if your goal is electing Democrats.) (But how sad that so many see their goal as elections and not truth.)


Last night, Ann took on Jay Rosen's nonsense attack on Karl's reporting by noting that the point of the on the air report and the point of the report in total was Nuland.  Ann established that by noting two journalist roundtables broadcast the day Karl's report came out.  Six journalists in all, plus a moderator, and when Karl's reporting was cited, what was noted was Victoria Nuland's e-mails.  In 2008, when they felt the Christ-child was threatened, The Cult of St. Barack would respond by demanding someone be fired.  Mike noted last night when they tried to get Charlie Gibson fired from ABC following the debate Barack bombed at.  Mike also pointed out that the Cult has now started a petition to get Karl fired.  Because that's how they are.  To protect Barack, they will destroy anyone.  They will lie and they will bully.  They will try to intimidate the entire press corps.  Because they were able to in 2008.  They think they can do it again.


When Pearl Harbor was attacked, FDR didn't say, "We're going to war and I can't tell you with who because it's the subject of an ongoing investigation." An attack on a US facility in a foreign country took place and the US government wants to pretend that the suspects could not be named because it could 'tip them off.'  Next up, Eric Holder sues 7-11 for releasing video of an armed robbery at one of the stores arguing that the release has damaged efforts to catch the criminal or criminals.


Ansar al Sharia is still not declared a terrorist group by the US government, not the arm in Libya.  Last October, the US government declared the Yemen arm of  Ansar al Sharia a terrorist group while insisting that it was "a separate entity from Ansar al-Shari'a in Libya."  All this time later, it's still not a terrorist group and all this time later there are still no arrests.  Reality, Ansar al Sharia (in Libya) is among the thugs the US got in bed with in the illegal war on Libya.  In an apparent surprise to a naive administration, thugs you use to take out opponents can then turn on you. 


If you read the e-mails, which apparently few actually did, you come across Victoria Nuland at 9:23 PM (September 14th) writing,   "These don't resolve my issues or those of us my building leadership.  They are consulting with NSS."

Where are the e-mails from State to NSS?

It's worth noting that the wording is rather chilling when you compare it to her lengthy e-mails.  In an e-mail chain with multiple agencies, Nuland wants changes and doesn't feel she's getting what she wants.  At some point she and others at the State Dept discuss this and decide to bring in NSS to override the ongoing process/exchange.  Nuland feels no need to offer, "We may involve NSS in this."  She waits until after the fact to declare that because her "issues" aren't resolved, her leadership is "consulting with NSS."




This morning the House Veterans Affairs Subcomittee on Health held a hearing on pending bills.  The Subcommittee Chair is Dan Benishek (who is a medical doctor) and the Ranking Member is Julia Brownley.   The first panel was US House Veterans Affairs Committee Chair Jeff Miller,  US House Rep Dennis Ross and US House Rep Brett Guthrie.  The second panel was Disabled American Veterans' Adrian Atizado, American Urological Association's Dr. Mark Edney, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of Ameirca's Alex Nicholson, Blinded Veterans Association's Michael O'Rourke and Paralyzed Veterans of America's Alethea Predeoux.  The third panel was the VA's Dr. Robert Jesse accompanied by VA Deputy Assistant General Counsel Susan Blauert.

Subcommittee Chair Dan Benishek is working on a draft of a bill to be entitled Demanding Accountability for Veterans Act of 2013 and this was discussed.


Subcommittee Chair Dan Benishek:  How do we hold the VA accountable?  How do we get those people to actually produce?  Mr. Nicholson, do you have any other ideas there?

I would just add, Mr. Chairman, that I think we are on the same page in terms of solutions that would actually have teeth to them.  You know, I think whether it's public safety issues, IG recommendations, following through on reducing the backlog, it doesn't sort of matter what issue you look at, the VA keeps promising us progress year after year and, you know, we-we see backlogs in not only disability claims issues but, like you mentioned earlier, in following through on all these outstanding IG recommendations.  So something that would add some teeth to the accountability factor I think would certainly be welcomed by us.  You know, we hear from our members consistently, year after year -- we do an annual survey of our membership which is one of the largest that's done independently of Iraq and Afghanistan era veterans.  And we consistently hear that while veterans are satisfied with the care they receive, they continue to be dissatisfied overall with the VA itself.  [. . .]  I would say from our perspective, solutions you mentioned with teeth would certainly be welcome and I think it's certainly high time that we start adding teeth into these type of bills.


Ranking Member Julia Brownley is concerned about disabled veterans being at risk of not receiving care as a result of the distance between them and the medical centers.  

Ranking Member Julia Brownley: And finally, my bill, HR 1284 The Veterans Medical Access Act would provide better access for blind and severely disabled veterans who need to travel long distances to obtain care at a special rehabilitation center.  Oftentimes blind and catastrophically disabled veterans choose not to travel to VA medical centers for care because they cannot afford the costs associated with the travel.  Currently the VA is required to cover the costs of transportation for veterans requiring medical care for service-connected injuries.  HR 1284 would extend those travel benefits to a veteran with vision impairment, a veteran with a spinal cord injury or disorder, or a veteran with double or multiple amputations whose travel is in connection with care provided through a special disabilities rehabilitation program of the VA.  Our disabled veterans have already made the greatest of sacrifices and I firmly believe, as I'm sure do everyone here in this Committee hearing today, that no veteran should be denied needed medical care.




PVA, DAV and BVA support the Ranking Member's bill  As feedback here and face-to-face with veterans groups has made clear, many veterans with physical injuries feel that there physical injuries are often overlooked by the media in the rush to cover the signature wounds of the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars: Traumatic Brain Injury and Post-Traumatic Stress.


Suicide is a pressing issue for both VA and DoD and it arose in the hearing.



Committee Chair Jeff Miller: Two weeks ago yesterday, I spent the day in Atlanta, Georgia with several members of the Georgia delegation to discuss inpatient and contract mental health program mismanagement issues at the Atlanta Dept of Veterans Affairs Medical Center.  The visit occurred after the VA Inspector General issued two reports which found that failures in management, leadership, oversight and care coordination at the Atlanta VAMC contributed to the suicide deaths of two veteran patients and the overdose deaths of two others.  Alarmingly, the IG found that approximately four-to-five thousand veteran patients fell through the cracks and were lost in the system after the Atlanta VAMC failed to adequately coordinate or monitor the care they received under VA's contracts with community mental health providers.  I wish that I could say that the issues in Atlanta are an isolated aberration.  Unfortunately, that would be far from the truth.

US House Rep Dennis Ross noted that "the VA has set the goal to provide an initial mental health evaluation within 14 days from the time the veteran contacts a VA medical provider to schedule a consultation.  They claim -- The VA claims -- to have met this goal with a 95% success rate; however, an Inspector General report published in 2012 greatly contradicts these claims.  In fact, the IG report determined that the VA met its goal only 49% of its time."  He also noted Chair Jeff Miller's point that 184,000 veterans were waiting over 50 days for the initial evaluation -- "not treatment, just the initial evaluations."  His bill is HR 241 Veterans Timely Access to Health Care Act.

US House Rep Brett Guthrie HR 984 To direct the Secretary of Defense to establish a task force on urotrauma.  He noted that there was a 350% increase in urotrauma in the current conflicts when compared to previous ones and that, prior to deployment to war zones, DoD surgeons and nurses are not receiving special training in urotrauma.







iraq
iraq body count
cnn
mohammed tawfeeq
reuters
mustafa mahmoud
isabel coles
alistair lyon
rod nordland
as sheikh
dar addustour
robert booth
the guardian
al mada
the iraq times
alsumaria
national iraqi news agency

the associated press
cbs news
chip reid
the daily show
jon stewart
cnn
reliable sources
 howard kurtz
jonathan karl
the washington post
glenn kessler

Wednesday, May 22, 2013. Chaos and violence continue, the western press loves to label dead Iraqi women "prostitutes," the Russian arms deal resurfaces, as does ExxonMobil's partnership with the KRG, more outcry in the US over the War on the First Amendment, CCR claps like a trained seal when the US Justice Dept announces 4 American have been killed by drones in The Drone War, things get testy (for the witnesses) at the US House Oversight Committee hearing, and more.



Starting with The War on the First Amendment.  Last week, The War on the First Amendment's big revelations were that the Justice Dept had secretly seized the phone records of a 167-year-old news institution, the Associated Press. This week's revelation is that the Justice Dept targeted Fox News reporter James Rosen.  This morning, the New York Times editorial board weighed in noting, "With the decision to label a Fox News television reporter a possible 'co-conspirator' in a criminal investigation of a news leak, the Obama administration has moved beyond protecting government secrets to threatening fundamental freedoms of the press to gather news."  The Sacramento Bee editorial board also weighs in, "Federal judges should be on notice: The U.S. Justice Department seems fully prepared to stretch the truth -- or worse, spreads falsehoods -- to obtain search warrants.  That's what it did in labeling a journalist as an espionage 'co-conspirator' for simply doing what reporters have always done -- attempting to solicit information from government employees."

On the targeting of Rosen and AP, Dana Milbank (Washington Post) argues:

But here’s why you should care -- and why this case, along with the administration’s broad snooping into Associated Press phone records, is more serious than the other supposed Obama administration scandals regarding Benghazi and the Internal Revenue Service. The Rosen affair is as flagrant an assault on civil liberties as anything done by George W. Bush’s administration, and it uses technology to silence critics in a way Richard Nixon could only have dreamed of.
To treat a reporter as a criminal for doing his job -- seeking out information the government doesn’t want made public -- deprives Americans of the First Amendment freedom on which all other constitutional rights are based. Guns? Privacy? Due process? Equal protection? If you can’t speak out, you can’t defend those rights, either.

The Washington Post's Eugene Robinson, in a widely syndicated column (here for the York Dispatch), explains,  "If this had been the view of prior administrations, surely Bob Woodward would be a lifer in some federal prison. The cell next door might be occupied by my Post colleague Dana Priest, who disclosed the CIA's network of secret prisons. Or by The New York Times' James Risen and Eric Lichtblau, who revealed the National Security Agency's eavesdropping program."  Fox Latino News' Rick Sanchez offers:

As a Latino immigrant now living in America, I’m proud to call a country home where the media remains courageous enough to poke holes around the pillars of power. 
That's why what has happened to my colleague James Rosen is so offensive to me.
Rosen has aggressively reported on the inner sanctum of diplomacy: the State Department. Yet he is now suspected of being a criminal, a co-conspirator, in a plan “to disclose sensitive United States internal documents and intelligence information.”   
It is an accusation wrought with the chill of all that is wrong with the kind of totalitarian government that my family escaped — except it’s happening here, in the U.S., in our democracy. 
On MSNBC's Morning Joe today, ABC News and NPR's Cokie Roberts pronounced the attacks on the First Amendment "mind boggling" and discussed the topic with Joe Scarborough, Steve Rattner,  and Bloomberg News' Al Hunt.  FYI, Scarborough jokingly termed Fox News "the opposition" to the White House (and made a joke that the only reason for the White House to spy on MSNBC was to find out what parties they were throwing for Barack Obama).  I note that because the term pops up in the excerpt below.

Joe This is a Justice Dept that to me seems out of control.

Cokie Roberts: It does.  It absolutely does.  This is an attack on the American press big time and the fact that they have gone after the AP records and now, as you say, the 'opposition' records, and it's not just -- I mean it's in the Bureau, it's in the White House, monitoring his movements in the State Dept -- 

Joe Scarborough: What is this?

Cokie Roberts: And they're talking about -- There's talk of prosecuting the reporter, not just the leaker.  And this administration, by the way, has prosecuted twice as many sources as all administrations in American history combined. And there's still more [time] to go. And this reporter being prosecuted for what?

Joe Scarborough:  For what?

Cokie Roberts:  Apparently for receiving stolen information.  Like he's a 'fence' or something, stolen property.

Joe Scarborough:  This is Daniel Ellsberg forty years later.

Cokie Roberts:  Right. Basically being prosecuted for -- if he is prosecuted -- doing his job.




Alexandra Petri (Washington Post) visits the portal to hell and finds one person overjoyed:

There is one upside to the increasingly distressing news about the Obama administration’s handling of journalists: In a small plot of land in Yorba Linda, Calif., Nixon sat up and smiled amiably.
“My name has been coming up a lot recently,” he said, “but in a phrase that I’ve seldom heard: ‘Worse than Nixon.’” He smiled a beatific smile. It still looked a little creepy. “Worse! You never hear that.”
Nixon went on: “I’ve been on the bottom of the presidential rankings for so long that James Buchanan, Warren Harding and I have become very close. We often go bowling together. You name the barrel, people stick me at the bottom of it. I was getting used to it, but then this week happened.”


Let's turn to peace news.  A War Criminal's about to be honored when he should be cuffed and behind bars.  ETAN explains:

 

Contact: John M. Miller, 917-690-4391

Media Advisory- Groups to Protest 'Democracy' Award to Kissinger

WHEN: Thursday, May 23, 2013  5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.

WHERE: The Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum, Pier 86, 12 Ave. & 46 Street, New York City

WHO: East Timor and Indonesia Action Network , Big Apple Coffee Party, Campaign for Peace and Democracy, Chelsea Neighbors United to End the War, War Resisters League/NYC, Veterans for Peace Chapter 34, War Criminals Watch/World Can't Wait.

WHAT : Protesters will express their outrage at the honoring of former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger with the Intrepid Freedom Award for his "his distinguished career defending the values of freedom and democracy." The protest will condemn the honoring of the accused war criminal by the museum's foundation.

“Of all the undeserved honors that Kissinger has received, this is one of the most absurd. Kissinger built his diplomatic career on undermining democracy and freedom throughout the world. He supported coups, armed dictators, undermined self-determination, and oversaw the bombing of millions,” said John M. Miller, National Coordinator of the East Timor and Indonesia Action Network (ETAN).

“Kissinger should be on trial, not honored. His actions led to mass murder, the overthrow of democratically-elected governments, and the invasion and occupation of nations," he said.

"With Kissinger's backing, Indonesia absorbed East Timor and West Papua against the will of their inhabitants. As a result of his policies, millions were killed, maimed and made homeless in East Timor, Vietnam, Cambodia, Chile, Cyprus, Bangladesh, Angola, West Papua, and elsewhere,” Miller added .

BACKGROUND

Kissinger was National Security Advisor and/or Secretary of State from 1969-1976.

The ceremony also will honor a second controversial figure, David Koch, executive vice president of Kansas-based Koch Industries, Inc. Koch has funded foundations and other efforts to undermine labor and other rights, as well as climate denial campaigns.

Below is a sampling of some of the history he has made and the consequences:

* On behalf of Richard Nixon's candidacy for president, Kissinger is alleged to have secretly scuttled the Paris peace agreement reached by the Johnson Administration to end the war in Vietnam. The war continued for 7 more years. during which 32,000 US military personnel and hundreds of thousand of Indochinese died;
 
* As Nixon's National Security Advisor, Kissinger suggested and oversaw the illegal bombing of Laos and Cambodia from 1969 and the 1970 military invasion of Cambodia, followed by the overthrow of its government.;
 
* Approval and direction of the overthrow of the democratically-elected government of Salvador Allende in 1973, and unqualified support for brutal military dictatorships in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Nicaragua, Uruguay, and elsewhere in Latin America;

* In 1971, Kissinger tilted toward the government of Pakistan as its troops massacred hundreds of thousands in rebellious East Pakistan (Bangladesh);
 
* Kissinger refused to intervene to halt the plot by the ruling fascist Greek generals to overthrow of the democratically elected leader of Cyprus. Turkey invaded in response and the island nation remains divided to this day.
 
* Kissinger supported and illegally-armed Indonesian dictator Suharto's invasion and occupation of East Timor which resulted in the deaths of up to 184,000 people.

* Kissinger provided unwavering diplomatic and intelligence support to the apartheid regime in South Africa, including the provision of military support to the apartheid government’s military intervention in Angola.

For background on Kissinger's role in the illegal invasion and occupation of East Timor (Timor-Leste) see http://bit.ly/guT5VD

###

---

To be taken off this list click here
etanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetan

John M. Miller, National Coordinator
East Timor & Indonesia Action Network (ETAN)
Mobile phone: +1-917-690-4391
Email: etan@etan.org Skype: john.m.miller
Twitter: @etan009  Website: www.etan.org

2012 Recipient of the Order of Timor (Ordem Timor)
Donate today. Read ETAN's fund appeal: http://etan.org/etan/2013appeal.htm



War Criminals aren't a thing of the past, sadly, they spring from the ground like weeds all the time.   The Drone War is a criminal war.  Tom Curry and Chuck Todd (NBC News) report today that ahead of US President Barack Obama's planned address tomorrow, the Justice Dept admits that 4 Americans have been killed by US drones in The Drone War:  Samir Khan, 'Abd al-Rahman Anwar al-Aulaqi, Jude Kenan Mohammed and Anwar al-Aulaqi.  The Center for Constitutional Rights issued the following:

The Justice Department’s acknowledgement of what we already know is a welcome step. But it is only the first step that is needed. Just as DOJ has now reversed its long-held position that it could not acknowledge these strikes – the position it took in its motion to dismiss our lawsuit – it can and should reverse course on its position against judicial review. A letter to Congress is no substitute for judicial process. The government should defend the legality of its actions on the merits in a court of law, including its decision to authorize the strike that resulted in the death of 16-year-old Abdulrahman, about whom Mr. Holder’s letter had almost nothing to say.

Yes, it is a weak statement from them. But they've ignored all the scandals in the last week because they serve, first and foremost, Barack Obama.  That's why they had the secret meeting with him in his first term.  A secret meeting with a sitting president goes against everything the Center for Constitutional Rights is supposed to be about.  It has been cowed, neutered and spayed.  Yet it rushes, tongue hanging out, to roll over or perform any other trick commanded.  The Drone War is illegal.  It goes against everything the US legal system is built around.  The acknowledgment is not "a welcome step."  It's piecing out a little info to try to mitigate the reaction.  It's a real shame that CCR has racked up 5 years now enabling the Barack Obama administration.  That will not look good when he's out of office and they will be seen as the hypocrites they are.  But then again, they never took accountability for their role in the imprisonment and punishment of a whistle blower under Bully Boy Bush who committed the 'crime' of thinking he could trust CCR and provided them with a list of names of prisoners at Guantanamo.  CCR gets a lot cozier with administrations than they'd ever want people to know.


The Drone War is a criminal war.  Like the ongoing war in Iraq.  Barack chose to back Nouri al-Maliki for a second term as prime minister in 2010 when the voters kicked him out.  Barack went around the voters and the Constitution with the extra-Constitutional Erbil Agreement.  Having backed him, Barack's now firmly in bed with him as they continue to arm Nouri who now uses the weapons the US provides to kill the Iraqi people.  Such as during the April 23rd massacre of a sit-in in Hawija when Nouri's federal forces stormed it.  Alsumaria noted Kirkuk's Department of Health (Hawija is in Kirkuk)  announced 50 activists have died and 110 were injured in the assault.   AFP has been reporting 53 dead for several days now -- indicating that some of the wounded did not recover.  UNICEF noted that the dead included 8 children (twelve more were injured). UPI reports today, "The U.S. Army reports its Project Office for Armed Scout Helicopters has completed deliveries of 407 Bell Helicopters to Iraq."  The Hawija massacre couldn't have happened without the helicopters the US has provided.

I say that not just because the helicopters swarmed overhead during the massacre.  I say that because Nouri's forces entered Kirkuk via the helicopters.  Shalaw Mohammed (Niqash) interviewed the Governor of Kirkuk Najm al-Din Karim last week:







Barack's hands are all over the Hawija massacre.  And a massacre always happens when the US pops up a tyrant. Today, Harith Hasan (Al-Monitor) observes,  "Any future road map should recognize that Maliki has failed in transforming himself into a unifying figure and any possibility for him to win a third term will deepen the internal division."  Gulf News adds:

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki missed the point when he said earlier this week that he would overhaul the country’s security structures and strategy. He has failed to recognise that the increasingly sectarian politics of his government have alienated large parts of Iraqi society. Al Maliki and his government have tended to favour Shiite politicians and communities, thereby affecting the national consensus. His purges of senior Sunni politicians have not helped at all. So, when Al Maliki says “We are about to make changes in the high and middle positions of those responsible for security and the security strategy,” the vast majority of Iraqis feel that the words mean nothing.

For some of the Sunni hatred that's helped make Patrick Cockburn pariah in the Arab world, you can click here.  There's nothing worth reading but it does firmly establish how biased he is.

 Violence never ends in Iraq.  National Iraq News Agency reports a Diyala Province car bombing ("north of Baquba") claimed the lives of 2 police officers and left four more injured, a Buhriz roadside bombing injured two Iraqi service members,  and a Kia mini-bus bombing left three people injured.  Alsumaria adds that an attack on a Baghdad home left 10 women and 4 men dead, an armed clash in Mosul left 1 rebel dead and two Iraqi soldiers injured, and they update the toll on the Kia mini-bus bombing noting 1 dead and seven injured.  Fars News Agency reports 1 corpse was discovered by Camp Ashraf.  AFP insists that the Baghdad home was a brothel.  They provide no quotes from neighbors maintaining that and, after the attack, they weren't allowed to enter the home so apparently AFP's confessing to visiting it before the attack?  They note, "Soldiers and police mainly armed with Kalashnikov assault rifles and pistols cordoned off the site, which was visited by high-ranking officers."  Considering the stigma attached to prostitution in Iraq, I'm always amazed at how glibly some outlets are when it comes to making that charge about the just murdered.  They don't even wait a day.  They can't ever prove it, but it's apparently the thing to say when women die: "Prostitute."  Since they're so comfortable with it, maybe the need get off their little asses and start reporting on who is visiting these alleged brothels?  Or would that take all the fun out of their smearing dead women?  And note, it's not an even an 'allegation,' it's presented as fact.  Because smearing Iraqis -- especially dead Iraqis -- has always been a favorite hobby of the western press.


Iraq Body Count counts 619 violent deaths in Iraq through yesterday.  Jason Ditz (Antiwar.com) notes of the ongoing violence:


Since then it is clear the Maliki government has had no real answer. Threats of further military operations are the order of the day, and a number of TV stations in Sunni areas were shut down for being unfriendly to the government. This of course is just fueling anger among Sunnis who already believed they were being persecuted, and is making it easier for militants to recruit.

World Bulletin provides a list of the most violent attacks this year.




October 9th, with much fanfare, and wall-to-wall press coverage, Nouri signed a $4.2 billion dollar weapons deal with Russia.  He strutted and preened and was so proud of himself.  Yet shortly after taking his bows on the world stage and with Parliament and others raising objections, Nouri quickly announced the deal was off.  The scandal, however, refuses to go away. In January, theIraq Times stated Nouri was offering up his former spokesperson  Ali al-Dabbagh and others to protect the truly corrupt -- the truly corrupt -- according to members of Parliament -- including Nouri's son who got a nice little slice off the deal.  These charges came from Shi'ite MPs as well as Sunnis and Kurds.  Even the Shi'ite National Alliance has spoken out.  All Iraq News noted the same month that National Alliance member and one-time MP Wael Abdul Latif is calling for Nouri to quickly bring charges against those involved in the corruption.  (The arms deal is now treated by the Iraqi press as corrupt and not allegedly corrupt, FYI.)   Latif remains a major player in the National Alliance and the National Alliance has backed Nouri during his second term.  With his current hold on power reportedly tenous and having already lost the support of Moqtada al-Sadr, Nouri really can't afford to tick off the National Alliance as well. And Kitabat reported at the start of the year MP Maha al-Douri, of Moqtada al-Sadr's bloc in Parliament, is saying Nouri's on a list of officials bribed by Russia for the deal. As it became obvious that Nouri could sign a contract but not honor it (that is his pattern -- see especially the Erbil Agreement), the government of Russia apparently tired of being jerked around.  Nouri probably hoped the scandal had faded.

It has not.


Zee News reports today that MP Bahaa al-Araji, who serves on Parliament's Integrity Committee, says that the investigation is moving forward in "Iraq's central criminal court."

Another thing Nouri probably wishes would go away is international oil companies feeling the Iraq oil and gas fields Nouri controls are dogs and wanting instead to do business with the Kurdistan Regional Government.  Hurriyet Daily News reports:

After Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s announcement that a Turkish company would be partnering with the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) and Exxon Mobil to carry out oil exploration in northern Iraq before his U.S. visit last week, Turkey is now reportedly in talks with U.S. energy company Chevron about activities in KRG.
Turkish officials and the executives of Chevron have been talking about oil and natural gas pipelines that are planned to be built from the KRG through Turkey, according to sources.

That news could not have come at a worse time for Nouri.  Florian Neuhof (The National) reports today, "International oil companies in Iraq are negotiating to revise their contracts with the government, as new production targets undermine the profitability of their operations."

And bad news just keeps rolling in for Nouri.  Adil Abdul-Mahdi and Tareq al-Hashemi served as Iraq's's two vice presidents during Nouri's first term (they are Shi'ite and Sunni respectively).  They kept their posts for a second term in 2010.  Tareq al-Hashemi was targeted by Nouri and now lives outside of Iraq.  Adil Abdul-Mahdi gave up his post as vice president in 2011 after Nouri's '100 days to fix corruption' resulted in no action at all.  He denounced the government corruption and resigned his post.  Omar al-Shaher  (Al-Monitor) reports he's now denouncing what's happening with Iraq's economy including:

According to Abdul-Mahdi’s statement on his Facebook page, “This is a disturbing issue that takes us back to the policies of inflation and multiple exchange rates.” He continues, “Our problem is that we have a strong dinar coming from the oil revenues within a fragile, single-product economy that depends on foreign [markets], not only for imports and tourism, but also for medical treatments, migration, residence, investment, speculation and savings.”
“We have to enhance the performance of the economy in order to consolidate it. [We should] become more open for the sake of our society and the national economy, in order to establish a regional and international status for the dinar so as to make it more valuable and increase demand for it. We leaped forward, and our successful monetary policies began to suffer the consequences of the failed economic policies. While we were concerned about pennies, we lost dollars. We accused and detained people first, and gathered evidence later.”
Clearly, Abdul-Mahdi is alluding to the ouster and prosecution of former CBI Governor Sinan al-Shabibi in October of last year, on charges of corruption and wasting of public money. Subsequently, Abdel Basset Turki was assigned as the interim governor.




Our democracy was created by the people and for the people. When government power is used to target Americans for exercising their Constitutional rights, there is nothing we as representatives should find more important than to take it seriously, get to the bottom of it and eradicate the behavior.  Since 2010, there appears to be a targeting of people based on their beliefs.  These people, particularly those who use "Tea Party" in their name, were mocked by the liberal media, mocked by late night television and referred to by this administration regularly with disdain.  Even hear in the halls of Congress, people would talk about who the Tea Partiers were, who was Tea Party supported?  When, in fact, there is no Tea Party.  As the evidence has shown, there are hundreds and hundreds of organizations -- as independent as any single American -- who simply wanted to live up to the Constitution, to have their freedom and to have it protected by our coutnry.  So last week when we received troubling complaints by groups across the country who received what appeared to be inappropriate and unnecessary questions -- in many cases after more than a year, in some cases two years of inactin by the IRS -- we went to the Inspector General -- who is here with us today.  In March of last year, upon the request of our staff  and later in a letter from Mr. Jordan, the Subcommittee Chairman, and myself, the IG launched a formal investigation.  We knew then that something seemed to be wrong.  We knew then that there was smoke.  We knew then that in fact something just didn't seem to be right. 

That's Committee Chair Darrell Issa speaking at today's House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing.  The Ranking Member is Elijah Cummings who observed, "This is more important than one election.  The revelations that have come forward so far provides us with a moment pregnant with transformation -- not transformation for a moment but for generations to come and generations yet unborn."  The issue was the targeting of various groups by the IRS.  The
witnesses appearing before the Committee were former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman, Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Neal S. Wolin, Lois Lerner who is both Director of Exempt Organizations of the IRS and a Marcel Marceau protege, and Treasury Dept Inpsector General J. Russell George.



Chair Darrell Issa:  Mr. George, before the Ways and Means Committee hearing, you told Representative Danny Davis the following, "Our audit, sir, began with the request of Congressional staff in -- I want to give you the correct date, sir -- I do not have it here.  March 1, 2012 is when there was an initial contact with the Government Oversight and Reform Committee  and are audit began or roughly" -- and then you go on with May or March, etc., etc.  So essentially, this began in your mind when you were made aware of it in March by members of my Committee -- staff members of my Committee.  Correct?

J. Russell George:  Uh, yes.

Chair Darrell Issa:  So, oddly enough, we have with us, and put it up on the board, from Holly Paz, a document just released to us from -- I guess in preparpartion for yesterday's interview -- that says "Forward TIGTA document request, the following are issues that could indicate a case to be considered, a potential Tea Party case, and sent for secondary screening. One Tea Party Patriots of 9-12 Project [. . .] 4, Statements in the case file that are critical of how the country is being run."  Now that's May 20, 2013.  To your knowledge -- and that is the result of an internal investigation done by the IRS, not your investigation. Oh, I'm sorry.  That's July 23rd, I'm looking at e-mails which are, unfortunately, this year, but that's July 23, 2012.  It's your understanding that the IRS concluded they had wrong doing from their own internal investigation by July 2012?

J. Russell George:  I have no information on that but, uh, let me consult with my counsel. [. . .] I have been informed that they conducted an internal review, sir, that was completed before that period. 

Chair Darrell Issa:  Okay. So it's your testimony that, in fact, independent of your activity, Mr. Shulman's reports conducted and concluded wrong doing and could have, in fact, reported that up the chain and taken appropriate action independent of your activities.

J. Russell George: That is certainly an option, sir.

Chair Darrell Issa:  So, Mr. Shulman, before I go back to Mr. George, it was your watch, your people did an internal review.  How is it you did not know that things were rotten in your shop in time to not only make sure it stopped, and stayed stopped, but in fact the Treasury, your boss sitting next to you, was aware of it?

 Douglas Shulman:  Uhm, you know, I, uh, said that I learned about this sometime in the spring -- and by "this," I mean I learned the fact that there was a list and the fact that "Tea Party" was on it --

Chair Darrell Issa:  Okay, so you knew at that time you knew that you had mistreated Americans within your ogranization and you saw no need to report it up the chain?  Is that your testimony?

Douglas Shulman:  My testimony is that I -- at that point I'd had a perlimary verbal report.  I'd been told at that same point that the activity was being stopped and I was told that the IG was looking at --

Chair Darrell Issa:  Okay, stop there.  I don't really care about the IG right now. The IG probably prompted the internal report.  The IG has been the reason, in fact, that we didn't hear about this until long after the election, till months or actually a year had gone by.  I'm asking you a question.  It was your job to make sure people weren't abused.  It was your job to stop abuse but also to report it.  Americans had been injured by the activity -- wrongful activity -- of your organization.  You say that you got it "vocal."  I don't care that the IRS doesn't keep paperwork.  I know that when I have to pay my taxes, I don't do it based on what I say I made or what I say my deductions are, that I need paper.  However, you knew.  You did not report up or did you report up to anyone else within your chain?

Douglas Shulman:  I had some of the facts, not all of the facts.  I had no idea of the scope and severity.  I didn't know the full list, I didn't know who was on the list.  I --

Chair Darrell Issa:  Okay, well I'm not going to belabor that because "I don't know" has been your answer previously.  I'm going to move back to the IG.  Mr. George, September 24, 2012, you mentioned your report would be ready in September.  These are exchanges we're putting up [on the screen] here. They're back and forth, they're not all personally with you.  So September 24, 2012, the answer to our request about this IG report was, "Field work for this audit is still ongoing."  Meaning we still don't get an answer.  December 18, 2012, "Any update on this?"  [Reply] "Sorry for the delayed response, I was studying for a final."  Okay.  That's when it was pushed off to March.  Just wanted to  check on the progress of this -- this is February 20, 2013 -- are you at a point where you can schedule a briefing?" From your organization, "We are leaving no stone unturned" -- this is February 22, 2013 -- "we won't be able to provide a detailed, substanative briefing until late April/early May."  My time is limited so I'll put the rest in for the record.  Mr George, I could go on as late as May 19th -- I'm sorry, May 9th -- where the Committee staff then sent on the 8th, "Can we go ahead and schedule a briefing?"  May 9th [reply], "I'll get back to you." And it goes on.  Mr. George, this Committee and the entire Congress has existing laws. Yesterday, I spoke before all of your fellow IGs.  Under existing law, you have a peer-level report of substantial misconduct or problems including waste, fraud and abuse.  The act describes your establishment -- meaning in this case, the IRS -- and Congress in the same sentence.  On August 3rd, I sent you a letter explaining the seven day rule, explaining the statute as it has been written for decades.  You have  responsibility to keep us continuously and -- according to statute -- equally informed. In this case it appears as though you certainly did not.  Would you agree with that?


J. Russell George: Uh, no, actually.

Chair Darrell Issa:  Okay, so when you conducted, day-after-day-after day, with Mr. Schulman's subordinate Ms. Paz, one after another interviews in which she's in the room, she's listening to all of these.  You're doing that.  You know, at some time, and I'm going to close with just a question, on what day did you know -- over this year period -- did you know personally that the IRS had abused Americans in the process of approval?  What was that day?  What was the a-ha moment?  And didn't you have an obligation to report that to Congress at that time?

J. Russell George:  Mr. Chairman, I have a detailed timeline which goes almost from month to month as to the interactions that we had with your staff  and then subsequently with the [IRS] commissioner as well as with officials at the Dept of the Treasury.  And I would appreciate the opportunity to give you a sampling of that.

Chair Darrell Issa:  We're going to accept that.  And I just want to close and then I'll let you take as much time as you need.  If your timeline essentially says you kept us informed so that we knew that in fact there was a pattern and could speak to Ways and Means to find out that 100s of organizations still languised not being approved after "the abusive behavior began," they still didn't get their answer in a timely fashion.  And if you're saying that you informed Mr. Wolin so that he would understand what is going on or others at Treasury and you informed us and Mr. Shulman, here's my problem.  Mr. Shulman has already said under oath, he didn't know.  Mr Wolin has already said under oath they didn't know.  And although I'm not under oath, I have reviewed my Committee staff documents, and of course it's a bipartisan relationship, we certainly did not have the information in any way, shape or form that could be understood so that Congressional action could occur until practically today.

J. Russell George:  Mr. Chairman, there are established procedures for conducting an audit and once again this is an audit.  And to ensure fairness and to ensure that we are completely accurate in the information that we convey to Congress, we will not report information until the IRS has had an opportunity to take a look at it to ensure that we're not mistating facts --

Chair Darrell Issa:  Mr. George, that is not the statute. That is not the statute.

J. Russell George:  But it would be incorrect for us to give you partial information which may not be accurate.  It would be counterproductive, sir, if we were to do that.


Ranking Member Elijah Cummings called out Shulman for not coming back to Congress after he was informed there was a problem and correcting his earlier pronouncement to the Committee that no targeting was taking place,  "It seems to me that after saying to the Congress 'absolutely no targeting,' it seems to me that you would come back even if it was a phone call or a letter or someting.  Common sense."  Shulman repeated that he felt he was doing the right thing by being silent.

Ranking Member Elijah Cummings:  Well I'm sorry, that's simply not good enough.  It's simply not good enough, Mr. Shulman.  The IRS conducting an internal investigation of its own.  Not the IG investigation, but there own investigation.  You personally knew there was a target list.  You knew it said "Tea Party" on it.  You put new processes in place and you took personnel actions.  You reassigned at least one individual back in 2012.  Come on, Mr. Shulman.  Help us help the taxpayers.  Am I missing something?


 Douglas Shulman: So as I --
Ranking Member Elijah Cummings:  Did you have an investigation?  Was there an internal investigation?


 Douglas Shulman:  I never understood that word of internal investigation.
Ranking Member Elijah Cumings:  Did you reassign at least one person back in 2012?


Douglas Shulman: Not that I was aware of.
Ranking Member Elijah Cummings:  You don't -- You don't know that?


 Douglas Shulman:  To the best of my knowledge, I was not involved in the reassignment of people in the uh determinations unit.  I have no recollection of that.
Ranking Member Elijah Cummings:  So when you learned about the targeting, apparently, you made some kind of inquiry because you said you found out that it had been resolved.  Who did you go to and who told you that it had been resolved?  And what did they say the resolution was?  You were the head of the IRS.


Douglas Shulman: I was the head of the IRS -- 
Ranking Member Elijah Cummings: And you've got Congress people that were upset about targeting.  They had been asking questions.  You had come [before the Committee] and said there was "absolutely no targeting."  And so help me with this.


 Douglas Shulman: First of all, let me express this is a very serious matter and I fully recognize that.
Great.  It only took Shulman 80 minutes into the hearing to 'express' that.  He had a lengthy opening statement that missed that point.


With few exceptions, the Democrats only focused on Shulman.  There are two reasons for that.  The secondary reason is that it's because Shulman was a Bully Boy Bush appointee.  The primary reason is that Fridays Ways and Means House Committee hearing resorted in blistering comments to Democrats on the Committee.  From their supporters in their districts.  One member told me he couldn't believe that an elderly woman who block walks and phone banks for him every two years when he's up for election felt he was letting the IRS off.  The IRS, because it collects money from people and few are thrilled to fork over money, has a built-in hostility factor with voters.  Fridays meeting struck many Democratic voters as if their elected officials were defending the IRS after it was caught in wrong doing.  They didn't do it astro-turf wise.  They did it by contacting the local offices in their districts and making it clear to people who knew them from previous campaign work just how offended they were.  It doesn't poll well with independents, sticking up for the IRS in this case, but four Dems on House Ways and Means and on Oversight told me that the complaints were coming from the core of their volunteer staff for re-election campaigns.  These are strong supporters and their offense is why you saw more action on the part of the Dems this hearing.

Focusing on Shulman allowed them to land blows on the IRS that they need to going into the re-election campaign.  My question for Oversight was if this were a DoD scandal and it was 2010, would they really think going after Robert Gates and terming him a Bully Boy Bush appointee would have made a difference?  Because while some will grab "Bush appointee" and wrap themselves in it like a safety blanket, the reality is that Shulman could have been asked for his resignation in 2009, in 2010, in 2011 . . .

And while Lois Lerner refused to testify, pleading the Fifth, it should be noted that everyone
assumes that had Congress dropped rounds of questioning and instead offered a round of charades,
she would have really shined.


Kat will cover the hearing at her site tonight, Wally will cover it at Rebecca's site, Ava will cover US House Rep Stephen Lynch in the hearing at Trina's site (Lynch was one of the strongest members in the hearing).


On the topic of Congress, Senator Patty Murray is the Chair of the Senate Budge Comittee and she and Senator Maria Cantwell and US House Rep Cathy McMorris Rogers are expressing disappointment over a decision announced today:

For Immediate Release Murray: (202) 224-2834 Cantwell: (202) 224-8277 McMorris Rodgers: (509) 353-2374 MAY 22, 2013

RSS Feed for Senator Murray's office




iraq
the new york times
 the washington post
 dana milbank
 al-monitor
 national iraqi news agency
alsumaria
iraq body count
antiwar.com
jason ditz

 hurriyet daily news
fars news agency

Friday, May 24, 2013.  Chaos and violence continue, more arrests of journalists in Iraq, a flunky Nouri al-Maliki's weaves a silly tale, who was the idiot that thought now was the time for US Vice President Joe Biden to speak to Iraqi leaders, the US War on the First Amendment continues to gather attention, the US State Dept is asked if a free press is just something they support in other countries, and more.


Starting in the US with The War on the First Amendment.  Last week, The War on the First Amendment's big revelations were that the Justice Dept had secretly seized the phone records of a 167-year-old news institution, the Associated Press. This week's revelation is that the Justice Dept targeted Fox News reporter James Rosen. Clark S. Judge (US News and World Reports) observed yesterday, "It has been a bad few weeks for the First Amendment.  The sinister commonality to the Internal Revenue Service and AP scandals and the James Rosen affair is that each appears to have been (strike "appears ": each was) an attempt to suppress a core American right."  Michael Isikoff (NBC News) reported:

 Attorney General Eric Holder signed off on a controversial search warrant that identified Fox News reporter James Rosen as a “possible co-conspirator” in violations of the Espionage Act and authorized seizure of his private emails, a law enforcement official told NBC News on Thursday.


James Rosen's State Dept press badge was also used to retrace every moment he made in the State Dept when visiting.  Fox News reporter Whitney Ksiazek and Associated Press reporter Matthew Lee raised this issue yesterday at the State Dept spokesperson Patrick Ventrell's press briefing.

 Whitney Ksiazek: And then on a separate topic, was former Secretary Clinton consulted with the tracking of my colleague James Rosen’s building – State Department building swipe? And were any other employees interviewed in connection with the North Korea reporting that James Rosen did?

Patrick Ventrell: My understanding, this is a law enforcement matter. I really refer you to the Department of Justice for all details on that. In terms of our cooperation with the Department of Justice or the FBI on matters, that would be handled through Diplomatic Security channels and law enforcement channels. That’s how that’s done.

Matthew Lee:  So you – in principle, DS doesn’t have a problem turning over badge records to --

Patrick Ventrell: Again, I’m not aware of the specific cooperation on this case, but --

Matthew Lee:  Well, they got the records of his entry and egress, so you guys obviously handed – I mean, they didn’t make them up, I hope.

Patrick Ventrell:   Well, I can’t --
Matthew Lee:  So you guys obviously gave them to them.

Patrick Ventrell: I can’t comment on any details of this particular case, but when we have --
Matthew Lee: Well, I’m not talking about this particular case. Just in general, I mean, are you, like, running around, giving out the details of our comings and goings from this building?

Patrick Ventrell: Issues of cooperation on law enforcement matters between Diplomatic Security and the FBI are handled in law enforcement channels. I don’t have anything further on it.

Matthew Lee: Wait. Well, so you mean you’re not – do you just give the information out if people ask for it? Or do they need a court order or something?

Patrick Ventrell:  Matt, I’m not sure of the legal circumstances on that kind of information sharing.
Matthew Lee: Well, can you check?

Patrick Ventrell: Sure.

Matthew Lee: It would be --
Patrick Ventrell: I’m happy to check on --

Matthew Lee: If DOJ comes to you and says we want the entry and exit records from people, persons X, Y, and Z, do you just give them to them? Or do they have to --

Patrick Ventrell: My understanding is there’s a legal process that’s followed, but I’d have to check with the lawyers.

Matthew Lee:  Well, can you find out what the – what it is --

Patrick Ventrell: I’d be happy to check.

Matthew Lee: -- from your end, whether they need a subpoena or whether they need something like that.






This afternoon, Luke Johnson (Huffington Post) explained, "The Justice Department argued that Fox News reporter James Rosen's emails should be monitored for an indefinite period of time, even in the absence of being able to bring charges against him, according to court filings unearthed by The New Yorker's Ryan Lizza.  The revelation demonstrates the vast power that the Justice Department used against the journalist, who drew attention for publishing an article on North Korea's nuclear plans." Phil Mattingly (Bloomberg News) adds, "The Justice Department, in a statement today, said Holder was involved in the discussions as prosecutors deliberated over whether to seek the search warrant in the investigation into the leak of information about North Korea’s nuclear program in 2009."

On the president's remarks yesterday, Andrea Mitchell (Andrea Mitchell Reports -- link is video) had questions for Antony Blinken today:


Andrea Mitchell: I also wanted to ask you about the leak investigations.  He said in his speech yesterday that he's trying to get answers from the Justice Dept.  Why does he need answers from the Justice Dept about something that has been going on for so long?  Isn't he aware more broadly of the way these leaks are pursued and the way journalists have been swept up in it?

White House Deputy National Security Advisor Antony Blinken: Well Andrea, I obviously can't comment on a specific investigation but I can say this and it goes towards what the president said yesterday --

Yeah, we heard what heard what Barack said yesterday.  So you've got no new comments.  Gotcha.  He also pimped Barack's 'support' for a media shield law.  It was left to a news veteran today to remind the public that Barack's embrace of a proposed media shield law is a new development.  Today on CBS This Morning (link is video), hosts Gayle King and Charlie Rose discussed the issue with veteran CBS journalist Bob Schieffer (who hosts CBS' Face The Nation).

Gayle King: The President also said yesterday, Bob, that he wants to protect journalists from the government's overreach and now comes news this morning that Attorney General Eric HOlder signed off on allowing an investigation into some reporters' e-mails.  Is that an awkward position?

Bob Schieffer: Well I think what's interesting here is the President has said he wants Attorney General Holder to be the one who does this review about protecting reporters' rights and all of that when it is the Justice Dept, of course, that has caused all this controversy.  I mean, the president's saying he wants to review this and he wants to protect reporters' sources.  I think a lot of journalistic organizations and the people who run them are going to view this with  skepticism.  They'll go back to the old Ronald Reagan "trust, but verify" because the last time they introduced the shield law, uh, it was the President and this administration that watered it down and it, uh -- and it just laid there.  Nothing ever happened.  They're going to now reintroduce the same legislation.  But I think a lot of people are just waiting to see how serious the President is about this, because there's no question in the minds of many journalistic organizations -- and there's no question in my mind -- this was an outrageous overreach when they subpoenaed all these records at the Associated Press and some of these other instances as well.

Gene Policinski (San Jose Mercury News)  reminds, "Freedom to report the news requires the freedom to gather it."  Law and Disorder Radio,  an hour long program. usually airs Monday mornings at 9:00 a.m. EST on WBAI and around the country throughout the week.  It did have a new weekly program this week but WBAI listeners didn't hear it.  WBAI is in pledge mode and instead had  Heidi Boghosian, and  Michael S. Smith for two hours live asking for donations to WBAI (if you'd like to donate, click here) and presenting a different program than this week's taped program.  From the live pledge drive:


Michael S. Smith:  And that raid on Associated Press where they got the home, cell phone and business phone records of 100 AP reporters --

Heidi Boghosian:  Right.

Without a warrant.  In clear violation of the Fourth Amendment --

Heidi Boghosian: Right.

Michael Smith:  and the First Amendment.  And just cleaned up the AP records.  Unprecedented.

Heidi Boghosian: It's unprecedented, Michael.

Michael Smith:  It's one thing after another.

Heidi Boghosian:  It's illegal too.  They're supposed to give notice when they do that but what's clearly happening is the press in this country is under attack.  We no longer have really a so-called free press.  If you look at the case of  Bradley Manning, Jeremy Hammond -- who's facing 42 years in prison for uploading documents to WikiLeaks  and of course Julian Assange.  Now the AP spying, the warrantless spying that has effected countless legal organizations such as the Center for Constitutional Rights, The People's Law Center in Chicago --

Michael Smith:  You know, you know why it's effected so many.

Heidi Boghosian:  Why?

Michael Smith:  Because the people effected by the raid on AP files are not just the AP reporters but they're their sources.

Heidi Boghosian:  Exactly.

Michael Smith:  Who's gonna --

Heidi Boghosian:  Who's gonna turn over information?

Michael Smith:  Who's gonna tell something to an AP reporter knowing that their phone conversation is going to go to the FBI?

Heidi Boghosian:  Exactly.  Exactly.  So we have what we have called "the chilling effect on Free Speech in this country" -- which again is why you need to support WBAI because we're not afraid to bring you the truth in reporting.


 At the Libertarian CATO Institute, Julian Sanchez argues the administration needs to take certain steps:

Transparency can begin with letting the public know exactly what the guidelines for investigating the press are—and how the Justice Department interprets them. As the FBI’s operational guidelines make clear, the rules requiring the press to be notified when their phone records are obtained only apply to subpoenas—not other secretive tools, such as National Security Letters, which can be issued without court approval. But the rules governing NSL demands for media records remain secret.
The Justice Department should also release any internal memos interpreting the rules governing press investigations. We know, for example, that there exists an informal 2009 opinion in which Justice Department lawyers analyzed how the rules would apply to sweeping demands—such as so-called “community of interest” requests—that can vacuum up a reporter’s records (among many others) even if the reporter is not specifically named as a target. Only brief excerpts of that opinion have been disclosed, thanks to a 2010 Inspector General report, and there is no way of knowing how many others remain secret.
Finally, we need an independent review—conducted by the Office of the Inspector General, not Attorney General Holder—to determine just how much surveillance of reporters has already occurred. It seems clear that the Justice Department does not think the current rules always require the press to be informed when they’ve been spied on: DOJ lawyers convinced a judge that the government never had to notify Rosen they’d read his e-mails. And because demands for electronic records can be quite broad, it would be all too easy for the government to end up with sensitive information about journalistic investigations even when no reporter was explicitly targeted.
When Congress and the public know what the rules really are, and how they have been applied in practice, we can begin a serious conversation about what reforms are needed to protect press freedom. Asking Eric Holder to investigate Eric Holder, on the other hand, is unlikely to protect much of anything—except, perhaps, Eric Holder.




Back to yesterday's State Dept press briefing. Later in the briefing, Asia Today and India Globe's Raghubir Goyal had a question.



Raghubir Goyal: New subject?

Patrick Ventrell: Yeah.

Raghubir Goyal: Question, Patrick, on the freedom of the press, globally.


Patrick Ventrell: You ask very broad questions, Goyal. (Laughter.)

Raghubir Goyal: Just simple question on the freedom of the press.

Patrick Ventrell: We support the freedom of the press. (Laughter.)

Raghubir Goyal: And the question is --

Matthew Lee: Do you?

Patrick Ventrell: We do.

Matthew Lee: Do you really?

Patrick Ventrell: We do, Matt.
Matthew Lee: Are you speaking for the entire Administration, or just this building?
Patrick Ventrell: We support the freedom of the press. We support it globally. We support it here at home.
Matthew Lee: That’s the position of this building. Is it the position of the entire Administration?
Patrick Ventrell: It is.
Raghubir Goyal: Just to mark the international freedom of the press, and recently Freedom House, they placed another 84 names of the journalists who were killed in 25 countries, but – these are only official from the Freedom House – but hundreds of journalists are beaten, jailed, or killed in many countries – more than 25 countries. My question is here: When Secretary meets with world leaders here or abroad, does he talk ever other than human rights but on the freedom of the press in these countries?

Patrick Ventrell: Indeed, he constantly and consistently raises these issues with foreign leaders around the world and here when he meets with them. And I think you heard over the two weeks during our freedom of the press activities, many of the cases that we called out, the high priority that we place on this, and our deep concern for the well-being of journalists who face violence and repression for the work that they do around the world. So that’s something we’re deeply committed to.

  
Raghubir Goyal: -- especially in China or Saudi Arabia and --

Patrick Ventrell: It includes all those countries.

Raghubir Goyal: Thank you, sir.
Matthew Lee: Is it just violence and repression? Or is it also government intimidation or – that you’re opposed to?
Patrick Ventrell: That as well. All of that.
Matthew Lee: So in other words, the State Department opposes the Administration – the rest of the Justice Department’s investigations into --
Patrick Ventrell: Well, again, I think you’re trying to conflate two issues here.
Matthew Lee: No, no. I’m asking about freedom of the press. That was what the question was.
Patrick Ventrell: And we do – and we support freedom of the press. I think you’ve heard the President – I think you’ve heard the White House talk about this extensively.
Matthew Lee: Right. So you – and you think that violence and repression against journalism – journalists is wrong, as you do harassment or intimidation by government agencies.
Patrick Ventrell: All of the above.
Matthew Lee: So you do not regard what the Justice Department has been doing as harassment or intimidation.
Patrick Ventrell: Again, I can’t comment on a specific law enforcement investigation.
Matthew Lee: I’m not asking about a specific case. In general, would the State Department oppose or support harassment, intimidation, or prosecution of journalists for publishing information?
Patrick Ventrell: We oppose that, in terms of them – is this around the world --
Matthew Lee: Okay. So the State Department then opposes the Justice Department’s prosecution.
Patrick Ventrell: Again, you’re trying to get me to conflate two issues.




No, not really but way to send a mixed signal to the world Patrick Ventrell.  Let's hope Secretary of State John Kerry does raise the issues of press freedom with Nouri al-Maliki's government in Iraq.  As Helena Williams (Independent) noted earlier this month, "According to the CPJ, Iraq continues to have the world's worst record on impunity, with more than 90 unsolved murders over the past decade and no sign that the authorities are working to solve any of them."

Article 36 of the Iraqi Constitution guarantees "Freedom of expression, through all mean," "Freedom of press, printing, advertisement, media and publication" and "Freedom of assembly and peaceful demonstration.  This shall be regulated by law."  Every week, Nouri al-Maliki, chief thug and prime minister in Iraq, demonstrates that he has trouble comprehending if he bothers to read. Fridays in Iraq. Since December 21st, that's meant ongoing protests.

While the protesters to see the day as an opportunity to exercise their civil liberties, Nouri sees the day as a chance to trash the Constitution and demonize the protesters.   The Iraq Times notes today that Nouri's government doesn't represent Iraqis, it represents State of Law (Nouri's political coalition) and State of Law's agendas.  At times, the paper notes, Nouri claims to represent the Shi'ites of Iraq (Shi'ites are the majority population, Sunnis and Kurds are the other two major populations which also includes Turkmen, Assyrians, Chechens, Palestinians, Shabacks, Armenians and more).  But while claiming to represent only one segment, Shi'ites, Nouri can't meet that claim because Shi'ites, like every other group in Iraq, suffer from the lack of dependable public services -- that means drinking water, that means dependable electricity, that means sewer systems that work (and the al Sadr section of Baghdad -- a Shi'ite section before the start of the war in 2003 and a Shi'ite section today -- is always one of the worst flooded areas in Baghdad when the heavy rains come down due to refusal of Nouri's government to spend money on needed sewage and drainage). 


 Nouri continued his war on the press and on protesters today.  With regards to the press, it's very easy for Nouri to target them since western outlets refuse to cover the protests, refuse to do anything that might upset Nouri.  So it's left for Iraqi journalists to fight all alone for the Constitutionally guaranteed free press.  Not only do they fight alone but when they are attacked, when they are arrested, the western world can't be bothered.  Earlier this year, a French reporter, Nadir Dendoune, was imprisoned by Nouri wrongly.  We covered it here.  It was news and the reporter deserved coverage.  But so do the Iraqi reporters who suffer and they don't get the coverage.  They don't get the worldwide coverage.

Mustafa al-Rubaie was attacked by an Iraqi military lientenant and the soldiers under him joined in on the attack, beating al-Rubaie with their fists.  Oh, goodness, that must have been under Iraqi President Saddam Hussein!  No. This was last week in Baghdad.  All the Baghdad TV reporter was doing was covering a story.  For that he was publicly beaten by the military.  A week ago.  And you've never heard Nouri al-Maliki condemn it.  You may not have even heard that it happened.  But it is why, around the world, people are noting (such as here) that there's no difference between Nouri al-Maliki and Saddam Hussein.

Alsumaria reports Anbar police arrested seven journalists for attempting to cover the Ramadi sit-in.  Among the arrested was Alsumaria's photojournalist and cameraman Anmar al-Ani.   In order to be released, Alsumaria reports, Anmar al-Ani was forced to sign a pledge that he would not cover the protests.  It was made clear to him that he would not be released without signing the pledge.  He says that he was interrogated by the Police Directorate in Anbar.  In a report this evening, they note two other journalists have now been released -- presumably also after signing the pledge.  Does the White House -- as it gives Nouri's regime billions this year alone and US service members for 'counter-terrorism' -- ever raise this issue of cracking down on the press?  Maybe.  Maybe they say things like, "Call Anmar al-Ani a 'co-conspirator' and be sure and seize phone records."



Or maybe the explain how to hack?  Al Mada reports the protesters website was hacked late last night.  Hacking websites is not uncommon in Iraq.  This is: No one has claimed responsibility.  The Iraqi hackers that are real hackers, hackers who do it for the joy of hacking and the rush it provides, they repeatedly claim responsibility.  We've noted repeatedly that the hacked site has a name taking responsibility and usually an e-mail address.  For example, May 4th the Independent High Electoral Commission's website was hacked.  What did it say?

Attacked By T34M HACKERS OF IRAQ
" .. IraQ in Our hearts .. "
IraQeN-H4XORZ
ethic41_backer@yahoo.cl
ryvv@yahoo.com

(We're going to have drop FOTKI for image sharing.  It's not working -- repeatedly.  You can click here and see the image that should display on the May 4th page.)


This has happened repeatedly.  For the record, they all leave their e-mail address.  They all claim credit.  Now there's a hack and no one's taking credit.  Doesn't sound to me like that was a hack by the Iraqi hacking community.  Sounds to me like that was a hack carried out by the Iraqi government.



In addition to Ramadi, Iraqi Spring MC reports that reporters covering the Falluja demonstration were threatened by security forces.  National Iraqi News Agency reports that "tens of thousands" turned out in Ramadi and Falluja.  Anbar organizer Shiekh Mohammed Fayyad states that "the primary goal is to inform the government that our demonstrations are peaceful and backed by the citizens deep convictions."  In Falluja, Iraqi Spring MC reports, there were calls for an investigation into the second massacre of Falluja (November 2004) by the occupation forces and the Iraqi government.   Protests also took place in Baiji, Baghdad. and Baquba, and the Iraqi Spring MC offers this video of the Baquba demonstrators.  On the topic of Baquba, NINA reports, "Preachers of Diyala Fri-prayers blamed and denounced in their sermons security forces and hold them [responsible for] the repeated violations targeting mosques and worshipers, especially the recent bombings that targeted worshipers in Sariya mosque in Baquba."  They add that Shiekh Thamer al-Falahi insisted that the demands of the protesters be met.  Alsumaria reports (and check out their photo of the huge crowd) protests also took place in Samarr and Tikrit and that, in Sammar, surveys were passed out by organizers to the demonstrators to get their feedback.

Al Mada reports that Martin Kobler, the United Nations Secretary-General's Special Envoy to Iraq, joined former Finance Minister Rafie al-Issawi, MP ahmed al-Alwani, and  Marwan Ali for a press conference at the home of Sahwa leader Ahmed Abu Risha to emphasize how important peaceful protest is and that this is a right the Constitution guarantees.  Kobler stated the UN confirms the right to demonstrate peacefully.  The attacks on journalists were called out and Kobler noted that freedom of the press is guaranteed in the country's Constitution.  Rafie al-Issawi declared that, after five months, the government (Nouri al-Maliki) has still not implemented the demands of the six provinces that have been protesting.   He also called for military forces, Nouri's federal forces and SWAT to leave Anbar and the end of arrest warrants for sit-in leaders.   Alwani's statements included calling out "genocides" in Diyala and Hawija and for the "war criminals" to be tried in international courts.


Tuesday, April 23rd Nouri's federal forces stormed a sit-in in Hawija causing a massacre.   Alsumaria noted Kirkuk's Department of Health (Hawija is in Kirkuk)  announced 50 activists have died and 110 were injured in the assault.UNICEF counts 8 children dead in the massacre and twelve more children were left injured.


Whether US Secretary of State John Kerry talks about that with Nouri or about the press, no one knows.  But US Vice President Joe Biden is talking to Iraq and that's not necessarily a good thing.  Wait for it.  First, the White House issued the following today:


Office of the Vice President

Readout of Vice President Biden’s Call with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki

Vice President Biden spoke with Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki today.  Discussion focused on Syria, and both leaders agreed on the importance of a negotiated end to the conflict.  The Vice President expressed concern about the security situation in Iraq and pledged continued U.S. support for Iraq in its fight against terrorism.   The Vice President also spoke about the importance of outreach to leaders across the political spectrum.  Both leaders expressed their ongoing commitment to deepening the U.S.-Iraq strategic partnership, as outlined in the Strategic Framework Agreement.


We're not done.  They also issued the following:

Readout of Vice President Biden’s Calls with Iraqi Kurdistan President Masud Barzani and Iraqi Council of Representatives Speaker Osama Nujayfi

Vice President Biden spoke with Iraqi Kurdistan President Masud Barzani and Iraqi Council of Representatives Speaker Osama Nujayfi yesterday, Thursday, May 23rd.  With President Barzani, the Vice President commended the return of Kurdish ministers and parliamentarians to Baghdad, and stressed the importance of engagement by all sides to seek solutions to contentious issues under the Iraqi Constitution.  With Speaker Nujayfi, the Vice President expressed concern about the security situation in Iraq, stressing the need for all of Iraq’s political leadership to unequivocally renounce violence and seek to marginalize extremists.  All three leaders reaffirmed the importance of the U.S.-Iraq strategic partnership.


So Joe didn't bring up the press and Joe didn't bring up the protesters so why the heck did the White House have him make those calls?

I like Joe Biden.  But talk about tone deaf on the part of the White House, talk about the need for Arabic speakers in the White House. There is nothing worse they could have done then have Joe Biden speak to Iraqi leaders today -- this month.

In the US, Joe Biden represents many things to different sets of people.  In Iraq?  He's got two images and let's focus on the most damaging: He proposed, as US Senator, that peace in Iraq would be possible only by splitting the country into a Shi'ite South, a Sunni central and the KRG in the north.  As Senator.  And we noted, while running for the presidential nomination, right before Iowa, Joe had noted if the US Congress didn't support then the idea was dead.  We covered that here.

Most ignored it because Biden's campaign was losing steam (he'd quickly drop out of the race).

It never registered in Iraq.

They continue to see Biden as the man who wants to split up their country.  And the Arabic press for the last three weeks has been full of reports that it's about to happen, Iraq's about to split.  Nouri's been in contact with Biden, the Kurds came to Baghdad just to ensure that the split takes place, blah blah blah.  Whispers with no foundation -- they may be true, they may be false -- have been all over Arabic media -- not just social media, all of the Iraqi outlets have reported it -- and reported it as a done deal.

So with the tension and fear rising in Iraq currently, why is Biden the go-to?  This was absolutely the wrong thing at the wrong time and these calls with the various leaders, whatever their intent (I'm told military issues were discussed with Nouri -- specifically more troops under the Strategic Framework Agreement and last December's Memorandum of Understanding with the Defense Dept), are only going to fuel more rumors in Iraq.

Even more troubling is All Iraq News' report that Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq head Ammar al-Hakim met with "US Embassy Charge D'Affaires" Doug Silliman today.  Are they -- the US administration -- just trying to send Iraqis reeling with paranoia?  Silliman's a name that's barely known in the US.  But his position in Turkey and the WikiLeaks exposure made him very well known in Arab media.  And Turkey borders Iraq so you can be sure that with talk of the US secretly supporting the PKK and supposedly looking the other way while Turkey allegedly supported al Qaeda in Iraq (Hurriyet News Daily) and that's before you get to the Cables WikiLeaks released and the powder keg that is the topic of Israel (it's a power keg issue in Iraq).  There is absolutely zero awareness and zero sensitivity when it comes to choosing US officials to dialogue with Iraqi officials.  This is just embarrassing, not to mention counter-productive.

I have no idea why the White House has no one monitoring Arabic media, why there's no one to say, "Uh, before the Vice President starts making those calls, you might want to look at these 57 reports from Iraq media in the last three weeks about how Biden's in secret talks with Nouri and the Kurds to split up the country."

These conversations will probably cause more harm than good and Biden's not given the chance to let this rumor in Iraq die (if it's just a rumor) before using his office to try to have some impact or influence on the current situation in Iraq.




Aleem Maqbool (BBC News) reports: on the rising tensions and starts by quoting a statement from Nouri's stooge  Sami al-Askari:



"Some Sunnis will not feel happy whatever they get because now they are sharing power. Perhaps this generation cannot be cured but we hope that the next generation of Sunnis feel they are Iraqi and don't feel they are different."
It is a statement that will infuriate many Iraqi Sunnis, including Nada Jabouri, an opposition MP.
"I feel sorry to hear that from any official in my country because after all we are already all Iraqis - all of us are Sunni, all of us are Shia."
Ms Jabouri says Sunni grievances are real, and points not only to the detentions, but the recent killings by government forces of Sunnis protesting against human rights abuses.
"No government has the right to use force against those demonstrators who are peaceful," she says.
Ms Jabouri acknowledged the many attacks were carried out by Sunni militant groups like al-Qaeda against Shia civilians, but said the government responses were only creating more tensions.
"We should not make civilian people pay the price for terrorist groups and what they do, but that is what is happening in Iraq now," she says.



Nada al-Jabouri is a MP with the Iraqiya bloc which won the 2010 elections and should have had first crack at the post of prime minister as a result of their win.  Instead, second place State of Law got to keep Nouri because Nouri pouted like a baby refusing to leave the post while Barack worked around the Constitution getting US officials to come up with The Erbil Agreement which is the legal basis -- such as it is -- for Nouri's second term.



And how sweet for Sami that he can tell such sweet fairy tales that absolve the government of wrong doing and pin the blame on Sunnis.  No doubt, at night in bed with Nouri, Sami al-Askari's a regular Scheherazade weaving one tale after another.

Too bad all the fairy tales in the world won't chase away the ongoing violence.  All Iraq News notes 1 person was shot dead in Mosul.  Alsumaria adds that another Mosul attack left one police officer injured and an armed attack on a Baghdad police station has left seven police officers injured.  National Iraqi News Agency reports an assassination attempt in Awja on Col Akrahm Saddam Midlif which he survived but which left two of his bodyguards wounded, a Falluja attack left two people injured (drive-by shooting), a Baquba bombing left a Sahwa injured, and late last night there was an attempted assassination on Diyala Province Governor Omar Himyari in Hamrin which left one of his bodyguards injured.  Through yesterday, Iraq Body Count counts 653 violent deaths so far this month. 



Back to the US,  Tuesday's snapshot covered a House Veterans Affairs Subcommittee hearing.  This was an exchange between the Subcommittee Chair and Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of Ameirca's Alex Nicholson:




My apologies, I left out Alex Nicholson's name.  The snapshots are dictated but that was my mistake.  If it's a morning hearing -- that ends before lunch (two recently haven't) -- at lunch, I either get on the laptop or the iPad and type up whatever exchanges will be included in the snapshot.  I do that myself.  Tuesday was a morning hearing and it was over in the morning.  That's my error and my mistake.  My apologies.  On the issue of the backlog, Aaron Glantz (Center for Investigative Reporting) reports:




The Department of Veterans Affairs has systematically missed nearly all of its internal benchmarks for reducing a hulking backlog of benefits claims and has quietly backed away from repeated promises to give all veterans and family members speedier decisions by 2015.
Internal VA documents, obtained by the Center for Investigative Reporting, show the agency processed 260,000 fewer claims than it thought it would during the past year and a half – falling 130,000 short in the 2012 fiscal year and another 130,000 short of its goal between October and March. 
The result: At a time when the number of veterans facing long waits was supposed to be going down, it instead went up.
On April 29, the VA began to qualify its promise, made repeatedly since 2009, that “all claims” would be processed within four months by 2015.



Monday is Memorial Day.   CBS 60 Minutes correspondent Steve Kroft will be hosting a one hour special airing on CBS News Radio over the weekend (and streaming here) about Post-Traumatic Stress entitled "Combat Stress: Finding the Way Home." It's a strong documentary addressing a number of issues including the need to feel in control of your treatment and the need to choose the treatment that works for you.




Still on veterans issues, yesterday's the House Veterans Affairs Committee released the following:

Miller, McCarthy Introduce VA Backlog Task Force Bill

WASHINGTON, DC – Today, Chairman Jeff Miller (FL-01) and House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (CA-23) introduced legislation that would establish an independent task force or commission to analyze VA’s disability benefits claims processing system. The task force would be charged with examining the root causes of VA’s backlog and providing solutions for ending it by 2015.
After decades of mismanagement, VA is buried under a mountain of backlogged disability benefits compensation claims. Nearly 900,000 veterans are waiting for a claims decision — a process that takes nine months on average, but in some cases takes years. VA leaders have repeatedly pledged to end the backlog by 2015, but many in the veterans community are skeptical the department is on track to meet that goal.
Under the bill, the task force would provide recommendations for improving VA’s claims processing operations within 60 days of its first meeting and continually help the department refine its claims processing efforts until VA’s backlog is eliminated.  
Task force members would be appointed by members of Congress and the Obama administration and would include a delegate from VA. The bill would also require task force members to solicit input from representatives from the veterans service organization community and private-sector leaders in fields such as claims processing, logistics, electronic records and product tracking.
“Government bureaucrats under both Republican and Democrat administrations created the backlog, so it’s only natural to solicit outside help from the private sector and the VSO community in working toward a solution. By creating a task force of private industry leaders, VA and VSO officials, we hope to establish a revised evidenced-based process that will help VA break its claims backlog once and for all in 2015, just as department leaders have promised.” Miller said.

“The entire country is counting on VA to end the backlog by 2015, and Congress is committed to holding the department accountable until they achieve that goal. Our veterans deserve the care they earned while protecting and defending our country, and continued failure by the VA cannot and will not be tolerated.” McCarthy said.

"As Memorial Day approaches, it's clear that there is no roadmap from the White House to bring the VA backlog to zero. Veterans need a comprehensive, inter-agency approach to solve the disgraceful backlog. IAVA strongly supports Chairman Miller's bill to proactively establish just such a coordinated effort to get the VA the help it needs on the backlog and to bring outside players to the table to assist in that effort. The enormous success of the roundtable with private industry experts convened by the Chairman last week is an example how the VA can greatly benefit from an expansion of this approach," said Paul Rieckhoff, CEO and Founder of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America.

iraq
 wbai
law and disorder radio
michael s. smith
heidi boghosian
iraqi spring mc
alsumaria
al mada
national iraqi news agency
all iraq news
bbc news
aleem maqbool
the associated press
matthew lee
the center for investigative journalism
aaron glantz
the san jose mercury news
cbs news radio
steve kroft

Monday, January 13, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue,  UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon visits Baghdad, some in the US think you can pet mad dog Nouri, efforts to charge UK officials with War Crimes, and more.



Tweet of the day:

1. Mohammed Ansar‏@MoAnsar9h

   Iraq: before and after democracy was imposed by the West. Let's hope they realise how lucky they are. (via @MPACUK) pic.twitter.com/fkY3ku47TS

   Expand

   • Reply
   • Retweet
   • Favorite

As more eyes turn to Iraq internationally, Michael Holmes (CNN -- link is video and text) observes:



And the Sunnis are correct.  US President Barack Obama backed Nouri for a second term as prime minister even though Nouri's State of Law came in second to Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya.  As Ned Parker explained in "Who Lost Iraq?" (POLITICO) last week:


It was the April 2010 national election and its tortured aftermath that sewed the seeds of today’s crisis in Iraq. Beforehand, U.S. state and military officials had prepared for any scenario, including the possibility that Maliki might refuse to leave office for another Shiite Islamist candidate. No one imagined that the secular Iraqiya list, backed by Sunni Arabs, would win the largest number of seats in parliament. Suddenly the Sunnis’ candidate, secular Shiite Ayad Allawi, was poised to be prime minister. But Maliki refused and dug in.
And it is here where America found its standing wounded. Anxious about midterm elections in November and worried about the status of U.S. forces slated to be drawn down to 50,000 by August, the White House decided to pick winners. According to multiple officials in Baghdad at time, Vice President Joseph Biden and then-Ambassador Chris Hill decided in July 2010 to support Maliki for prime minister, but Maliki had to bring the Sunnis and Allawi onboard. Hill and his staff then made America’s support for Maliki clear in meetings with Iraqi political figures.


And the US government brokered The Erbil Agreement to give Nouri the second term.  This was a power-sharing agreement, a legal contract, one that US officials told the leaders of Iraq's political blocs would have the full backing of the White House.

But Nouri used this contract to secure a second term in November 2010 and refused to then implement the concessions he agreed to in the contract to get the second term.

And the White House?

They played dumb.

Nouri stalled on implementing The Erbil Agreement.  Then came the summer of 2011 and Iraqiya, the Kurds and Moqtada al-Sadr all began publicly demanding that Nouri implement The Erbil Agreement as planned.   He refused to.  He's still refused to.  He's a liar who never keeps his word.

From December 2006 to July 2011, Robert Gates was the US Secretary of Defense.  Tony Capaccio (Bloomberg News) gets Gates' opinion on Iraq today:

Maliki “has turned out to be far less inclusive and more of a sectarian leader then we had hoped” after the U.S. “handed the Iraqis a golden opportunity in 2009, 2010,” Gates said today in an interview in New York. “Since then, he’s really been sort of antagonistic towards the Sunnis in a kind of unrelenting way.” 

Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq also points the finger at Nouri.  David Kenner (Foreign Policy) reports:


 Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq -- a former member of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party before being expelled in 1977 -- told Foreign Policy that the government in Baghdad was using al Qaeda as a pretext to crack down on its political opponents. Marginalization of Sunni Arabs, Mutlaq added, was leading to their radicalization. And even as he deplored the U.S. invasion for being the root cause of Iraq's problems, he called on Washington to intervene in Iraqi politics to save the country from disaster.
"Yes, I do blame [the Americans]," he said. "And I expect them to do some changes in Iraq now. Not necessarily through military operations, but through political pressure and economic pressure on Iraqi politicians, to make sure that Iraqis feel that they are equal in their own country." 


Now might be a good time to remember when Saleh al-Mutlaq last gave an interview to a US news outlet. We need to drop back to December of 2011 for that. Arwa Damon and Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reported:


Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki is amassing dictatorial power as U.S. troops leave the country, risking a new civil war and the breakup of the nation, his deputy warned Tuesday.
Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq told CNN that he was "shocked" to hear U.S. President Barack Obama greet al-Maliki at the White House on Monday as "the elected leader of a sovereign, self-reliant and democratic Iraq." He said Washington is leaving Iraq "with a dictator" who has ignored a power-sharing agreement, kept control of the country's security forces and rounded up hundreds of people in recent weeks.
[. . .]
"America left Iraq with almost no infrastructure. The political process is going in a very wrong direction, going toward a dictatorship," he said. "People are not going to accept that, and most likely they are going to ask for the division of the country. And this is going to be a disaster. Dividing the country isn't going to be smooth, because dividing the country is going to be a war before that and a war after that."


Remember how Nouri responded to that?  Dropping back to December 17, 2011:

Like Tareq al-Hashemi, Saleh al-Mutlaq is a member of the Iraqiya political slate.  Dar Addustour is reporting that the homes of al-Hashemi and al-Mutlaq as well as the home of Rafi Hiyad al-Issawi have been surrounded by "tanks and special forces." Dr. Rafi Hiyad al-Issawi was the previous Deputy prime minister (2007 through 2010). He was the head of Falluja General Hospital prior to that and he is currently the Minister of Finance. Like the other two, al-Issawi is a member of Iraqiya.


And from the December 19, 2011 snapshot:

Late Saturday night online (Sunday in print), Liz Sly (Washington Post) noted that the 'government' in Iraq is "unraveling faster than had been anticipated Saturday." Really?  All in one day.  Well,  no, not in one day.  She continued,  "In recent days, the homes of top Sunni politicians in the fortified Green Zone have been ringed by tanks and armored personnel carriers, and rumors are flying that arrest warrants will be issued for other Sunni leaders." 

That's how Nouri responded to criticism just two years ago.  Let's wait and see if he handles it any better today.

Today the Washington Institute for Near East Policy's Michael Knights argues at USA Today:

 Providing counter-terrorism advisors and air support during crises such as the present one does nothing to invalidate President Obama's claim to have ended the U.S. military occupation of Iraq. No "boots on the ground" should not be taken to extremes. And if a post-occupation Iraq cannot openly ask for help from its recent occupier, this should not stop the U.S. from occasionally pursuing terrorists in Iraq when they become vulnerable. After all, is al-Qaeda in Iraq any less threatening than al-Qaeda's ideologues in Pakistan, where America risked undermining the government of a nuclear-armed Islamic state to kill Osama bin Laden without the host government's permission?


Joining in the arm-arm-Iraq chorus, the editorial board of the Middleton Press insists:





Critics worry that Maliki’s Shiite-dominated government might turn U.S. weapons on perceived foes in the Sunni tribal ranks; given the increasingly sectarian style of his rule, that’s a legitimate fear. That’s why the Obama administration should make its military aid explicitly conditional on a new political effort by Maliki for a rapprochement with Sunnis. Sunni leaders, who dominated during the long reign of Saddam Hussein, have also been slow to adjust to their minority status. But Maliki is in charge and must take the initiative.


How does that work?

How do conditions placed on Nouri work?

In his first term, which began in 2006, he took an oath to uphold the Iraqi Constitution.  That Constitution includes Article 140 which calls for a referendum and census to be held on Kirkuk by the end of 2007.  He refused to do that.

Then, in 2010, he wanted a second term the voters didn't give him so the US brokered The Erbil Agreement -- a legal contract.  He used it to get his second term and then refused to honor his contractual promises -- which included, yes, implementing Article 140.

In February 2011, he insisted that if protesters would leave the streets, he would end corruption in 100 days.  100 days came and went.  No end to corruption.

When he became prime minister for the second time, he was supposed to assemble a Cabinet.  In fact, that's the only condition to move from prime minister-designate to prime minister.  But Nouri never did that.  In fact, he still hasn't.   Back in July, 2012,  Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) observed, "Shiite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has struggled to forge a lasting power-sharing agreement and has yet to fill key Cabinet positions, including the ministers of defense, interior and national security, while his backers have also shown signs of wobbling support." True then and still true.

You might think if the country was gripped by violence, Nouri would finally get around to filling those positions but you'd be wrong.

So I'd love to know how the editorial board of the Middleton Press thinks they can impose conditions that Nouri will follow since he's failed to follow every condition (including the White House benchmarks) and every law previously.

The Center for Strategic and International Studies'Anthony H. Cordesman offers an assessment of Nouri today:

He has refused to honor the Erbil power-sharing agreement that was supposed to create a national government that could tie together Arab Sunni and Arab Shi’ite, and he has increased tensions with Iraq’s Kurds. As the U.S. State Department human rights reports for Iraq, Amnesty International, and the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) make all too clear; Maliki’s search for power has steadily repressed and alienated Iraq’s Sunnis on a national level. It has led to show trials and death sentences against one of Iraq’s leading Sunni politicians including former Vice President Taqris al-Hashimi, who has been living in asylum in Turkey since being convicted nad sentenced to death in absentia by an Iraqi court. It has shifted the promotion structure in the Iraqi Security Forces to both give the Prime Minister personal control and has turned them into an instrument he can use against Sunnis.
Al Qaeda in Iraq - nor its recent incarnation the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) or the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) - has not risen up as a rebirth of the opposition the U.S. faced in 2005-2008. In spite of attempts by the Maliki government to label virtually any major Sunni opposition as terrorists, the steady increase in that opposition orginated primarily in the form of peaceful and legitimate political protests against Maliki’s purges of elected Iraqi Sunni leaders, and a regular exclusion of Sunnis from the government – including the Sons of Iraq in areas like Anbar. It came because Maliki used the Iraqi Security Forces  against segments of his own population in the name of fighting terrorists and extremists. It came because of the failure to use Iraq’s oil wealth effectively and fairly – resulting with an economy that the CIA ranks Iraq 140th in the world in per capita income. The opposition to Maliki's government also resulted from corruption so extreme that in December 2013 Transparency International ranked Iraq the seventh most corrupt country in the world, with only Libya, South Sudan, Sudan, Afghanistan, North Korea, and Somalia ranking worse than Iraq in terms of corruption.


Nouri's word is useless.  He's refused to ever keep it and he is the root cause of violence in Iraq.  Furthermore, if the editorial board of the Middletown Press needs a condition, here's a condition:

Consistent with U.S. law and policy, the Department of State vets its assistance to foreign security forces, as well as certain Department of Defense training programs, to ensure that recipients have not committed gross human rights abuses. When the vetting process uncovers credible information that an individual or unit has committed a gross violation of human rights, U.S. assistance is withheld.

That condition?  Happens to be a US law.  It's the Leahy Amendment, names after Senator Patrick Leahy.  In spit of that law, people are advocating for the US government to continue to arm a despot who regularly uses weapons on the Iraqi people.


The violence continue in Iraq today.  One of the targets?  The new Falluja Chief of police Col Mohammed Alewi took over his position yesterday. Today, National Iraqi News Agency reports his home was bombed. NINA also notes a western Mosul bombing left three police members injured, a Baquba bombing left a police member and a civilian injured, 1 Iraqi soldier was shot dead in Kirkuk, a Baghdad car bombing left 2 people dead and thirteen injured, an Adhamiya Corniche car bombing claimed the life of 1 person and left nine injured, a south Mosul roadside bombing left six construction workers injured, an eastern Baghdad car bombing left 1 person dead and ten more injured, and a downtown Baghdad car bombing claimed 5 lives and left thirteen more injured.

Yesterday wasn't even the half-way mark but, according to Iraq Body Count, the number killed in violent attacks so far this month reached 420 on Sunday.  AKE's John Drake Tweeted today:








United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon arrived in Baghdad today.


The United Nations notes:

Voicing concern about the deteriorating security in parts of Iraq, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today urged all political leaders to unite against terrorism and work together to stabilize the country and stop the “senseless deaths of Iraqi women, children and men.”
“We agreed that the challenges facing Iraq require all political leaders to fulfil their responsibilities to ensure social cohesion, dialogue and progress over political obstacles,” Mr. Ban said, speaking alongside Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki, following their meeting in Baghdad.
He also met with the Vice-President, the Foreign Minister, the Speaker of the Council of Representatives and President of the Independent High Electoral Commission.
“The people of Iraq are looking to their leaders for tangible benefits and a better future,” he added, noting that the parliamentary elections due to held in April are an “opportunity” to deliver on these legitimate expectations.
Urging Iraq’s leaders to address root causes of the current wave of unrest, ensuring that “nobody is left behind,” Mr. Ban encouraged measures to strengthen the country’s social fabric – through political participation, democratic processes and institutions, respect for the rule of law and human rights, and inclusive development. 


Hamza Mustafa (Asharq al-Awsat) adds:

Maliki, meanwhile, dismissed calls for dialogue in the Anbar Province, saying that there could be no negotiations with insurgents linked to Al-Qaeda.
“Talk about dialogue in Al-Anbar is rejected because we do not hold dialogue with Al-Qaeda,” he said, adding that the conflict in Anbar had united Iraqis in their fight against the terrorist group.

Yeah, Nouri did just blow of Ban Ki-moon's statements.  And that was actually key to the joint-press conference.  AFP reports:

Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki on Monday publicly rebuked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's call for the country to halt executions while standing beside him at a joint news conference.
Despite widespread calls for a moratorium due to major problems with the country's criminal justice system, Iraq executed at least 169 people last year, its highest such figure since the 2003 US-led invasion, placing it third in the world, behind just China and Iran.

At Queerty, Iraq War veteran Rob Smith explains why you should buy his new book Closets, Combat, and Coming Out: Coming of Age as a Gay Man in the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Army.









Moving over to  news of England and Iraq.  RT reports:

The ICC has been urged to investigate the alleged war crimes of UK politicians during the Iraq conflict. A dossier detailing reports of sexual assault, torture and mock executions carried out by British soldiers in Iraq has been submitted to the Court.

The 250-page document entitled “The Responsibility of UK Officials for War Crimes Involving Systematic Detainee Abuse in Iraq from 2003-2008”, published by the German-based European Centre for Constitutional Human Rights, calls for "opening of an investigation” into the actions of senior British officials during the conflict. 


Chris Harris (Euronews) adds:


The head of the British Army, General Sir Peter Wall, and former defence secretary Geoff Hoon, are among those reportedly named in a 250-page dossier alleging the abuse.
But current UK foreign secretary William Hague said the application should be rejected because the allegations are already under investigation or have been dealt with.
The dossier, which claims to represent more than 400 Iraqis, was submitted by Public Interest Lawyers. It is said to detail allegations, between 2003-2008, of beatings, electrocution, mock executions and sexual assault.


Felicity Arbuthnot (Dissident Voice) continues:



The document, lodged with the International Criminal Court at the Hague on Saturday (11th January 2013), “calls for an investigation into the alleged war crimes, under Article 15 of the Rome Statute” and is the result of some years of work by Birmingham-based Public Interest Lawyers and the European Centre for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR.). The submission “is the most detailed ever submitted to the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor on war crimes allegedly committed by British forces in Iraq.”
In 2006 the ICC opined that “there was a reasonable basis to believe that crimes within the jurisdiction of the court had been committed, namely willful killing and inhuman treatment.” However, since the claims were less than twenty cases, prosecutors declined to mount an investigation.
Subsequently “hundreds of other claims have come to light, prompting consideration of the complaint now. It is the start of a process which could result in British politicians and generals being put in the dock on war-crimes charges.” The “pattern of abusive treatment by UK services personnel in Iraq continued over almost six years of military operations.” When is a crime not a crime, one wonders, when it is “only” in double figures?

Evidence is presented of “systematic use of brutal violence, that at times resulted in the death of detainees, while in the custody of UK Services Personnel.”









iraq
dissident voice
felicity arbuthnot
bloomberg news
tony capaccio

arwa damon
dar addustour

Tuesday, January 14, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, Ramadi's in the control of rebels, the assault on Anbar continues to target women and children, Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq asks for US monitors to Iraq's upcoming elections, Iraqiya leader Ayad Allawi explains the US has never given Nouri conditions for their support, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon visits the KRG (including a Syrian refugee camp), and more.

We'll start with Monday's US State Dept press briefing when spokesperson Jen Harf was asked about Iraq.


QUESTION: On Iraq, please.

MS. HARF: Iraq?

QUESTION: Iraq.

MS. HARF: Yes.

QUESTION: Do you have anything about the recent – I mean, updating about the cooperation with the Iraqi Government regarding --

MS. HARF: Yeah, let me – yeah – sorry, I didn’t mean to cut you off there.

QUESTION: -- confronting different --

MS. HARF: Yep. Let me just --

QUESTION: -- challenges?

MS. HARF: -- give you a few updates here, and then if there are any follow-ups, I’m happy to get to it.
So just a couple of things. We put out a fairly lengthy statement about Deputy Assistant Secretary Brett McGurk’s travel to Iraq. Just a little update on the situation on the ground, and we talked about this a little last week – but basically that if we think back on, I think it was January 1^st when AQ took over much of Ramadi, Fallujah, that the Iraqis, their local police, with the support of the army in a supporting role, have really cleared out most of Ramadi, and basically did it in about a week, a little longer, and now have a plan to use some of those same tactics to do the same thing in Fallujah. We’re working with them very closely on this.
Obviously, Fallujah’s a more complicated situation, but I think it’s important to note when there is success in doing this. A lot of people covered when AQ took over Ramadi. I think there should be as much attention paid to when the Iraqi local police was able to push them out to the outskirts of Ramadi. So we’re working with them on a whole host of issues, really. It’s working with them politically – as you saw Deputy Assistant Secretary McGurk met with everybody, I think, in Iraq over his few day trips there – but also on the military and counterterrorism side, certainly accelerating our cooperation.
I don’t have more details other than what we talked about last week.

QUESTION: Yeah, I mean, if it was the talk about 72 hours ago or 48 hours ago, was about this Apache helicopters and missiles and all these things are – these things are finalizing, or on --


MS. HARF: Well, we certainly hope so. This is – these are things we certainly support, the Administration supports. We will keep working with Congress to as quickly as possible get more things, for lack of a more technical term, more materials to the Iraqi Government they can use in this fight. We are very committed to supporting them in this way through foreign military sales, and also politically and diplomatically.


It's rather sad that on the day the United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon begins a visit to Iraq, the US State Dept doesn't even note the visit.  Monday, Ban Ki-moon spent the day in Baghdad.  Among those he met with?  Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.  Deutsche Welle explains, "Visiting refugees from neighboring war-torn Syria in the Kurdish-hub of Irbil in northern Iraq on Monday, Ban had urged Iraqi leaders to seek 'political dialogue' and said he was saddened to 'so many young children and vulnerable groups who suffer from this man-made tragedy'."  UPI notes, "Their meeting followed a bloody Sunday that left 22 dead and 80 injured. On his fifth trip to Iraq, the UN leader expressed concern about the deteriorating security situation and encouraged political unity and civic participation." ABC News Radio says the violence "overshadowed" the Secretary-General's visit to the capital.


Today, he visited the KRG in northern Iraq.  The UN News Centre reports:






Visiting with Syrian refugees in northern Iraq, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today called “heart-breaking” what he saw in Kawrgosik camp, saying he was particularly saddened to see so many young children, women and vulnerable people suffering from “this man-made tragedy.”
“I am here to send our strong solidarity and support to all the refugees who came from Syria, on behalf of the United Nations and the international community,” said Mr. Ban alongside the High Commissioner for Refugees, Antonio Guterres, and Valerie Amos, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and UN Emergency Relief Coordinator.
“We are also here to listen to the concerns and aspirations of all the refugees here,” the UN chief said, recalling the people with whom he met in their tents. “Families shared their struggles to survive, find their loved ones and cope with the sadness of those who have been lost.”
The Kurdistan Regional Government is hosting more than 220,000 Syrian refugees. Mr. Ban highly commended “its commitment to humanitarian principles” in establishing refugee camps, transit sites and a humanitarian corridor to north-east Syria. 

And they note:

In a private meeting in Erbil with the President of the Kurdistan Region, Massoud Barzani, and Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani, Mr. Ban urged the Government to keep the border open for refugees fleeing the conflict.
  The request was echoed by Mr. Guterres, who said it “breaks my heart” to see Syrian refugees risking their lives to escape from the country, such as the reported 200 people who drowned in a Nile River ferry accident.
“Your border is open,” he said, urging Governments to take in refugees and assume full-burden sharing with neighbouring countries “in the noble need to respond to this dramatic situation.”




The KRG notes the Erbil meet-up with President Barzani and Ban Ki-Moon was also attended by Prime Minister Barzani and Deputy Prime Minister Imad Ahmed as well as other officials. Ban Ki-Moon expressed his thanks for the KRG hosting the Syrian refugees and that the situations in Syria and Iraq were discussed.







Amir Taheri (Asharaq Al-Awsat) observes:

Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki has claimed that the city, which drove governmental forces out last week, is now controlled by Al-Qaeda. His aides have warned that the new Iraqi army has received orders to “liberate” the city with a shoot-to-kill strategy. “We are not going to take any prisoners,” says Muwaffaq Al-Rubai, a veteran advisor to Maliki. Using the Al-Qaeda bogeyman, Maliki has managed to persuade the Obama administration in Washington to speed up arms deliveries, including drones using Hellfire missiles, to Iraqi government forces.
However, the black-and-white picture painted by Maliki does not tell the whole story. To start with, although radical Islamist groups are involved in the current crisis in Fallujah, it is simply wrong to brand them all with the Al-Qaeda label. Elements from the groups operating under the label of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) are certainly present in Fallujah and, to a lesser extent, in Ramadi, another town in Anbar. But the insurgency that has wrested control of Fallujah away from Maliki has also attracted armed Arab Sunni tribes that helped drive Al-Qaeda out of the city almost a decade ago. Some of the radical Sunni armed groups came to Fallujah from neighboring Syria, where they have suffered a series of defeats at the hands of rival Islamist groups. In a sense, Maliki provoked them into direct control by launching operations at the Kilometer 90 junction where the borders of Iraq meet with those of Jordan and Syria, a major crossing point for radical Islamists fighting against President Bashar Al-Assad in Syria.


Nouri's assault on Anbar Province continues.   Alsumaria reports that Anbar Province's Health Committee announced today the vast number of victims (300 dead and 251 injured) in the two week assault have been women and children.  Mu Xuequan (Xinhua) reports, "Gunmen on Tuesday regained control of more districts in Ramadi, the capital of the volatile Anbar province in western Iraq, after fierce clashes with Iraqi army backed by Sunni tribes. [. . .]  On Tuesday, they managed to retake control of most areas in central and northern city, a provincial police source told Xinhua." Al Jazeera adds, "Rebel fighters have staged coordinated attacks near the western Iraqi city of Falluja, destroying two army tanks and capturing a police station, police have said."AFP notes of Ramadi, "Most civil servants have returned to work and many shops reopened, but schools remained closed." Meanwhile World Bulletin reports the Anbar tribal leaders held a press conference today:

Tribal chieftains held a conference on Tuesday in provincial capital Ramadi at which they issued a joint statement condemning what they called "the unjust war waged by the government of [Prime Minister Nouri] al-Maliki" on the province.
The province was rocked by clashes early this month when Iraqi security forces dismantled a months-old anti-government sit-in. The sit-in was staged by Sunni tribesmen to protest perceived anti-Sunni discrimination by the Shiite-dominated government.

Chieftains said that the crackdown on the province had led armed tribesmen to take up arms against government troops "in defense of their souls and the pride of the tribes that al-Maliki tried to undermine."


UNHCR issued a statement today which included:

The UN refugee agency said on Tuesday that it has been able to deliver aid over the past week to some of the estimated 70,000 people displaced by fighting and insecurity in central Iraq's Anbar province.
"Aid from the UN and partner agencies has been reaching some of the affected communities since January 8, and yesterday a further 12 trucks of UNHCR relief reached neighbourhoods around Fallujah, carrying non-food aid," spokesman Adrian Edwards said, adding that the International Rescue Committee was conducting the distribution for UNHCR.
"At present, insecurity and access difficulties are still hampering the overall effort. The UN is advocating with the government of Iraq to ensure access to displaced persons and safe passage of humanitarian aid," he added.


Other responses to Nouri's assault on Anbar?  Deutsche Presse-Agentur reports,  "Up to 10,000 Iraqi commandos would get antiterrorism training from the United States to bolster Baghdad's fight against al-Qaida under a plan currently being negotiated, diplomats said on Tuesday.  Washington and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki are finalizing a security pact that would arrange for antiterrorism training for between 8,000 and 10,000 Iraqi commandos in Jordan, US diplomats based in Amman said." Tom Roeder (Colorado Gazette) reports on Fort Carson service members in Kuwait:

Soldiers with the 2nd Brigade Combat Team are preparing for three major training exercises in the next 40 days, with the biggest matching their tanks against a Kuwaiti battalion. The training allows the 3,800-soldier unit to fulfill its mission of helping America's friends while honing skills that leaders hope deter threats in the roiling region.
"It has taken on increased significance and meaning, many of us in the brigade are veterans of Iraq," said Col. Omar Jones, brigade commander and a veteran of fighting in Fallujah, Baghdad and Mosul.
The brigade deployed to Kuwait in the fall, replacing Fort Carson's 1st Brigade Combat Team for a nine-month stint.
Keeping Fort Carson troops at Camp Buehring, Kuwait, near the Iraqi border is seen as a safeguard against violence that could spread beyond Iraq. The Colorado Springs soldiers also are the nation's first responders if trouble arises in the Persian Gulf region.


And there are other reactions to note as well.  Michael Holmes (CNN) reports on Iraq today including interviewing Iraqiya leader Ayad Allawi:

Ayad Allawi:  And I warned all the leaders in the world and the region that unless this is averted then Iraq really is on the -- has started the civil war but hasn't reached the point of no return.  Once it reaches the point of no return then, unfortunately, the whole region will burn up.  

[. . .]

Michael Holmes [. . .] what he's saying about the US is that they backed al-Maliki which he says is fine.  They have no put enough pressure on him to reign in this sectarianism, to be more inclusive.  Here's part of what he [Allawi] said about the US.

Ayad Allawi:  They should support Maliki, it's up to them.  But they should also clarify to Maliki that their support is conditional on the inclusivity of the political process and respecting the Constitution and respecting human rights.  But unfortunately, the Americans are not doing this. 


Michael Holmes:  And he's a very worried man.  You know, I've had that sense coming back this time.  He's very worried that this could slip down that road to all-out sectarian war.  He says at the moment it's an asymeterical war with the car bombings, the assassinations.  He said it wouldn't take much for it to become a symeterical war -- that is armed rebellion, if you like, by the Sunnis in this country.  And that would be a disaster for the region and the country.


Today Iraq Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlak was among those speaking in DC at the United States Institute of Peace.  Excerpt.

Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq:  Cruelty and abuse and marginalization can create a rich environment for terrorism and al Qaeda specifically.  And that's why al Qaeda is growing again in Iraq. And now we need all the effort to come together to help Iraq get rid of that danger -- likewise in the region.  I would like to emphasize that your brothers -- Sunnis, Shi'ites, Kurds and Arabs -- are quite determined to clean the country from  sectarianism and terrorism.  And they really need your help. I am quite sure that at the end we will be able to defeat terrorism in Iraq.  So we need help from the United States [. . .]  But today we need your help with the heads of the political groups to have a reconciliation in the country because we believe that arming the Iraqi army is not enough by itself because, you know, there's a society, cohesive society is needed to fight terrorism.  If you don't have these two factors, things will be really difficult.  And, as you know, that the American army with its might could not defeat al Qaeda unless they could have the cooperation of the local people.  

Hannah Allam and Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) add, "In telephone interviews, residents of Anbar echoed Mutlaq’s talking points but said they no longer viewed him as a legitimate envoy for their concerns because he’d refused to resign from the Maliki administration. Tribal leaders said Mutlaq should have consulted with them about their priorities before he went to Washington representing the Sunni population." Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) covers it here.  We'll note the speeches tomorrow as well.  Eli Lake (Daily Beast) interviews al-Mutlaq and reports:


 Saleh al-Mutlaq, a deputy prime minister of Iraq, arrived in Washington this week with a modest request for a president he says prematurely withdrew American forces from his country at the end of 2011. He is asking President Obama to provide observers for the national elections in Iraq scheduled for the end of April.
As far is it goes, election monitors are not a big ask for Iraqi politicians. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has asked for the United States to send advanced aircraft, attack helicopters and other munitions for his military. He is getting some hellfire missiles and surveillance drones now that al Qaeda has claimed dominion over the western Iraqi city of Fallujah.
But Mutlaq—who is his country’s second highest ranking Sunni Arab politician after Usama al-Nujayfi, the speaker of Iraq’s parliament—would like the United States to try to save Iraq’s fraying political system before strengthening its army. 


al-Mutlaq's call for election monitors comes on the same day as a Nineveh Electoral Commission official was assassinated in Mosul.  In other violence today, NINA reports a Kadhimiyah roadside bombing left six people injured, a western Baghdad (Adil neighborhood) bombing claimed 2 lives (one was a police member) and left three people injured, 1 corpse was discovered in the streets of Buhriz ("bullet in the head and chest"), 1 Supreme Judicial Council judge and his driver were shot dead northwest of Baghdad, Nouri's forces and forces of Anbar tribes killed 21 Daash in Ramadi, a Mosul shooting left 1 man dead and his brother injured, an armed attack in Albotama Village left 4 Iraqi soldiers dead and five more injured, a Baghdad car bombing (Sadr City) left 4 people dead and ten injured, a Khalis clash left 2 people dead and three more injured, an Alwihdah bombing left 1 police members and 1 Sahwa dead as well as five more police injured, an attack to the east of Ramadi left 1 Iraqi soldier dead and four more injured, a western Baghdad car bombing (Ghazaliya area) left 6 people dead and thirteen injured, a Baghdad armed attack left 3 police members dead, "At least four civilians were wounded when two bombed cars expoded on Tuesday evening 14, Jan. south and east of Kirkuk," and a Baghdad armed attack (Al-Ersan) left 2 fighters dead, Qarma mortar attacks left 2 children and 1 man dead and ten more people injured.   EFE identifies the assassinated judge as Muttar Hussein.  Mu Xuequan (Xinhua) notes, "In Diyala province, gunmen attacked two houses at the edges of the city of Khalis, near the provincial capital city of Baquba, some 65 km northeast of Baghdad, killing five people, three of them from one family, and wounding two others, a provincial police source told Xinhua."



National Iraqi News Agency reports Abu Karma mosque (Diyala Province) was set fire to leaving "material damages" and that this follows the bombing of "two mosques in the Zaganiah village 14 km northeast of Baquba" yesterday.  In addition, they note:

Director of Laylan District Mohammed Wayis announced the burning of two shrines south east of the city.
Mohamed Wayis said in a press conference that an unidentified armed group set fire on Tuesday 14, Jan. to the shrines of Sayyed Abdul Majid and Sultan Kozlh Baba on the main road linking between Kirkuk and Laylan District, a matter that led to serious material damages in them. "


And if you think things can't get worse there's MP Kadhim al-Sayadi.  He's billed as 'independent' by the press but he usually makes news for doing Nouri's bidding.  All Iraq News reports he's insisting he won't return to Parliament until Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi resigns.  al-Nujaifi is a member of Iraqiya.  Worth noting since last fall, al-Sayadi got into a fist fight with Iraqiy MP Hayder al-Mula.  Also last September he began demanding that Iraqiya MP Ahmed al-Alwani be stripped of immunity.  You may remember Ahmed al-Alwani.

Nouri ordered the dawn raid and illegal arrest of him on December 28th which kicked off the current conflict.  (Six people were killed in the raid including al-Alwani's brother.  When Osama al-Nujaifi attempted to lead an investigation into the raid, Nouri's military would not allow al-Nuajifi to leave Baghdad and enter Anbar.)

There is nothing independent about Kadhim al-Sayadi.  When Nouri's ass itches, Kadhim provides the scratch.  Kadhim is often the trial balloon for Nouri's next plan.  So the notion that Nouri wants to get rid of Osama al-Nujaifi is very frightening.  Osama is the last check on Nouri.

Nouri controls the judiciary.  He's run off Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi (Sunni and a member of Iraqiya).  The country has no president.  December 2012,  Iraqi President Jalal Talabani suffered a stroke.   The incident took place late on December 17, 2012 (see the December 18, 2012 snapshot) and resulted in Jalal being admitted to Baghdad's Medical Center Hospital.    Thursday, December 20, 2012, he was moved to Germany.  He remains in Germany currently.

There are no checks left on Nouri al-Maliki except for the Speaker of Parliament -- a post held by a member of the political slate that beat Nouri's State of Law in the March 2010 elections.

UPI reports Turkey's state-run Turkey Petroleum Co. announced today "it discovered oil while working in what it described as tough conditions near the borders with Iraq and Iran." There are many implications for this and some will try to see it in terms of the KRG and Turkey's oil deal.  That's not what's going to be the issue here.  Iraq and Iran are already in border disputes -- you could argue the eight year war from 1980 to 1988 between the two countries had something to do with border disputes.  Since 2003, Iran and Iraq have repeatedly disagreed about where the border between their two countries are.  It's something a real prime minister of Iraq would have established long ago.  This will only add more pressure to the issue and that's before you factor in third party Turkey.


Turning to an ongoing topic, Michael Mathes (AFP) reports, "Several US lawmakers led by Republican Senator Rand Paul introduced legislation Tuesday that would finally bring to an end Washington's authorization to wage war in Iraq. President Barack Obama's White House backs the efforts, in principle, having withdrawn US forces in December 2011." As noted in Friday's snapshot, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand Tweeted. "Co-sponsoring @SenRandPaul's bill to #repealAUMF, to end authority for #Iraq war and prevent more troops being sent there." John Hudson (Foreign Policy) notes today:


 An administration official made clear that repealing the Iraq AUMF was not a priority for the White House because the effect would be largely symbolic. But the statement may provide cover for other Democrats who voted against Paul's attempt to repeal the Iraq AUMF in 2011 due to concerns that it would hamstring the administration. (At the time, Paul's repeal effort failed by a landslide 30-67 vote).
[. . .]

The bill is now backed by a bipartisan group of co-sponsors including Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Mike Lee (R-UT), Jon Tester (D-MT) and Jeff Merkeley (D-OR).





















iraq
asharq al-awsat
xinhua
mu xuequan
deutsche welle
upi
world bulletin
abc news radio
mcclatchy newspapers
mohammed al dulaimy
hannah allam
the washington post
ernesto londono
cnn
the daily beast
eli lake
all iraq news
national iraq news agency
alsumaria

Wednesday, January 15, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, rebels seize more territory in Anbar, Nouri orders a newspaper shut down, Nineveh wants to become semi-autonomous, Nouri ticks off the Kurds again, Iraq is noted in a US Congressional hearing today, an investigation is launched to determine whether US service members disrespected Iraqi corpses in Falluja in 2004, and more.


TMZ announces today:

The United States military is conducting a formal investigation into American soldiers burning the dead bodies of what appear to be Iraqi insurgents.
TMZ obtained 41 pictures that we're told were shot in Fallujah in 2004.  Two pictures show a Marine appearing to pour gasoline or some other flammable on the remains of what officials believe are 2 insurgents.  Two other photos show the bodies on fire.  You then see charred remains.
Another photo shows a Marine crouched down next to a dead body and mugging for the camera.
Still another pic shows a Marine rifling through the pocket of the pants on a corpse.
We have not included all of the photos.  Many are just too gruesome.  There are well over a dozen bodies in the pics and some are covered with flies and one is being eaten by a dog.
We turned them all over to the Pentagon last week, and a Pentagon official tells us the pics have triggered a Marine Corps investigation.

ABC News Radio explains, "The defiling of remains is a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice but the photos may also be a violation of U.S. Central Command’s General Order Number One, which provides the guidelines for how American troops serving in the Middle East should conduct themselves." The issue was raised at today's State Dept press briefing delivered by spokesperson Marie Harf:




QUESTION: On Iraq.

MS. HARF: Uh-huh.

QUESTION: I was wondering if you could say something about these pictures that were released about military soldiers pouring gasoline on the bodies of Iraqis in Fallujah in 2004. I understand there’s an investigation going on.

MS. HARF: I have not seen those. I’m sorry. I would point you to DOD. They probably have the lead on this. I’m happy to check with our folks. I just haven’t.

QUESTION: I’m just wondering. I mean, right now as you are trying to work with the Iraqis on countering what’s going on, the violence on the ground, if this kind of damages your credibility in terms of someone that can be helpful right now.


MS. HARF: Well, we’re certainly extremely committed to working with Iraq in a variety of ways to counter this threat together. We’ve talked a lot about that in the past few weeks in a combination of political and counterterrorism support. I’m not familiar with the specifics about these photos, but we certainly are very committed to the relationship and have no indication that the Iraqis aren’t as well.

This comes as Michael Lipkin (Law360) reports, "The American Civil Liberties Union and other human rights organizations renewed their attempts on Wednesday to force the U.S. Department of Defense to release photos of prisoner abuse in U.S. facilities in Iraq and Afghanistan, arguing conditions had changed since the DOD last rejected their requests." And as the US Air Force is rocked by a test cheating and drug scandal.  At the Pentagon today, Secretary of the Air Force Deborah Lee James took questions about the investigation.  Those alleged to have been involved are members of the ICBM force -- the intercontinental ballistic missile force.  Phil Stewart (Reuters) reports, "The Air Force has suspended security clearances for 34 officers and is re-testing the entire forces overseeing America's nuclear-armed missiles after uncovering widespread cheating on a key proficiency exam." Secretary James declared at the press conference, "I've directed that the OSI put full resources against this investigation so that we get to the bottom of exactly what happened, who was involved, and the extent of this so that we can hold people appropriately accountable for this."


Former US Senator Joe Lieberman:  Yet increasingly we hear voices -- on both sides of the political spectrum -- who say that the threat from terrorism is receding, the end of this conflict is here or near, and therefore that we can withdraw from much of the rest of the world. This narrative is badly and dangerously mistaken. There is no question, the United States -- under President Bush and President Obama -- has inflicted severe damage to 'core' al Qaeda, the senior leadership that reconstituted itself in the mid-2000s in the tribal areas of northwestern Pakistan, after being driven by the American military from neighboring Afghanistan after 9/11. To borrow a phrase from General David Petraeus, while the progress we have achieved against core al Qaeda is real and significant it is also fragile and reversible . What has degraded core al Qaeda in the tribal areas of Pakistan has been the persistent, targeted application of military force against these indi viduals and networks. The precondition for these operations, and the intelligence that enables them , has been our presence in Afghanistan. If the United States withdraws all of our military forces from Afghanistan at the end of this year -- the so-called "zero option," which some now advocate -- you can be sure that al Qaeda will regenerate, eventually on both sides of the Afghan-Pakistan border. If you doubt this, I urge you to look at what is now happening in western Iraq, where just a few years ago, during the US-led surge, al Qaeda was dealt an even more crippling blow than core al Qaeda has suffered in Pakistan. Yet now it is al Qaeda that is surging back in Iraq, hoisting its black flag over cities like Falluja and Ramadi, murdering hundreds of innocent Iraqis this year, with violence surging back to 2008 levels. 





Lieberman went on to advocate for "a small number of embedded [US] advisors on the ground" in Iraq as well as for the US to provide "airpower." He was testifying today before the House Homeland Security Committee -- US House Rep Michael McCaul is Committee Chair and US House Rep Bennie G. Thompson is the Ranking Member.  Also testifying were former US House Rep Jane Harman, retired General Jack Keane and the RAND Corporation's Dr. Seth Jones.

Gen Jack Keane:  After the strategic blunder of leaving no residual force in Iraq -- and immunity for US troops was a false issue -- equally damaging was distancing ourselves from a long term strategic partnership between the US and Iraq leaving the al Qaeda to have re-emerged and the level of violence today is as high as it was in 2008 and destined to get higher.  The al Qaeda are quickly taking control of western Iraq while they have seized control of northern Syria.

Harman had nothing to offer on Iraq -- possibly because she was still focused on the Defense Policy Board briefing on South Asia that  "I've just come from" -- a briefing which she described as "bone chilling." (What was she referring to?  US assessments on where nuclear war stands currently between Pakistan and India.)

We'll note this exchange.  It's typical of the hearing -- talking down to Americans, preaching war and death and destruction.

Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson:  A lot of us our faced, when we go into our districts, with an effort that's gone on a long time.  The people are becoming weary -- not defeated, but weary. And they say, "Why don't you do something to bring this to an end?" If we had a magic wand, we could do that. So, listening to some of our constituents who talk about the 6,000 people who died and the enormous costs so far, and I'll go, because I've heard it -- what would you suggest as a response to those constituents going forward, as to what members of Congress, the House and the Senate should do to bring that to an end? I'll start with you, Senator.

Former Senator Joe Lieberman:  Thanks, Congressman Thompson, that's a -- that's a really important question.  I'm glad you asked it because that's the reality.  And I know that's what you face and what members of both parties probably face -- when you go home.  So here's the point at which -- I mean one first reaction I have, which won't really convince people, but it - but it's an important one.  I will tell you that every time I went to a funeral of a soldier from Connecticut who was killed in Iraq or Afghanistan, I was amazed and moved by the families saying, 'Please make sure that our son/daughter/husband/whatever didn't die in vain.' So there is that element.  I mean, if we just, we learned some lessons from Iraq and Afghanistan, that if we just walk away, we do risk saying to those families whose family members gave their lives because we ordered them to go there in our defense that they did die in vain.  I don't think we ever want that to happen.  Second thing, I want to go back to and, in some ways, I want to make this personal about President Obama. Put it in this context, President Obama ran for office in 2008 and again in 2012 with one of the basic themes -- in addition to all the change and dealing with domestic problems -- was that he was going to get us out of the wars that we were in and not get us into additional wars around the world/  And, uhm, you know, fair enough.  But sometimes the world doesn't cooperate with a presidential narrative and I think that's where we are in the countries that I've talked about: Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya.  Which, if we don't do something more than we're doing now, they're going to tip over.  So, I say this personally, I'm not here just to criticize what the Obama administration has done.  In some sense, I'm here to appeal to the Obama administration -- which, after all, the president's going to be our president for three more years and a lot that could be good or bad for our security couldan happen.  I repeat, what's a lesson learned that's consistent with the message that the president -- the policy that the president has adopted?  We're not going to send tens of thousands of troops on the ground to any of these countries.  But there's something in between that and just pulling out.  And I think what we've all , in different ways, tried to argue today, both militarily and in other ways in terms of aid and support where if we don't -- and this is what I'd say to the constituents -- if we don't at least maintain a presence, if we don't help the freedom fighters in Syria, the non-extremists, anti-Assad people, if we don't build up the Libyan military to maintain order against the militias, if we don't make the kind of agreement and support the government in Iraq, then we're going to get attacked again. Same from Afghanistan.  And, uh, then we're going to have to go back in there and have to spend more, risk more American lives.  It's not an easy argument to make -- and particularly, not in tough economic times.  But so I think, bottom line, we've learned from Iraq and Afghanistan, it's not going to be hundreds of thousands of troops but if we just turn away we're going to suffer and, therefore, we need your support, Mr. and Mrs. Constituent, to help us do that. 

Former US House Rep Jane Harman: I can think of five things -- some of which I've already mentioned, but I'll tick them off.  One, honor the service of those who followed orders and went to Iraq and Afghanistan.  Tens of thousands grievously wounded.  Many came home in decent shape.  Honor their service.  Make sure we have in place a welcome mat that includes all the benefits they're entitled to but also hopefully efforts to build good jobs for them -- the unemployment rate among returning vets is disproportionate to the unemployment rate of others.  Second, engage in a whole of government approach to solve this problem.  We've discussed that at length, I won't go into it again.  Third, continue the counter-terrorism mission in not just the Middle East but around the world.  The US has interests in other places other than our own country but we surely don't want training grounds to develop again in pick a place.  And we know that some are and we need to be active there using all the tools that we have. Fourth, continue our surveillance system although I think some reforms are in order.  The president will speak on Friday.  I was quite impressed with the report that was presented to him.  It's not clear exactly what he'll adopt but we need to have an effective system that can spot bad guys and prevent and disrupt plots against us.  And finally, enact cyber security legislation so that we are protected against what is a growing threat and could in the end be a more -- many predict -- a much more severe threat than some other form of terror threat against the homeland.

Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson:  General?

Retired General Jack Keane: Yes, I would first say to them that never before in the history of the country have so few sacrificed so much for so many and have done it for so long.  And the fact of the matter is that the reason why it has been so long is because of the mistakes that we made and be honest about it.  The fact of the matter is that our strategy initially in Afghanistan -- military strategy I'm talking about here -- and our military strategy in Iraq after we liberated Iraq was flawed  And that led to protracted wars.  And we should have an honest discussion with the American people and with your constituents. Now the fact of the matter is that if you know America's military -- and I can say this with some knowledge -- is that we normally get off on the wrong foot and we have throughout our history with some rare exceptions.  But because we're reflections of the American people, the American society, we're intellectually flexible and operationally adoptable.  And we sort of get to the answer faster than other people would when we're on a much larger war than what we're dealing with here.  And we did figure it out eventually in Iraq and we have figured it out in Afghanistan as well.  And the sacrifice is definitely worth it to protect the American people.  I mean, when you talk to the troops we deployed in the 90s and we were all over the world doing things in Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Herzegovina, you name the place, there were problems and we were there.  Not necessarily fighting to the degree that we've done post-9/11 but nonetheless deployments and some fighting.  From 9-11 on, and we have a 9-11 generation in the military, we have a 9-11 generation in the Central Intelligence Agency -- The fact of the matter is when you talk to these troops, it's all about the American people.  Before it was about helping others.  This is about protecting the American people and they get it.  That's why they willingly go back and do four, five, six tours.  We have generals that have been away from their families for 8 out of 10 years.  I mean it's quite extraordinary the sacrifice that is willingly be made. Tell that story.  It's extraordinary because they are protecting the American people and our way of life.  And they're willing to do something that most of the American people cannot do and that is die for that.  And that is really quite extraordinary.  So I say be honest with them.  And then, in terms of this troublesome area, I know intellectually we like to talk about we're pivoting to the east because of the emergence of China.  Does anyone in this room believe that in any near term we're going to go to war with China? Not that we shouldn't be vigilant about them.  We can't be serious about that.  The fact of the matter is we have huge problems in the Middle East that threaten the United States.  And we have to stay engaged, Mr. Congressman, that is the word that we need to use.  We partner with our allies in that region and we support people who want to overthrow dictatorial regimes -- like in Libya, like in Tunisia, like in Syria.  In Libya and Syria, they just want us to help them.  They don't want our troops. And in Iraq, where we did help them, we walked away and look at the mess we have as a result.  That should inform us of how dangerous this situation is and how important American commitment is to stay engaged.  And we have to do that if we're going to protect the American people. 

Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson:  Dr. Jones?

Dr. Seth Jones:  I would say three things that are worth reminding constituents and all Americans that we talk to.  One is, as much as we would like this war and this struggle to end, there are organizations committed to fighting Americans and conducting attacks overseas that will not end.  They don't have a desire to end this and the struggle on their part will continue.  Therefore, the struggle continues.  As much as we want to end it, the terrorists we've talked about today are committed to continuing this struggle.  Second, I would say, as everybody here has noted, the days of large numbers of American forces targeting terrorists overseas -- particularly conventional forces -- are over.  And I think that as we have seen over the past several years, they have tended to radicalize populations rather than to facilitate.  So what that does leave us is, I would say, a third point.  There is a more modest approach.  I think we have learned we're talking about smaller number of forces, lethal ones overseas -- as well as civilians; we're talking about smaller amounts of American dollars that are being sent.  There is a need for direct action -- some direct action activity.  We have stopped plots targeting the US homeland from overseas because of this action.  We also have an interest in building some of the local partnership capacity so that we don't have to do all of this -- so that we don't have to do all the fighting and dying and that locals can do it.  This is the direction we've moved on in several fronts.  So I would say there has been a learning process.  But let me just conclude by again just reminding constituents and Americans, that from the al Qaeda and jihadists perspective, the war continues and, in that sense, we cannot retreat. 




Some quick take aways.  Joe Lieberman has never understood 9-11, not even the official story.  If you examine his claims about how inaction will cause another 9-11, you should realize quickly that the only inaction in the official story is the failure to heed warnings.  The reasons given for the attack are not reasons calling for more US troops stationed around the world. In fact, one reason given for the attacks was US troops stationed in the Middle East.  Second, it's really sad that two people who voted for the Iraq War -- Lieberman and Harman -- can do nothing to justify the war but hide behind dead soldiers.  Contrary to their embarrassing remarks, you don't continue insanity because some people died.  You learn from your mistakes.  Or, in Lieberman and Harman's case, you never learn.  Last main point we'll make: only a smaller number of forces will be used.

That's what the War Hawks said.  And that can be seen as a victory.  The force size -- even at its largest -- in Iraq was never as great in number as what the US sent to Vietnam.  So it's worth noting that the Iraq Wae which was supposed to bury memory and fact (more popularly known as "the Vietnam syndrome") didn't work.  And even War Hawks have to face that in the next go rounds the numbers sent will be even smaller.

Lieberman and others, of course, say send advisers so we should probably point out that this is the way they birth wars -- start it with advisers and kick it up to something greater.

I'll probably come back to the hearing tomorrow to note one more thing regarding Iraq.  Also in today's State Dept press briefing:

QUESTION: Marie --

MS. HARF: Uh-huh. Yep.

QUESTION: I have one more – Iraqi members of parliament are in town. Have they met anyone from the State Department?

MS. HARF: Members of parliament?

QUESTION: Yeah.


MS. HARF: I can check. I don’t know. I’ll check.


That's what we need to cover and I'll kick that back to tomorrow.  This is about the DC event that we covered in yesterday's snapshot.  We'll try to pick up the Iraq from the hearing and one of the MPs from yesterday.  Also Ruth and Kat were at this morning's hearing and plan to write about it at their sites tonight focusing on Benghazi.  Ava and Wally were at the hearing and are debating if they've got anything else they can cover.






Yesterday, Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq began a visit to DC.  Speaking to  Eli Lake (Daily Beast) al-Mutlaq called for the US to send election monitors to Iraq.   He made his call for election monitors on the same day as a Nineveh Electoral Commission official was assassinated in Mosul.  Today, National Iraqi News Agency reports, "Unknown gunmen assassinated on Wednesday 15, Jan. an employee at Nineveh Elections Office, near his home in eastern Mosul."



Let me point out what we said here before Nouri's assault on Al Anbar Province began -- it would not stop violence in Iraq and that previous assaults by Nouri only stirred up violence in the parts he wasn't attacking.  That has proven to be the case this go round as well.  Of today's violence, Lateef Mungin and Jomana Karadsheh (CNN) observe, "Much of the violence recorded Wednesday was in and around Baghdad." Michael Holmes (CNN) has a strong look at Iraq today which includes:





The Irish Mirror notes that Nouri made a high drama statement today, "If we keep silent it means the creation of evil statelets that would wreak havoc with security in the region and world." Some assume he means Falluja and Ramadi.  He may just as well be talking about provinces that want to declare their own independence (as guaranteed by the Iraqi Constitution).  Bassem Francis (Al-Monitor) speaks with Nineveh Province's Governor Atheel al-Nujaifi (brother of Iraq's Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi).  Atheel explains Nineveh is thinking about declaring its independence:



In a discussion with Al-Hayat, Nujaifi said: “The province is worried about the recent events in Anbar. Any conflict between the security forces and the Sunnis will be quickly reflected on the people in Ninevah. These events have made the people of Ninevah province despair that the conditions of the Sunnis in general, and the people of Ninevah province in particular, will be reformed any time soon. … Therefore, our only option to restore hope to the people of the province is to come out with a new project that has specific features. We have all agreed to request either the establishment of an [autonomous] Ninevah province or to demand the internationalization of the situation of the Sunnis in Iraq because of the injustice they are suffering.”
Nujaifi said: “[Iraqi Prime Minister] Nouri al-Maliki wants to risk the security of Iraqi society for electoral purposes. He always uses the [recess periods] to make his moves. Every year during the Christmas period he provokes a major crisis, taking advantage of the world being on holiday. … In today’s case, his aim is the election. [He wants] to achieve a victory over his Shiite rivals and at the same time to push the Shiite extremism project a step forward.”
Ninevah’s government accuses Maliki of confiscating its authority over the deployment of the army in major cities, and for launching arrest campaigns by exploiting the laws of “accountability and justice” and “the fight against terrorism,” as well as for depriving the province of a budget that is commensurate with its population.


Nouri's also stirring up problems with the Kurds.  Kitabat reports Kurdish Cabinet members walked out of the meeting on the budget today due to Nouri's efforts to penalize the Kurdistan Regional Government for the KRG's oil deal with Turkey. This is the second year in a row where Nouri has failed to work out what the Kurds see as a fair budget.  Though the budget's been forwarded to Parliament, Baghdad residents won't read about that in the Middle East.  The Baghdad and Saudi Arabia daily newspaper has been shut down.  Kitabat reports that Nouri's forces stormed the paper's Baghdad offices and shut it down.  Iraq's Journalistic Freedoms Observatory has called for an explanation and cites journalist Hamza Mustafa explaining that the Ministry of the Interior forces stormed in late Tuesday, shut them down and told them they were no longer allowed to print a newspaper in Baghdad.




iraq
all iraq news
national iraq news agency
alsumaria
the daily beast
eli lake
reuters
prensa latina
the associated press
qassim abdul-zahra
sameer n. yacoub
afp
the irish mirror
cnn
lateef mungin
jomana karadsheh
the telegraph of london 

iraq

Friday, January 17, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue,  Barack wants to arm and train Nouri's killers, BRussells Tribunal talks reality on Iraq, Robert Gates calls for conditions on any arms to Iraq, NPR and Tom Bowman edit out Gen Martin Dempsey's most important remark in an interview, and more.



The topic of Iraq was raised in today's State Dept briefing delivered by spokesperson Jen Psaki.


QUESTION: Do you have a readout about the Deputy Burns meeting with the Iraqi deputy prime minister?

MS. PSAKI: Sure, with the Iraq – mm-hmm.
Deputy Secretary Burns, as part of his regular diplomatic engagement with senior Iraqi officials, met today with Iraqi deputy prime minister – with the Iraqi deputy prime minister to discuss bilateral issues, including the ongoing situation in Anbar Province, the upcoming elections, and our shared commitment towards a long-term partnership under the Strategic Framework Agreement.

QUESTION: Was any part of that discussion regarding the Iraqi Government seeking arms or increased arms supplies from the United States?

MS. PSAKI: Well, we’ve, of course, seen those reports in the public comments, I guess it would be a more accurate way of referring to them. Certainly, we’re not going to get into a laundry list of FMS support. You’re familiar with what we have provided, the fact that we’re working with Congress on pieces like Apaches. In terms of whether they discussed that or not, I’m happy to see if there’s more detail to provide.

QUESTION: Jen, on the same issue --

MS. PSAKI: Let’s just finish Iraq. Go ahead --

QUESTION: Yeah, on Iraq.

QUESTION: Also, was there any discussion about the willingness by – excuse me – the U.S. military to train Iraqi troops in a third country?

MS. PSAKI: I know there have been reports of that which are, I believe, referring to Jordan which are inaccurate, but --

QUESTION: Jordan, that’s inaccurate --

MS. PSAKI: I can check and see if there’s more about the meeting to read out to address your question as well as Arshad’s.

QUESTION: So is the report inaccurate that the U.S. military is ready to train troops in a third country, or just the part that it might be in Jordan? Which one is accurate?

MS. PSAKI: Well, I don’t have any more specific details for you beyond the fact that the report that has been specifically referring to Jordan and training and U.S. involvement at that is inaccurate.[i]

QUESTION: In the meeting with – between the Deputy Secretary Burns and Dr. Saleh al-Mutlaq, has the issue of the sectarian divide come up? The reason I ask this, because Mr. Mutlaq is saying all over the place that basically the sectarian differences are irreconcilable. He’s basically accusing his boss, al-Maliki, of being irreformably sectarian.

MS. PSAKI: Let me check, as I mentioned to Jo and Arshad, if there’s more that we can share about Deputy Secretary Burns’ meeting on all of your specific questions.

QUESTION: The reason I ask this is because the reconciliation has been really at the crux of the issue, but the United States has not taken any steps to sort of take initiative or perhaps lead the initiative on reconciliation.

MS. PSAKI: I think we – the United States has done a great deal to engage the Iraqi Government – not just providing military equipment to Iraq, but also working with all parties to better address the needs of the Iraqi people. We’ve had a range of officials on the ground, including Brett McGurk, as recently as, I believe, a week ago.

QUESTION: Right.


MS. PSAKI: We’ve engaged the government closely. We’ve encouraged unity repeatedly and consistently over the course of months. So I would just refute the notion of your question.


And they added this footnote to the transcript:





Let's talk about arming and training.  AFP speaks to an unnamed Defense Dept official, "Pending an agreement with Jordan or another nation to host the effort, the training was "likely" to go ahead as both Baghdad and Washington supported the idea, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity." Luis Martinez (ABC News) adds:

Pentagon spokesman Col. Steve Warren told reporters Friday there were discussions underway with Iraq about future training possibilities for Iraq’s security forces.  “We are continuing to discuss with the Iraqis how we can train them and how we can keep their security forces at the highest possible levels,” Warren told reporters.
“The department recognizes that it is important for the Iraqis to have a capable force,” said Warren.  He would not detail whether those discussions would have U.S. troops doing the training or where such training might occur if it is agreed to.


Loveday Morris and Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) report, "Maliki said during the interview that he would support a new U.S. military training mission for Iraqi counterterrorism troops in Jordan, marking the first time he has expressed support for a plan that the Pentagon has been contemplating in recent months. U.S. military officials have not provided details on the scope or timing of such a training mission."


That's the training issue.  And it should be noted that training in Jordan isn't a new idea.  It dates back to the Bully Boy Bush administration when Jordan was going to be used as a location to train Iraqi police.  Let's move over to the arming.  Oren Dorell (USA Today) reports, "The Obama administration said Friday it is sending more weapons to Iraq to help Baghdad put down a resurgent al-Qaeda that is battling government troops in cities that U.S. troops helped liberate during the Iraq war." David Lerman (Bloomberg News) adds, "The aid will be delivered “as rapidly as possible” to meet a request made by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, said Army Colonel Steve Warren, a Pentagon spokesman."


In light of the above, it's interesting that the Chair of Joint-Chiefs of Staff, Gen Martin Dempsey declared, "No one has asked, nor have we offered direct military involvement because of the underlying religious issues and extremist issues."

That statement may surprise some.

It will certainly surprise the listeners of NPR who caught Tom Bowman's lousy report for Morning Edition today.

It really is amazing how NPR works to pull news from their broadcasts.

Dempsey made the quoted remark to Bowman.  It didn't make the edit.

Jim Garamone (DoD's American Forces Press Service) found the remark newsworthy:



 The United States is looking at how to help solve the problems of the region. Dempsey said the U.S. military can help in planning and logistics. “No one has asked, nor have we offered direct military involvement because of the underlying religious issues and extremist issues,” he said.

Claudette Roulo (DoD's American Forces Press Service) also found the remark newsworthy:



“No one has asked, nor have we offered direct military involvement because of the underlying religious issues and extremist issues,” Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey told NPR this week.


On the heels of embarrassing adoption 'report,' NPR really didn't need to get caught with bad editing choices again.  But they have been caught.

Tom Bowman didn't report Dempsey saying,  "No one has asked, nor have we offered direct military involvement because of the underlying religious issues and extremist issues."

It's a real shame Tom Bowman fell in love with his own voice (he offers several cut-aways as though he's Peter Griffith on Family Guy) and lost interest in the subject of his supposed report.  What "underlying religious issues and extremists issues" was Dempsey referring to?


It's a shame Bowman and NPR didn't feel the need to allow the American people to hear the discussion.

Robert Gates is a former US Secretary of Defense (December 2006 to July 2011).  He has a new book he's promoting entitled Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War.  The Christian Science Monitor hosted a press breakfast for him this morning.  Anna Mulrine (Christian Science Monitor) reports he declared that the US military had accomplished the goals they were tasked with and handed control of the country over to the Iraqi government:

The mistakes that have since been made by Iraqi President Nouri al-Maliki have included isolating Sunnis in a country dominated by a Shiite-led government and "treating the Sunnis in such a hostile manner over the last couple of years or so."


The Christian Science Monitor has posted a brief clip of Gates speaking about Iraq.

Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates:  Well I think if I were sitting in the [White House] Situation Room today, I would recommend that we offer the Maliki government a wide range of military assistance -- both equipment and training.  But I would be very explicit about conditioning it on his outreach to the Sunnis and pulling back on all these acts such as trying to arrest Vice President [Tareq al-] Hashemi and other Sunni officials from his government, make some investments in Anbar and other Sunni areas that give the Sunnis some reason to believe this government in Baghdad does represent them and is better -- is better than any other.  I think -- I think there are two causes of the situation that we face, that is going on in Iraq.  One is Maliki treating the Sunnis in such a hostile manner over the last couple of years or so.  And -- and the other then is the spillover from Syria.

For more on the breakfast, refer to FORA TV which has more clips (and the recording of the entire breakfast is available for $9.95). Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq makes similar points to Joshua Keating (Slate):





And things are probably about to get even worse if previous patterns are any indication.  Currently, parliamentary elections are scheduled for April 30th.  What happened last time in the lead up to parliamentary elections?  Saleh al-Mutlaq should remember, it was done to him.

Candidates were disqualified.  They were labeled 'terrorists' and 'Ba'athists.' This happened if they were political rivals of Nouri al-Maliki and it was done via the Justice and Accountability Commission.  Dar Addustour reports the Justice and Accountability Commission will be vetting candidates shortly.

They weren't supposed to vet anything in 2010.  They were a one-time committee that was supposedly phased out as part of Nouri's efforts to meet the White House benchmarks -- which included to move towards national reconciliation and to end Paul Bremer's de-Ba'athifaction process.


Sunnis are targeted by Nouri.  That's among the reasons they protest.






Above is Samarra from earlier today -- Iraqi Spring MC posted the video here.  December 21, 2012, a wave of protests kicked off in Iraq and they continued today. Protests also took place in Amiriya, Rawa, Falluja,  Tikrit, Baiji, and Baquba.

NINA reports:

Vice Chairman of the Council Faleh al-Issawi told / NINA / that the local government , represented by the provincial council and governor of Anbar province , is holding talks and continuous meetings with tribal sheikhs and elders , in order to end the crisis and the tense situation in the province.
Issawi added that the purpose of these meetings and discussions, is to know the demands of the clans, and to work on bringing together their points of views with the central government in order to end the current crisis and end armed manifestations in Anbar. 

This week, BRussells Tribunal's Eman Ahmed Khamas spoke with RT about the assault on Anbar.


Eman Ahmed Khamas:  I was saying that the US-led invasion and occupation of Iraq is to be blamed for this violence.  And of course there are many other reasons behind this violence: the non-functioning state, for example, the corrupt and fascist government, the absence of any kind of services, the failing state, all of these -- and above all the persecution of people --  especially those who protest against the fascist policies of the government.  All these togethar are behind the escalation of violence.  [. . .]  Actually for the last year -- more than a year Iraqis are protesting peacefully I mean protesting against the government's policies and, above all, the executions and the detentions.  You know Iraq now has the first rate of executions in the world.  And, again, the non-functioning state, the failings, etc.   What the government did is that they attacked the peaceful protesters and they killed many of them.  For example, a few months ago, they slaughtered 45 people in Hawija, people who were protesting peacefully.  And in other places -- in Diyala, in Mousl, and Anbar -- all these killings.  Yes, Iraqis are trying to cope with this violence but simply the government has to stop persecuting the people.


Mustafa Habib (Niqash) reports:








al-Hakim's proposal is the on that the US government has been backing for two weeks now -- as al-Hakim has repeatedly noted in public.

Through yesterday, Iraq Body Count counts 640 violent deaths for the month.  Today?  National Iraqi News Agency reports a Tikrit armed attack left 1 Sahwa leader dead and his son injured,  1 corpse (gun shot wounds) was discovered dumped in the street northeast of Baquba, a Shura armed attack left 1 Iraqi soldier dead, a Mosul roadside bombing left one military Lt Col injured, an Almishahdah armed attack left 2 rebels dead, a Ramadi suicide bomber took his own life and that of 9 "Anabar's tribes sons," a Jorfi-ssakhar elementary school was bombed, and a bridge linking Anbar Province to Karbala was blown up.

Turning to the topic of war resistance, J.B. Gerald (Global Research) notes:

Canada continues to deport contemporary deserters to U.S. military prisons. One or two resisters have found safe haven through legal cases and appeals against the orders to remove them. Polls have shown a majority of Canadians supports war resisters, but in 2010 Parliament failed to pass bill C-440 amending the Immigration act in their favour. The Harper government continues to deny refuge and asylum. Aside from known cases there are unknown numbers of resisters.
Among the deported were Robin Long, Clifford Cornell, and Kimberley Rivera. In the U.S., sentenced to 14 months, Kimberley Rivera gave birth in prison Nov. 26th, and was released Dec. 12th, after serving 10 months. In reporting her release, the U.S. military paper, Stars and Stripes, noted her dishonourable discharge doesn’t necessarily mean she won’t be able to find work. Jeremy Hinzman, an upfront conscientious objector, after numerous complex legal battles received a permission to stay in Canada on humanitarian and compassionate grounds. The UN Human Rights Commission has shown ongoing support for the rights of conscientious objectors. Yet on long term AWOL from the U.S. Army, Rodney Watson, under government warrant, enters his fifth year of sanctuary asylum in the First United Church of Vancouver. Many legal cases have been won by resisters, then appealed by the government and legal cases of war resisters such as Joshua Key remain under consideration as though waiting for politicians to wake up. Some cases are rarely mentioned, as though notice might upset an applecart.


Julie Berry writes the editors of the St. Thomas Times-Journal to note, "Conscientious objector, Kimberly Rivera, has just finished serving a 10 month jail term in U.S. Military prison because of her refusal to take part in the Iraq war. She has spent months separated from her husband and children and now faces rebuilding her life with a felony conviction on her record. This injustice only happened because our government chose to force her to leave Canada and return to the US, arguing that it was 'merely speculative' that she would be punished." Last month, Courage to Resist noted Kim Rivera had completed her sentence.  While behind bars, Kim gave birth.  The San Diego Free Press reported November 30th,

Kimberly Rivera gave birth to her son Matthew Kaden Rivera in the Naval Hospital on November 25th.   Her husband Mario was initially denied access to the birthing room but was ultimately granted permission to attend the delivery.  Although the delivery itself went smoothly, this was no ordinary birth– Rivera has been serving a ten month sentence for deserting the US army while deployed in Iraq.  She deserted in 2007 because she felt morally unable to take part in the conflict.


Kim is part of a movement of war resistance which also includes Lt. Ehren Watada, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Justin Colby, Camilo Mejia, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson,  Kyle Snyder , Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Joshua Key, Ricky Clousing, Mark Wilkerson, Agustin Aguayo, Camilo Mejia,  Patrick Hart, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Jeremy Hinzman, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Brad McCall, Rodney Watson, Chuck Wiley and Kevin Benderman.

In January 2004, Jeremy Hinzman became the first US service member to go to Canada and seek asylum instead of deploying to Iraq to serve in the illegal war.  War Resisters Support Campaign explains:

Jeremy Hinzman was a U.S. soldier in the elite infantry division, the 82nd Airborne. He served in Afghanistan in a non-combat position after having applied for conscientious objector status.   After being refused CO status and returning to America, he learned that they would be deployed to Iraq.
  Hinzman did not believe the stated reasons for the Iraq war. In January 2004 he drove to Canada to seek asylum. He is currently living in Toronto with his wife Nga Nguyen and son Liam. His refugee claim was turned down in March 2005 by the Immigration and Refugee Board. This decision was upheld by the Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal, and on November 15, 2007 the Supreme Court refused to hear his appeal.
  On July 21 2008 their daughter Meghan was born in Toronto.
  Jeremy and his family was ordered to leave Canada by September 23, 2008, or face deportation to the United States where Jeremy would be turned over to the US military to face punishment for desertion. A judicial review of this decision was denied by the Federal Court in June 2009, but on July 6, 2010, the Federal Court of Appeal, citing serious flaws with the immigration officer's decision, ruled in favour of Jeremy and ordered a review of his application to stay on Humanitarian and Compassionate grounds.


Hinzman remains at risk of being forced to return to the United States.  Tom Riley writes the editors of the Toronto Star, "During the Vietnam era, Canada welcomed 50,000 draft resisters and deserters. I was one of them. It’s shameful that 40 years later, rather than continuing this proud tradition and affirming Canadian values, our government is using its resources to try to actively intervene in the cases of Iraq resisters to try to ensure they are forced out of Canada."  On Global Research's latest radio show, they speak with war resister Joshua Key who notes that those who speak out are especially punished when they return or are forced to return.  He shares that due to his writing a book about war resistance (The Deserter's Tale, written with Lawrence Hill), his granting many interviews on the topic, his appearing in documentaries and his acting as an advisor on Kimberly Peirce's Stop-Loss mean he would, according to one expert, get 20 years in prison if he was forced to return to the US.



Finally, David Bacon's last book, Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press), won the CLR James Award. He has a new book, The Right to Stay Home: How US Policy Drives Mexican Migration.  Teofilo Reyes reviews it for Labornotes:





While immigrants were fasting on the Mall near the U.S. Capitol last month to pressure for immigration reform, the Mexican Congress was allowing privatization of the country's public oil corporation, PEMEX.
Separated by 2,500 miles, these events might seem a world apart.
But David Bacon's The Right to Stay Home: How US Policy Drives Mexican Migration shows how the two are intertwined. Bacon weaves narratives across borders, following communities as they struggle at home, migrate, and then struggle again in their new homes.
Over half the Mexican population lives in poverty, according to the World Bank. And Mexico is the only country in Latin America that saw poverty increase last year.
 In 1994 Mexico formally scrapped its decades-old program of economic development based on industrial and agricultural self-sufficiency. The government turned instead to a policy based on open markets and foreign investment: NAFTA.
Shortly after the NAFTA ink dried, the U.S. fell into a recession and the poverty rate in Mexico quickly grew to over 60 percent of the population. Ross Perot's sucking sound of jobs rushing south across the border was drowned out by the noise of U.S. capital vacuuming up cheap labor.




iraq
abc news
luis martinez
bloomberg news
the washington post
ernesto londono
npr
morning edition
tom bowman
iraqi spring mc
the christian science monitor
anna mulrine
niqash
mustafa habib
david bacon

Monday, January 20, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, another journalist is killed in Iraq,  we drop back to remember the 70s when the US government pretended to be the Kurds friends while using (and then discarding them) like pawns, the IHEC fires a number of commissioners right ahead of the elections and offers no explanation, the Justice and Accountability Commission still has no head, and more.


As former UK prime minister and forever War Criminal Tony Blair likes to boast at his website, "Globalisation brings each of us closer together." Blair found out just how close today.  Felicity Morse and Jonathan Owen (Belfast Telegraph) report, "One of the world’s most controversial political figures had an unlikely brush with reality on Friday, with Tony Blair subjected to a humiliating citizen’s arrest by a DJ working as a barman at trendy London eaterie the Tramshed." Lizzie Edmonds (Daily Mail) adds:

The part-time producer said he put his hand on his shoulder and said 'Mr Blair, this is a citizen's arrest for a crime against peace, namely your decision to launch an unprovoked war against Iraq.'
Mr Garcia told Vice magazine how Blair then attempted to engage in a debate before one of his son's went to get security. The worker then left the restaurant to avoid any trouble.


The website Arrest Blair encourages people to make a citizen arrest of War Criminal Tony Blair.  Robin De Peyer (Evening Standard) notes, "After spending some time engaged in debate with the former Labour Prime Minister - who now focuses his energy on the Middle East peace process - the man said he realised one of Mr Blair's sons had gone to find security. Quitting on the spot, Mr Garcia said he then left the restaurant immediately."

And the war he co-started continues.  Saturday, Aswat al-Iraq reported, "Jordanian Minister for Communications and Media Mohammed al-Mo'mini announced the intention of his country to train Iraqi forces in anti-terrorism spheres on its soil." AP quotes al-Mo'mini stating, "We look positively at the training because it is consistent with our foreign policy goal of fighting terrorism and because we have one of the best security and military training facilities in the region." AFP reminds, "On Friday a US defense official told AFP that Washington was waiting for an agreement with Jordan or another country to go ahead with the training program. Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has asked the United States to help the army fight against Islamist extremists, blamed for a spiral of deadly attacks in recent months." Saturday, the White House issued the following:





Office of the Vice President

Readout of Vice President Biden's Call with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki

That's what the White House says.

Some will believe, some will wait and see.

Because the US government lies and lies frequently.

US President Barack Obama's illegal is a current scandal.  The United States has endured many other government scandals.

During one such period, The Village Voice published Aaron Latham's "Introduction to the Pike Papers." The February 16, 1976 report noted:



As a part of its investigation of covert action, the Pike committee examined three recent operations: our funding of pro-U.S. elements during the 1972 Italian election, our funding of the Kurdish rebellion in Iraq, and our assistance to one of the contending factions in Angola.


What was the Pike Committee?  The CIA offers a summary that's both hyper defensive and hyper combative.  Their summary opens:

A storm broke over the CIA on 22 December 1974, when Seymour Hersh published a front-page article in The New York Times headlined "Huge C.I.A. Operation Reported in U.S. Against Anti-War Forces." Hersh's article alleged that the Agency had been engaged in massive domestic spying activities. ¹ His charges stunned the White House and Congress.
In response, President Ford established a blue-ribbon panel, the Rockefeller Commission, to investigate CIA activities in the United States. Ford later complicated the already-delicate issue further by hinting of CIA involvement in assassination attempts against foreign leaders. Congress soon launched its own investigation of the entire Intelligence Community (IC) and its possible abuses. On 27 January 1975, the US Senate established the Senate Select Committee to Study Government Operations With Respect to Intelligence Activities (the Church Committee). On 19 February 1975, the House voted to create a House Select Intelligence Committee (the Nedzi Committee, which was replaced five months later by the Pike Committee.)
These Congressional investigations eventually delved into all aspects of the CIA and the IC. For the first time in the Agency's history, CIA officials faced hostile Congressional committees bent on the exposure of abuses by intelligence agencies and on major reforms. In the Congress, there was no longer a consensus to support intelligence activities blindly. The old Congressional seniority system and its leadership was giving way. With the investigations, the CIA also became a focal point in the ongoing battle between the Congress and the executive branch over foreign policy issues and the "imperial presidency."
The investigations of the Pike Committee, headed by Democratic Representative Otis Pike of New York, paralleled those of the Church Committee, led by Idaho Senator Frank Church, also a Democrat. While the Church Committee centered its attention on the more sensational charges of illegal activities by the CIA and other components of the IC, the Pike Committee set about examining the CIA's effectiveness and its costs to taxpayers. Unfortunately, Representative Pike, the committee, and its staff never developed a cooperative working relationship with the Agency or the Ford administration.

The committee soon was at odds with the CIA and the White House over questions of access to documents and information and the declassification of materials. Relations between the Agency and the Pike Committee became confrontational. CIA officials came to detest the committee and its efforts at investigation. Many observers maintained moreover, that Representative Pike was seeking to use the committee hearings to enhance his senatorial ambitions, and the committee staff, almost entirely young and anti-establishment, clashed with Agency and White House officials.


Actually, the report specifically details Henry Kissinger of one of the main stalling points.

It details quite a lot.

In 1972, for example, Kurds in northern Iraq were funneled US dollars and they thought the US government cared about their situation.  The Kurds are considered the largest minority in the world without a homeland.  Those who were in Iraq were facing oppression under the government of Saddam Hussein.  What a blessing, what a heaven-sent gift for the Kurds that the US government supported them.

Oops!  It didn't.

Aaron Latham explained:


In 1972, Dr. Henry Kissinger met with the Shah of Iran, who asked the U.S. to aid the Kurds in their rebellion against Iraq, an enemy of the Shah.  Kissinger later presented the proposal to President Nixon who approved what would become a $16 million program.  Then John B. Connally, the former Nixon Treasury Secretary, was dispatched to Iran to inform the Shah, one oil man to another.
The committee report charges that: "The President, Dr. Kissinger and the foreign head of state [the Shah] hoped our clients would not prevail.  They preferred instead that the insurgents simply continue a level of hostilities sufficient to sap the resources of our ally's neighboring country [Iraq].  The policy was not imparted to our clients, who were encouraged to continue fighting.  Even in the context of covert action, ours was a cynical enterprise."
During the Arab-Israeli war, when the Kurds might have been able to strike at a distracted Iraqi government, Kissinger, according to the report, "personally restrained the insurgents from an all-out offensive on the one occassion when such an attack might have been successful."
Then, when Iran resolved its border dispute with Iraq, the U.S. summarily dropped the Kurds.  And Iraq, knowing aid would be cut off, launched a search-and-destroy campaign the day after the border agreement was signed.
A high U.S. official later explained to the Pike committee staff: "Covert action should not be confused with missionary work."


They were given support not because the US government hoped that they would be successful or even hoped that they would be successful.  In fact, Kissinger and the government were hoping that the Kurds "would not prevail." It was all about screwing over someone else and the Kurds were just the US government's unknowing pawns.


EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs Catherine Ashton:  The EU is doing all it can to support Prime Minister Al Maliki and his Government in their efforts to confront terrorism and address security challenges, particularly in the west of Iraq, I am very concerned about the humanitarian situation in areas affected by the recent fighting and it's vital that everything possible is done to protect the civilian population from further violence. 


KUNA reports she made those remarks in Brussels today at the Cooperation Council meeting the Eropean Union and Iraq held.  Iraq's Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari led the Iraqi delegation.

The European Union released a statement which includes:


The Cooperation Council between the European Union (EU) and the Republic of Iraq held its first meeting in Brussels on 20 January 2014. The meeting was opened by the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs, Catherine ASHTON, who headed the EU delegation. Deputy Foreign Minister of Greece, Dimitrios KOURKOULAS, was also present and chaired the remaining part of the meeting. The Iraq delegation was led by the Minister of Foreign Affairs H.E.Mr. Hoshyar ZEBARI. 
The Cooperation Council, which takes place within the framework of the EU-Iraq Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA), reaffirmed the commitment of both parties to continue strengthening their relations. The meeting took stock of progress in implementation of the EU- Iraq PCA, currently under provisional application, and discussed possible are as for future cooperation. Concrete implementation of the agreement began in 2013 with the holding of three technical sub-committees: Energy and related issues; Trade and related issues; as well as Democracy and Human Rights. In the margins of the meeting, the High Representative Catherine ASHTON and Minister Hoshyar ZEBARI held an exchange of views on a wide range of domestic and regional political issues. 



Yesterday, Nouri al-Maliki raged in public.  The AP cleaned it up to protect Nouri:  "Hours after the offensive was announced, Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki vowed to continue fighting 'terrorism,' but left the door open for a political solution."   NINA reported what AP was afraid to:

Prime Minister, Nuri al-Maliki described the demands of the protesters in the Anbar province as " trick fooled some of the politicians."
Maliki said in a speech during a ceremony of distributing land to the poor and squatters in Nasiriyah: "This trick has been revealed and this play has been ended." 


He's back to making public attacks on the peaceful protesters.

And the US government voices no displeasure over it.

When the US government 'helps' and nothing's being accomplished, it's time to examine what they're really doing.  The US government regularly lies about their intent, tricks people they're helping.  The Kurds, for example, should never believe a word the administration offers.

They used KRG President Massoud Barzani to get a second term for Nouri.  They brought him on The Erbil Agreement, got him to act as the Iraqi face of the agreement and they gave him their word that The Erbil Agreement was binding and had the full backing of the White House.  He then helped them sell it to the leaders of the other political blocs.  Nouri got his second term as prime minister like he wanted and he then refused to follow the promises he made in the agreement.

And did the White House rush to insist that The Erbil Agreement be followed?

No.

They turned their backs on Barzani and everyone else.

And that's what created Iraq's current crises.

The US government should have long ago been asked to explain publicly what their real intent was with The Erbil Agreement and why they refused to insist Nouri follow it.

But today's cowardly press spends all their time ignoring The Erbil Agreement.

In fact, this topic was addressed in yesterday's "Roundtable" at Third (Jim: "Participating in our roundtable are  The Third Estate Sunday Review's Dona, Ty, Jess, Ava, and me, Jim; Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude; Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man; C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review; Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills); Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix; Mike of Mikey Likes It!; Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz); Ruth of Ruth's Report; Trina of Trina's Kitchen; Wally of The Daily Jot; Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ; Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends; Isaiah of The World Today Just Nuts and Ann of Ann's Mega Dub"):

Jim: Why don't people know about The Erbil Agreement?  We'll be guessing here, I know, but this was November 2010, the US still had large numbers of troops in the country, there was still limited American media coverage of Iraq.  Why don't people know?

Ruth: Well go to the snapshots for that time period.  What you will notice -- what I have noticed when I pull them up now -- is that really The Guardian newspaper out of England did a better job than anyone.  After that, you have Reuters which is an international newswire service.  But American outlets really were not interested in covering The Erbil Agreement.

Jim: Because?

Ann: Because it reveals what a fraud the US government is.  I mean think about what was done there with that contract.  Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya beat Nouri's State of Law.  Allawi should be prime minister today.  Why isn't he?  Because Nouri refused to step down.  Can you imagine the outrage in January 2009 if Bush had said he wasn't leaving the White House?  That's what Nouri did.  And the US government backed him on that. He brought the country to a stand still for over 8 months.  Parliament wasn't meeting.  Nothing was happening.  And the White House backed him throughout this.  Then, to make it worse, they negotiate a contract that gives this loser a second term.  Of course the US media didn't cover it.

Wally: Right because it's so revealing.  The government lies that they're bringing democracy to Iraq but, in 2010, they don't like the way the Iraqi people voted so Barack pisses on democracy.  It's brand new to Iraq, this idea that citizens are in charge.  And Barack pisses on that notion, says forget who you wanted to lead the country, I want Nouri so he's going to lead.  Why even have elections if the US government's going to overrule you?  Of course the US media didn't cover The Erbil Agreement.  That contract goes against democracy, against everything we supposedly stand for as a country.

Isaiah: Yeah, but -- I agree with what Wally and Ann and Ruth are saying -- but if Bully Boy Bush had been in the White House in 2010, the media would have crucified him for this.  Certainly, The Progressive and The Nation would have gone to town on him.  But since it was Barack, everyone looked the other way.

Cedric: Can -- I'm sorry, Isaiah, were you done?

Isaiah: Yeah, it's fine.

Cedric: I think, and this is point Jim and C.I. have both made for years but one I'm finally starting to grasp, that Bully Boy Bush became an embarrassment to the country and so the media turned on him.  That's big media, small media, all of them out to get him.  And good, I don't care for Bully Boy Bush.  But they weren't upset about illegal wars.  They weren't upset about spying or Guantanamo.  They were upset that he was such a buffoon, he basically fell down and embarrassed himself and the actions.  So they get behind smooth talker Barack and they don't care about anything but helping him sell imperialism.  They don't care about anything.  And there real problem with Bully Boy Bush was that he became a lousy salesperson for empire.  If he'd been able to move more cars off the lot, they would have kept him and kept fluffing for him.

Isaiah: I think that's a really strong point.  The Nation and The Progressive should be leading the way right now but they're not able to.  Why?  Because Barack's a Democrat?  Maybe.  Or maybe it's because, for all of their pretense during the Bully Boy Bush years, they're okay with empire -- especially when it's a Democrat leading it.

Kat: Yes.  That's really the case.  I mean, let's remember, The Nation had an expose on Senator Dianne Feinstein and they killed it. She's helping her husband get rich and abusing her position but The Nation kills the piece.  They're not about reporting.  They're not about issues.  They're about pimping empire but from the Democratic Party side.  The magazine has never been as bad as it is today.  And it's been plenty bad before.  I can remember Naomi Klein, when she still had bravery, talking about how when she wrote about what James Baker was doing in Iraq, the magazine really didn't want to know about what Madeline Albright was doing -- both were involved.  The Nation is more than okay with empire when carried out by Dems.

Jim: And The Progressive?

Rebecca: It's Salon dumbed down even further.


The Erbil Agreement, clearly, for the US government existed solely to create a justification for Nouri to have a second term after his State of Law lost the 2010 elections to Iraqiya.  Their actions make that clear.  The contract had many, many clauses.  The only one the US government gave a damn about?  Nouri getting the second term.

CNN Global Public Square host Fareed Zakaria has a column at The Daily Star in which he reflects on Nouri:

I met with the current prime minister of Iraq, Nouri al-Maliki, in 2005 when he held no office. I described him then as “a hard-line Shiite, unyielding in his religious views and extremely punitive toward the Sunnis. He did not strike me as a man who wanted national reconciliation.”
It was also clear that, having lived in exile in Syria and Iran for almost two decades, Maliki was close to both those regimes, which had sheltered him and his colleagues. Bush administration officials dismissed these concerns and told me Maliki believed in democracy and pluralism.
Fareed Zakaria called it right in 2005.  Sunday AFP reported honestly about Nouri's ranting.  They also noted what led up to the assault on Anbar:



Back in December, Nouri kicked off his latest assaults by illegally arresting MP Ahmed al-Alwani (and killing six people in that dawn raid, including al-Alwani's brother).  Today All Iraq News notes Ahmed al-Alwani has finally been charged.  He's charged with terrorism.  He was arrested a month ago.  (December 28th, to be exact.) He finally got charged.  Iraqi 'justice.' As Ayad Allawi -- among others -- has noted publicly, Nouri controls the Baghdad courts, there is no longer an independent judiciary -- largely because the US government looked the other way and humored the tyrant Nouri for 8 years.  And counting. December 27th, he went on TV to say he would burn the protest tents in Anbar down.  December 30th, his forces attacked the protest squares.



As NINA reports, Nouri's assault on Anbar Province continues today with armed clashes and heavy shelling in Falluja, Nouri's forces killed 32 fighters in Ramadi, 2 Iraqi soldiers were killed and three more injured northwest of Falluja,  the military killed 4 fighters in Ramadi, in another Ramadi clash -- with the help of helicopters -- security forces killed 6 fighters, a police station in Ramadi was set fire to, and "The security source in Anbar declared closing all roads lead to Fallujah with nearly provinces in preparation for storming the city's outskirts." Nafia Abdul Jabbar (AFP) observes, "Al-Qaeda-linked militants tightened their grip on Fallujah, a city on Baghdad's doorstep that has been outside of government control for weeks."


Elise Labot (CNN) offers a run through of events in Iraq which takes the form of five questions and answers:




Dan Murphy (Christian Science Monitor) also goes with the Q&A format:

Did Iraq's civil war really end?

No. The very day the last US troops left Iraq, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, from the Shiite-Islamist Dawa Party, turned the screws on senior Sunni Arab politicians in parliament, signaling his intention to crush his political enemies. Mr. Maliki called for a vote of no confidence against Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq and issued an arrest warrant for Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi, the country's most senior elected Sunni Arab officials.
In the years since, Maliki's government has worked steadily to undo whatever progress toward political reconciliation had been made prior to the US exit. While Iraq is much less violent than it had been, thousands of civilians are still being killed in political violence each year. In 2012 civilian deaths jumped 17 percent. Last year such deaths more than doubled, to more than 8,000.



The violence was throughout Iraq today.  National Iraqi News Agency reports a southwest Baghdad car bombing (Alshorttah al-Rabaah neighborhood) killed 2 people and left seven injured, another southwest Baghdad bombing -- two bombs actually (in Saydiya area) -- left 1 person dead and ten more injured,  a north of Baghdad roadside bombing (Rashidiya) killed 3 people and left eight others, a Khanaqin bombing claimed 1 life and left one person injured, the corpse of 1 woman was discovered in the streets near Samawah (bullet wounds), 1 man's corpse was discovered in Tangro (bullet wounds), suspect Mohamed Fadel Abbas was shot dead by the Ministry of Interior forces, 2 corpses were discovered in Mosul (bullet wounds), a southeast Baghdad car bombing (Baghdadijiddeedah) left 4 people dead and fifteen injured, state-TV (al-Iraqiya) announced that "the Wali of Anbar named Ismail Latif" was killed by security forces in Ramadi, a southern Baghdad car bombing (Abu Dshir area) claimed 6 lives and left fifteen more injured, a southwest Baghdad car bombing (Bayaa area) left eight people injured, and a northwest Baghdad car bombing (Alhurriyah area) left 1 person dead and nine more injured. The Latin American Herald has a breakdown on the Baghdad bombings here.  All Iraq News adds 4 corpses were discovered in Ramadi (Iraqi soldiers) and Firas Mohammed Atea, "reporter of Falluja Satellite Channel [. . .] was killed while accompanying the security forces during their clashes." The International Federation of Journalists issued the following statement:

The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) has issued a renewed plea for Iraqi authorities to step up their efforts to protect the safety of journalists following the murder of reporter Firas Mohammed Attiyah today, Monday 20 January.

According to IFJ affiliate, the Iraqi Journalists' Syndicate (IJS), Attiyah, who worked for Fallujah TV, was killed in a bomb attack in the town of Khaldiyah, east of the Iraq's Anbar provincial capital, Ramadi. The blast occurred as Attiyah, his brother and Muayad Ibrahim, a reporter for Al-Anbar TV, were travelling in a car to report on fighting in the area.  Ibrahim and Attiyah's brother were both wounded in the attack.

As violence in Iraq continues to escalate, The IFJ has reiterated its appeal for the Iraqi government to introduce genuine measures that will bring an end to the killing of innocent journalists and ensure that those who carry out acts of violence against the media face the full weight of justice.

"We are deeply saddened at the news that the journalists Firas Mohammed Atttiyah has lost his life and we send our deepest condolences to his family and colleagues during this incredibly difficult time," said IFJ President Jim Boumelha.

"Standing in solidarity with our Iraqi affiliate, the IJS, we reiterate our call for the Iraqi government to set up a special task force with the resources to carry out a thorough and independent investigation into the murder of Attiyah and the many other journalists that have been brutally killed in Iraqi. Impunity must end and those responsible must answer for their crimes."

According to the IFJ's list of Journalists and Media Staff Killed in 2013, Iraq remains of the deadliest countries in the world for journalists. Thirteen journalists were murdered in the country last year, with eleven of those murders occurring towards the end of the year.

Reacting to the desperate situation, the IFJ last October launched its End Impunity campaign which is calling on the governments of Iraq, Pakistan and Russia to investigate killings of journalists and bring their perpetrators to justice.

Boumelha added: "We are deeply concerned about the escalation of violence against the media in Iraq in recent months. Our End Impunity campaign is calling for an end to violence against journalists in the country where it is estimated that at least 300 journalists have been killed since the US invasion in 2003.

"Our message is clear: the slaughter of journalists in Iraq must end now," continued Boumelha. "Such blatant and utterly appalling disregard for the lives of journalists quite simply cannot be tolerated."


For more information, please contact IFJ on + 32 2 235 22 17
The IFJ represents more than 600.000 journalists in 134 countries


Reporters Without Borders also issued a statement:





On the issue of the killing of journalists, BRussells Tribunal carries ICSSI's "Journalists in Iraq: their freedoms obliterated by laws and policies while their lives are continually threatened!" which opens:


The Press Freedom Advocacy Association released its annual report for 2013, highlighting the serious deterioration in the working conditions and the safety of journalists in Iraq over the last year. The Association cited 286 cases of violent acts against journalists, including kidnappings and abductions, threats, bullying, beatings, and obstruction of their coverage of events. Twenty-one reporters and journalists were killed; most of these martyrs were specifically targeted because of their work. According to the Association, this is the most serious decline in the situation of journalists since 2007 when widespread civil conflict claimed the lives of thousands of citizens, including journalists.
The Association stated that this violence is largely caused by armed militias that operate freely in many areas, regularly threatening journalists with violence and death. The government allows these perpetrators to carry out their attacks with near total impunity. The province of Nineveh was identified by the Association as the most dangerous place in Iraq for journalists to work. Indeed, most journalists there have abandoned their work as a result of the threats and killings.

Even as the government has failed to address the dramatic increase in violence that journalists are experiencing, it has reinstituted laws and practices of the Saddam era that pose tremendous challenges to freedom of the press. Journalists have been detained, arrested and tried. The Association cited more than 700 cases in which members of the press have been brought before the court of “publication and media” regarding “crimes of libel and defamation” based on an Iraqi law of 1969. In addition, new legislation adopted in 2011, the so-called “Rights of Journalists Law”, severely threatens freedom of the press, and with it the transformation to democracy in Iraq. The Association worked for the repeal of this law, and later proposed amendments to the sections of the law that threaten press freedom to the Parliament’s Committee of Culture and Media in September 2013. It also filed a lawsuit in the Federal Court to force the government to revise the law, but until now, the Parliament has not placed discussion of these crucial issues on its agenda.


Jomana Karadsheh and Hamdi Alkhshali (CNN) remind, "On Saturday, U.S. Vice President Joe Biden talked with Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki about U.S. support for Iraq's fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, a group trying to overthrow the Iraqi government. Biden's office said the two leaders agreed on the importance of the Iraqi government's continued outreach to local and tribal leaders in Anbar province." It doesn't matter.  Nouri doesn't give a damn what Joe Biden says.  If US President Barack Obama got on the phone with Nouri and said, "No weapons, no aid, until you start implementing power-sharing and listen to the Sunnis demands"?  That might frighten Nouri enough to start a real dialogue.  Short of that, the assault's continuing.


When this started as December wound down, a State Dept friend assured me Nouri would wrap up the "action" in 7 days "10 tops."

That hasn't happened.

Not only is that threatening to the residents of Anbar, has the White House forgotten that parliamentary elections are supposed to take place April 30th?

In December, you might be able to pretend that there was a time for an assault.  It's now January 20th, closer to the end of the month than the start and April 30th looms.

When is the White House going to get serious?

Or is the plan not to?  Is the plan to just prop Nouri up for a third term?

World Bulletin reports:



In a press statement Kasim Abdurrezak, a member of the Iraqi Kurdish Regional Administration Independent High Electoral Commission, stated that Qadir has been discharged by the board because he did not perform his duties appropriately and because of corruption allegations.

The IHEC still hasn't posted a statement about this.  But this is not good 'timing.' With an election so close, they're firing people from the Commission?  There's too much work to be done for this nonsense.  Last week, for example, the IHEC issued the following:

The IHEC Chief Electoral Officer (CEO), Mr. Mukdud al Sharify reported on 11 January that the IHEC has agreed with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) to form a joint committee to follow up the upcoming Iraqi Parliamentary elections (IPE) of Iraqis abroad scheduled on 30 April 2014.
Mr. al Sharify said that the IHEC has held a broadened meeting with the delegation of MoFA to develop a general framework for cooperation and coordination to succeed the voting process for the upcoming IPE of Iraqis abroad.
He added that the meeting addressed several issues to facilitate the IHEC's work and to give opportunity for all eligible voters overseas to participate in the upcoming IPE. The recommendations came out to form a joint committee to facilitate the procedures of the IHEC's staff to open the electoral offices in the states where elections to be held, as well as to overcome the obstacles that may face the IHEC's work.
The MoFA delegation expressed their full readiness to provide all the facilities and cooperation to support the IHEC's role to run the elections abroad in 13 countries and four polling centers in other countries, in conjunction with the same date to run the IPE inside Iraq on 30 April 2014.


They have problems with incomplete voter rolls in Kirkuk and they need to include the external refugees in the voting, there's a lot to be done besides the printing of ballots, their distribution, the training of poll workers and security at the poll stations.  April 30th is not in the distant future. As EU High Representative Catherine Ashton observed today,  "April's general elections will be a crucial test for Iraq's democracy, and I hope that the country's political leaders will seize this opportunity to promote dialogue and compromise."

In the only good news, All Iraq News reports, "The Federal Court rejected the nomination of Falah Shanshal as the head of the Justice and Accountability Commission."  No offense to Shanshal, but the longer the Justice and Accountability Commission has no leader, the less chance of them excluding candidates from running in the races.  (In 2010, the Justice and Accountability Commission was used to weed out Nouri's political opponents.)


Finally, last Thursday, Abdullah Salem (Niqash) reported on the targeting of protesters in Mosul:





The men who broke into al-Hadidi’s house murdered him.
This was not an isolated case. Several of the leaders of the demonstrations in this area have been assassinated over the past year. The murders started after demonstrators started to carry guns - and they started to carry guns after the Iraqi army broke up a demonstration in Hawija, near the city of Kirkuk, in late April. In doing so, they killed around 40 demonstrators and injured hundreds of others.
One of the first protest leaders to be murdered was Haitham al-Abadi who was attacked on August 19, 2013. The attack on al-Abad also saw another tribal leader, Ahmad al-Ramawi injured.
Later that month gunmen targeted Barzan al-Badrani, a prominent tribal leader who took part in the protests. He was murdered using a pistol with a silencer in central Mosul.
Another protest leader, Tharwi al-Kourz al-Shammari, was also killed in Mosul, next to his house by unidentified gunmen. Yet another protest leader Thaer Hazem Abed was killed by gunmen in September. 


















iraq
the belfast telegraph
the daily mirror
aswat al-iraq
all iraq news
national iraq news agency
cnn
elise labott
afp
nafia abdul jabbar
brussells tribunal
jomana karadsheh
hamdi alkhshali
niqash
abdullah salem
the christian science monitor
dan murphy
the latin american herald tribune

Tuesday, January 21, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, one 'analyst' spews hatred at Sunnis while another forgets 2007, US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel meets with Iraq's Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi, Nouri finally arrests a Shi'ite militia leader, the arrested has a cell phone in jail and calls Reuters to threaten Nouri, the assault on Anbar continues, bad news for Nouri in a new Human Rights Watch report and a new UN human rights report, and more.

Talk Radio News reports US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel met in DC with Iraq's Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi:

During the meeting, Hagel provided al-Nujaifi with an update on a U.S. plan to accelerate the delivery of “critical defense equipment” to those Iraqi Security Forces conducting missions in the country’s Anbar Province. In August, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Iraq of a $339 million Mobile Troposcatter Radio System and a $2.4 billion Integrated Air Defense System. The proposed air defense system is expected to provide Iraqi Air Defense Command with situational awareness of the country’s airspace.

The Pentagon issued the following regarding the meeting today:

Readout of Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel's Meeting with Iraqi Council of Representatives Speaker Osama al-Nujaifi

UPI reports, "Iraq was the only member of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries to post a decline in oil production last month, the IEA said Tuesday." Nouri al-Maliki's Iraq stands out -- just never in a good way.  Today the prime minister and chief thug of Iraq wanted to take bows again.  AP notes that Nouri's government issued a declaration, "The justice ministry carried out the executions of 26 (men) convicted of crimes related to terrorism on Sunday." CNN adds, "One of those executed was Adel al-Mashhadani, a militia leader in Baghdad who was "famous for sectarian crimes," the statement said. He was a member of the Awakening, the Sunni tribal fighting force who fought alongside the United States against al Qaeda militants." The announcement of the executions come one day after UNAMI issued their [PDF format warning] latest human rights report on Iraq which included:


16. Declare a moratorium on the use of the death penalty in accordance with UN General Assembly resolutions 62/149 (2007), 63/168 (2008), 65/206 (2010) and 67/176( 2012) ; revie w the criminal code and the criminal procedure code with a view to abolishing the death penalty; and consider acceding to the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR aimed at abolishing the death penalty; 
17. Implement international standards that provide safeg uards of the rights of those facing the death penalty , as set out in the annex to Economic and Social Council resolution 1984/50 of 25 May 1984 , until the death penalty is abolished in Iraq.


Clearly, Nouri's not listening to the United Nations.


Today Human Rights Watch issued World Report 2014 which notes 2012 saw Nouri's government execute at least 129 people while 2013 saw the number increase to 151.  BBC News notes today's executions come after "m the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights for an immediate halt to executions in Iraq. A spokesman for Navi Pillay said in October large-scale killings were 'obscene and inhumane'."


Of course, that's not Nouri's fault.  Not in his mind anyway.  Nothing is never his fault, in his mind.

Dropping back to the January 16th snapshot:

Meanwhile, Iraq's budget has gone to Parliament.  National Iraqi News Agency reports that Kurdish MP Mahmoud Othman calls the forwarding of the budget -- which led the Kurds to walk out of the Cabinet -- "unwise." NINA also notes Kurdish MP Ashwaq al-Jaf notes the Kurds plan to use Constitutional steps in Parliament to address the issue.  Steve LeVine (Quartz) explains:



UPI notes, "Genel Energy, led by former BP boss Tony Hayward, said Wednesday it expects oil from a pipeline in the Kurdish north of Iraq to be exported from Turkey soon."


Nouri created that crisis.  On Sunday, a Kurdish delegation had to go to Baghdad. Aswat al-Iraq reported they were there to discuss the budget and the oil issue.  On the same day,Aswat al-Iraq quoted KRG President Massoud Barzani stating, "Kurds will not recede any of their rights any form." Rudaw reported:

Meetings led by Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani in Baghdad to resolve oil and budget rows ended inconclusively on Sunday, with a decision to continue the talks at a later date.
Following the closed-door meetings, Maliki softened his stance over threats to cut off the Kurdistan Region from the federal budget, unless there was agreement over revenues from the oil exports to Turkey.
"I have not said I would cut the KRG's share of the budget. I said there should be a language of understanding to solve the issues between Baghdad and Erbil," Maliki told Rudaw.

It wasn't, you understand, Nouri's fault.  It's his Cabinet, most Sunnis (all but Saleh al-Mutlaq) long ago began boycotting sessions.  He controls the Cabinet, he controls what gets forwarded to Parliament but it wasn't his fault.

It was some Phantom head of the Cabinet -- a head of it that no one knew existed or had ever heard of.

A sure sign of a failure in a leader is someone who can't admit mistakes and has to pretend he or she is perfect.

And Nouri is so far from perfect.  Rudaw reports on the conclusions of the British All Parliamentary Group:

The cat and mouse game between Erbil and Baghdad is as old as Iraq itself. The APPG agrees with Kurdish leaders that Baghdad should nurture and celebrate the social and economic achievements of the Region and see it as the future for the whole country. It seems possible that the autonomous region and the federal government can negotiate a revenue sharing law that accompanies the new pipelines between the Kurdistan Region and Turkey.
The rapprochement with Turkey has concerned some in Baghdad and in America who fear that economic independence will become political independence and that Iraq will disintegrate. Members of the APPG accept that a unified Iraq should work for all its component parts through what President Barzani described to us as "partnership and power-sharing."
The Kurds told the APPG that the current revenue-sharing agreement should give them 17% of the national budget but that they usually receive about 10% and not consistently. The crucial need is for a robust and reliable revenue-sharing law.


But Nouri will always have fools and tools who applaud him.  Jamie Tarabay has an idiotic article at Al Jazeera America entitled "Will daily bombings bring Iraq to a new tipping point?" I'm sorry, when did daily bombs not take place.  What world is Taraby living in where daily bombings are something recent to Iraq?  She writes like someone seeking a fatwa and if that seems harsh, read this 2013 piece by Tarabay -- especially this section:

De-Baathification, adopted in 2003 to weed out Saddam Hussein-era officials from positions of power, is still law. It has been employed by the Maliki government to isolate, arrest or oust political threats and opponents.
The security forces remain under the thumb of Shia politicians, including those from Maliki’s Dawa party, but also members of the Badr brigade — the former military wing of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, which ran against Maliki's Dawa Party in the last parliamentary election, in 2010. Despite repeated appeals by the U.S. to bring more Sunnis into the ranks, the Interior Ministry, which controls the country's security forces, remains a Shia bastion. Sunnis guarding the few remaining Sunni enclaves in Baghdad in makeshift units called the Sons of Iraq continue to be shut out of joining.
Maliki wants the U.S. to provide Iraq with Apache attack helicopters and drones and recently purchased Korean fighter jets. His critics claim he intends to use them against their communities.


That's just last month.  Now read her crap today, her anti-Sunni screed -- "long-suffering Shia majority,""many Sunnis consider them [Shi'ites] to be heretics and apostates,""narrative reinforces the calls by Shia religious leaders for calm and fortitude, but the goal of the Al-Qaeda elements is to provoke the Shia to abandon such restraint and plunge" and it just goes on and on. She calls the Sunnis everything but dogs and largely conflates all Sunnis as fighters and/or al Qaeda.  I don't understand how such hateful and ignorant writing can be produced to begin with.  But it's especially shocking when compared to her past articles -- recent, like last month, or her work at NPR (or AP before that) -- which had balance and didn't spew hate towards any sect.

As she vents her hate and stupidity, let's return to Human Rights Watch's new report World Report 2014 to note some reality:

The government responded to largely peaceful demonstrations with violence and to worsening security with draconian counterterrorism measures.  Borders controlled by Iraq's central government remained closed to Syrians fleeing civil war, while as of November, nearly 206,600 Syrians fled to the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG)-controlled area.  
In December 2012, thousands of Iraqis took part in demonstrations in mostly Sunni areas, demanding reform of the Anti-Terrorism Law and the release of illegaly held detainees. Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki announced in January 2013 that he had created special committees to oversee reforms, including freeing prisoners and limiting courts' use of secret informant testimony.  At time of writing, there was little indication that the government had implemented reforms.  Security forces instead used violence against protesters, culminating in an attack on a demonstration in Hawija in April, which killed 51 protesters.  Authorities failed to hold anyone accountable.  
The government responded to increasing unrest with mass arrest campaigns in Sunni regions, targeting ordinary civilians and prominent activists and politicians under the 2005 Anti-Terrorism Law.  Security forces and government supporters harassed journalists and media organizations critical of the authorities.  
Iraq's security forces abused detainees with impunity.  Throughout the year, detainees reported prolonged detentions without a judicial hearing and torture during interrogation.  In February, Deputy Prime Minister Hussein al-Shahristani told Human Rights Watch that security forces frequently carred out mass arrests without arrest warrants.  Courts continued to rely on secret informant testimony and coerced confessions to issue arrest warrants and convictions.  On May 11, villagers south of Mosul found the bodies of four men and a 15-year-old boy, which bore multiple gun shot wounds.  Witnesses had last seen them alive on May 3 in the custody of the federal police 3rd Division, but at time of writing, the government had not announced any investigation into the deaths.


Jamie Tarabay seems to have missed or forgotten all of that.  She and Kirk Sowell both need to hop on a pair of ponies.  As Cass Elliot, Denny Doherty, John and Michelle Phillips (the Mamas and the Papas) sing in "Too Late" (first appears on The Papas & the Mamas):

Get on your pony and ride
Get on your pony and ride
No one to catch up to you
If you try.
Get on your pony and ride
Get on your pony and ride
No one to catch up to you
If you try.
No one to catch up to you,
If you try -- 'cause I've tried.
'Cause when the mind that once was open shuts
And you knock on the door, nobody answers anymore
When the love and trust has turned to dust
When the mind that once was open shuts
When you knock on the door, nobody answers anymore
When the love and trust has turned to dust



Sunday, Kirk H. Sowell (Foreign Policy) tries his hand at analysis and he got this part right:

He [Nouri] wished Christians a Merry Christmas, extended to "all Muslims, who believe in Jesus the Messiah, messenger of humanity and peace." Holiday greetings out of the way, the prime minister moved on to what he really wanted to address. He spoke of ongoing counter-terrorist operations, and the need for tribal support. Maliki then talked about "what is referred to as the ‘sit-in protest,' which has become a base for the leaders of al Qaeda," repeating the phrase twice. This was a reference to the protest site near Ramadi, the symbolic center of the mainstream Sunni protest movement countrywide.
Maliki went on, saying "this we know because they have openly appeared on the podium, declaring we are al Qaeda, and we cut off heads. They have openly raised the banner of al Qaeda at the podium, and soon we will air the confessions" of terrorists admitting they are based at the site. "Our intelligence from aerial and human sources inside the site, confirm the presence of both Iraqi and foreign al Qaeda leaders. The provincial government has also confirmed that there are 36 al Qaeda leaders based there. So now there is a popular demand that the site be shut down."
With national elections set for April, Maliki's Christmas speech, a show trial-like airing of "confessions" by detainees on state television, and a wide-ranging media campaign in the days that followed were part of an effort to tie Ramadi protests to al Qaeda. The case was largely wrong, and to an extent made in bad faith. This and the December 30, 2013 bulldozing of the Ramadi encampment were among several actions that led to the total breakdown in security in Anbar province at year's end and exacerbated the security crisis there.


He was less sturdy on other points -- such as this:

The movement never had a serious chance of achieving its stated goals. It stated its demands absolutely, and was too sweeping, demanding a total abolition of de-Baathification and repeal of the death penalty for terrorism, which no Shiite prime minister would accept. 


de-Ba'athification is something no Shi'ite prime minister would accept?

I'm confused how he can argue "no Shi'ite prime minister would accept" that.  Did he do a survey of potential Shi'ite prime ministers?

I find it hard to believe Sowell did that.  I find it even harder to believe that Sowell's never seen this:

Reversal of de-Baathification laws. The Iraqi parliament passed the Justice and Accountability Law on January 12, 2008, clearing the way for an estimated thirty-thousand low-ranking ex-Baathists to return to public life. The law also allowed some party members to collect pensions. But some Sunnis argue the law has made matters worse for them by opening the door to federal prosecution, barring top-ranking officials from regaining jobs, and restricting former Saddam security forces from reintegration. The drive to rescind de-Baathification laws was part of a larger effort to make constitutional concessions to minority groups like Sunni Arabs.


That's what the Sunni protesters have been calling for since the ongoing protests kicked off on December 21st -- they've been calling for more than that, but with regards to de-Ba'athification, that's what they're calling for.


No Shi'ite prime minister would agree to that?

Is Nouri al-Maliki no longer Shi'ite and/or no longer prime minister?

He was prime minister in 2007 and he agreed to the quoted passage above which is part of the White House benchmarks.  Background, Democrats swept the 2006 mid-term elections in the US.  Prior to the elections, they controlled no house of Congress.  They promised if voters would put them in charge of one house of Congress, they'd end the Iraq War.  The voters did better than that, they voted them in charge of both houses of Congress.  As the new Congress was sworn in back in January of 2007, Bully Boy Bush knew he had to make immediate changes.  Gone was Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld (Robert Gates replaced him in January of 2007) and a series of White House benchmarks was created to demonstrate success -- in order to continue Congressional funding.

The Council on Foreign Relations has the benchmarks here.  Nouri agreed to these benchmarks.  It's a failure on the part of the Obama administration that they've given billions to Iraq (and continue to) and tons of weapons and have not demanded that Nouri implement these benchmarks he agreed to and signed off on.

In June of 2007, Fred Kaplan noted at Slate:




Sowell claims no Shi'ite prime minister would ever agree to what . . . Nouri al-Maliki promised he'd do in 2007.

When you realize that even the Bully Boy Bush administration knew de-Ba'athifcation -- which they started -- had to end for Iraq to come together as a country, the demand of the protesters -- for the same thing -- becomes much less 'out there' than Sowell attempted to play it in his Sunday episode.

Monday last week, United Nations Security-General Ban Ki-moon visit Baghdad.  Yesterday, the United Nations News Centre reported:


Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today called on Iraq’s political leaders to enter inclusive talks in the face of rising conflict and warned that failure to make progress in Israeli-Palestinian peace talks could spark a new outbreak of violence.
“Today, I reiterate my message to Iraqi political leaders to fulfil their responsibilities to ensure inclusive dialogue, social cohesion, and concrete political progress,” he told the United Nations Security Council at the start of the body’s regular debate on the situation in the Middle East following his return from a visit to the region.
“The country is again facing serious threats to its stability,” he said. Mr. Ban, who visited Iraq ahead of a stop in Kuwait were he chaired a humanitarian donors’ conference for Syria, which generated some $2.4 billion in pledges, said he discussed his concerns with many Iraqi leaders and urged all sides to remain committed to political dialogue and uphold respect for the rule of law and human rights.
“I was reassured by their pledge to hold parliamentary elections as scheduled on 30 April,” he added. “Today, I reiterate my message to Iraqi political leaders to fulfil their responsibilities to ensure inclusive dialogue, social cohesion, and concrete political progress.”


The assault on Anbar continues.  Kareem Fahim and Yasir Ghazi (New York Times) report, "Thousands of residents have fled Falluja in recent days, fearing worsening violence after the failure of negotiations between local leaders and jihadist militants to end a standoff that has lasted weeks, leaders from the city said Monday."AFP reports 22,000 families have been forced to flee their homes due to the Anbar operations and they note, "The UN said the actual figure was likely to be higher, as not all those who fled had registered. It said of those who had left, most had found refuge elsewhere in Anbar, but some had gone as far afield as the northern Kurdish region."  UPI adds, "Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is having a tough time trying to dislodge al-Qaida forces who hold much of the western cities of Fallujah and Ramadi because his army doesn't seem to be up to the task, despite emergency shipments of U.S. arms."

NINA reports today:


Security source announced on Tuesday the continuation of the displacement of hundreds of families in several neighborhoods of Fallujah as a result of the shelling of the city by the army.
A security source in Anbar, told / NINA / that hundreds of families fled the city of Fallujah, because of the artillery intense shelling that led to the killing and wounding of many civilians. 

And they note that among the Falluja shelling targets today was a school.  Steve Inskeep (NPR's Morning Edition -- link is audio and text) spoke with AFP's Prashant Rao this morning about the violence.


RAO: In terms of how the government is responding though, it varies depending on the area. In Baghdad, they have locked out a lot of areas. They've sort of increased checkpoints and they've sort of tighten those checkpoints. But in Anbar, the response have been a combination of the deploying of U.S.- supplied Hellfire missiles and also clashes in some towns in between Ramadi and Fallujah, where the Iraqi army and Iraqi police, allied tribal fighters are all looking to take back territory that the government lost about three weeks ago.


INSKEEP: Let's remember here Anbar. Of course, that's the Sunni-dominated province west of Baghdad. You're saying that's where some of the heaviest fighting is taking place. So is this sectarian violence Sunni versus Shia?



RAO: Well, it might be slightly over-generalizing it to say it's sectarian. But there is a perception of sectarianism, in that the Iraqis security forces are perceived in Sunni areas to be a Shia force, especially some of the more elite fighting units. And, of course, Anbar, as you say, is a predominantly Sunni province - so it takes on that color. That is certainly part of the perception.



Some of today's violence?   National Iraqi News Agency reports security forces killed 6 fighters in Ramadi,  3 police members were shot dead in Mosul, Sheikh Ismail Brayse ("director of Information of the Sunni Endomen in the province of Diyala" and "Iman of Abuk Bakr mosque") was shot dead in Diyala Province,  a southeast Baghdad (Diyala Bridge area) sticky bombing left 1 person dead and another injured,  1 person was shot dead and another left injured in a southwest Baghdad (Bayaa area) attack, a Mosul attack left "a member of Nineveh intelligence" dead and two more injured, a central Baghdad car bombing (Alnahdhah area) left eleven people injured, 2 police officers were shot dead at a Mosul wedding ceremony, and Mahmoud al-Issawi ("adviser of Anbar governor for security affairs") was kidnapped to the "east of Fallujah today."

Suadad al-Salhy (Reuters) reports Nouri finally arrested a Shi'ite militia leader and he's from Iran.  Strange, the show confessions last Friday were about Saudi Arabia -- the country Nouri denounced on Sunday.  Again, this one is Shi'ite and he's from Iran.  And he got a cellphone and jail and dialed Reuters:

A Shi’ite militia leader arrested in Iraq as said leaders of Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki’s political bloc will be killed unless he is released within 24 hours.
Wathiq Al-Battat, speaking to Reuters on a mobile phone he said had been given him by a sympathetic prison guard, said he was being held without charge in solitary confinement in a small, cold cell, with no access to lawyers or his family.
Battat was detained in Baghdad on Jan. 2, six weeks after his Iranian-backed Al-Mukhtar Army fired six mortar bombs from southern Iraq into a neighboring country, causing no casualties.


Yesterday's snapshot noted the attempted citizen's arrest of War Criminal and former UK Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.  George Monbiot (Guardian) explains today:

Nothing changes without talk; nothing changes through talk alone. Petitions and debates and social media campaigns and even, sometimes, articles in newspapers are essential campaigning tools but, without action, they seldom amount to anything but catharsis. Without risk, there is no inspiration. Without demonstrations of what change looks like, the public imagination fails.
This is why I set up the Arrest Blair website. Everywhere I went, I met people who were furious that Tony Blair should have got away with what, under international law, appears to be clearly defined as mass murder. The crime of aggression ("planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression) was described by the Nuremberg Tribunal as "the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole".
[. . .]
Arrest Blair collects donations and uses them to build a bounty pot. We pay out a quarter of the money that's in the pot when a successful claim is made. Four people have received the bounty so far, in each case amid a blaze of publicity for an issue that is otherwise largely forgotten.
Twiggy Garcia's attempt last Friday was performed with a certain panache. While Garcia held his shoulder, Blair attempted his long-polished trick of changing the subject: "Shouldn't you be worried about Syria?" Garcia responded that he could "only address things that are within my grasp at any one time". It'll take a day or two to formalise the decision, but his claim seems to meet the criteria.
Once more, what Blair did in Iraq is in the news, 11 years after the event, and the clamour to ensure that such crimes become unthinkable in future has risen again. That is a small but significant contribution to peace.








iraq
cnn
upi
talk radio news
the new york times
kareem fahim
yasir ghazi
npr
morning edition
 steve inskeep
afp
prashant rao
fred kaplan
reuters
suadad al-salhy

Wednesday, June 22, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, Nouri's assault on Anbar continues, more families are displaced in Anbar, the use of collective punishment, we look at the silence on Anbar, we note how Alice Walker managed to leave the Cult of St. Barack and regain her voice, and more.



Nouri al-Maliki, prime minister and chief thug of Iraq, continues his assault on Anbar Province.  And where are the people around the world objecting?  Falluja's electrical grid has been destroyed (by the Iraqi military), this week has seen a school bombed (by the Iraqi military),  Iraq Times notes that Nouri's assault on Anbar has displaced over 22,000 families.

And this is treated as a misfortune and how sad but . . . No, not a misfortune.  The Anbar residents are victims of War Crimes.  Monday, Aswat al-Iraq quoted MP Mohammed Iqbal Omar (he's with Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi's Mutahidoun bloc) noting the military was responsible for the deaths, that the mission remains "vague" and he called for this "tragic" assualt to cease and for a political solution to be worked out.

Applause to him.  But I'm not talking about Iraqis right now.  I'm not talking about the cowardly and cowed press (I'm sorry AFP but when you had journalist arrested just months ago, you should have made a news report and not buried it -- you risk your own lives and everyone else's when you respond to Nouri's thuggery with silence). I'm not talking about the disappointing and lying US government.

I'm talking about the people of this world.  This site started in November 2004.  The second assault of Falluja began shortly after.  We called it out.  Like we call out this one.

But in 2004, we weren't the only ones calling out the terrorizing of the Iraqi people.

Where are those voices today?

Leslie Cagan, was United for Peace and Justice nothing but an ego trip for you?  Noam Chosky, you know this is wrong and you've given one trivial and useless interview after another in recent weeks but never stopped to call out what's happening in Anbar.  CODEPINK, I call you "CODESTINK" and you get mad and your itty bitty feelings are all hurt.  You tell me repeatedly when Medea Benjamin embarrasses herself and your organization that I'm "not being helpful" when I note it here.  I'm sorry, when are you helpful?  My role is the role of the critic.  It is clearly defined and I serve that purpose.  Your role is supposedly advocating for peace.  How do you do that when Medea rails against The Drone War but can't call out the person who oversees and continues it?  (That would be US President Barack Obama.)

Without Iraq, CODEPINK would never have been a media event.  They were a momentary joke with their FCC actions before the start of the illegal war.  It was about self-interest for them, their little media stunts.  That's how most people saw it, a bunch of bored people dressing in pink for attention.  And CODEPINK realized that which is why they basically dropped domestic issues.  (Illegal spying, et al, has to have an international aspect to appeal to CODEPINK today.)  They'd be nothing today without Iraq.  Protesting it gave them meaning, gave them stature, made them appear to be a serious organization.

Yet today they can't mention Iraq.  They refused to note it when, in the fall of 2012, Tim Aragno (New York Times) reported that Barack had sent "a unit of Army Special Operations soldiers [. . .] to Iraq to advise on contuerterrorism and help with intelligence." That was shameful and disgusting but it was on the eve of the 2012 presidential elections and CODEPINK are Cult of St. Barack.  That's why they never 'bird-dogged' then-Senator Barack Obama in their faux action.  It's why co-founder Jodie Evans was a bundler for Barack's 2008 campaign -- a detail she should have made public by CODEPINK in 2007.  They just finished two days of 'action' in Switzerland but couldn't stand up for the Iraqi people.

Cult of St. Barack is not fatal.  You can shake it and re-emerge as someone committed to peace.  March 9th of last year, Lyse Doucet (Newshour, BBC World Service) interviewed Alice Walker.  Excerpt.

Alice Walker: And you know, he charmed me, he held out this wonderful vision of a different way.  But we cannot have the different with with the same people and the same programs and the same destructiveness.  It's impossible. So I smile at my naivete in a way but I love it too.  I love that I have such a youthful hopefulness about the possibility of change. 

Lyse Doucet:  Well you wrote a letter to Obama when he came to power and you gave him some advice about how to work with the enemy.  And, of course, it was about that time that he got his Nobel Peace Prize.  Did he listen --

Alice Walker:  No.

Lyse Doucet:  -- to you advice?

Alice Walker:  No.  No.  I don't think he listens, really, to people like me.  I don't think he is the kind of person who pays that much attention to the masses actually.  I say that because I have a friend who actually ended up as part of his team but was soon kicked out because he was probably too truthful and too radical.  And one of the things he came back to tell us was that in the inner circle in the White House they don't think that they get into positions of power because people, you know, masses of people protest and demonstrate and, you know, vote.  They think they get there because people pay a lot of money to get them there. And so that's who they listen to. So, I think we've been, you know, naive in our desperate desire to have leadership that will change things.

Lyse Doucet:  But now he has several more years.  Do you have any hope that in his second term he could pursue the kind of changes that you and others like you believe should happen?

Alice Walker:  I don't think he's powerful enough.  I don't think one person can do all of that and I also think that he's more like a CEO rather than like the person who actually has the power to make decisions that will change things very much. 

Lyse Doucet:  Do you see him as someone who came to change the system and then the system changed him?

Alice Walker:  I don't know if he actually came into power to change the system.  He said he was going to make changes but I think he listens much more to bankers and to people that are not us, not the masses of the people and the poets.  And I must say, I think it's fatal not to listen to women, children and poets.  

Lyse Doucet:  He seems -- He says he listens to poets, poets like you, poets like Maya Angelou, he invites them to his great moments.

Alice Walker:  Well he invites them.  He doesn't invite me.  I have never been invited.  And I understand why he would think twice about doing that because I probably wouldn't go because I see the use of drone warfare as criminal and so I think it is a criminal act.  I think that the presidents before him were criminals.  And I think that they've made war on-on humanity and on the planet and they should be actually brought to justice for these things.

Lyse Doucet:  You may remember that ten years ago this week, you were arrested outside the White House where you were protesting against the war in Iraq.  And yet at that moment, you and Barack Obama, before he came to power, agreed more or less on the war in Iraq.

Alice Walker:  Well he said he was on our side but he didn't stop the war.  And even though they have withdrawn some troops, there are still tons of Americans there and their job now seems to be what the plan was all along which was to administer the oil fields.  And I came from people in the south who struggled very hard for decency and goodness and who believed in justice and who worked very hard to change an evil system of apartheid in the United States so there's no way that I can feel that this is good and what he, as the head of this country, seems to be about. 


Alice Walker survived the Cult of St. Barack and re-emerged with her own voice intact.  Others could do the same if they so desired.

In the interview, Alice notes, "We cannot sanction the destruction of people anywhere."

And she's right.  So why are so many today silent as Anbar is terrorized?

This is not about justice or even about terrorism.

The Boston Marathon Bombing took place April 15, 2013.  The US government didn't respond by shelling Cambridge and bombing Watertown.  Since when do you respond to act of crime by sending in the military to attack the people and their homes, schools, cities and towns?

You don't do that.

A good leader, as opposed despot like Nouri, does everything he or she can to ensure the safety of the people.  But Nouri is not a legitimate leader.  First the Bully Boy Bush administration insisted he be made prime minister in 2006 and then, despite the votes of the Iraqi people, the Barack Obama administration insisted that he have a second term in 2010.

Mustafa al-Kadhimi (Al-Monitor) speaks with Shi'ite politician Adil Abdul-Mahdi who was Vice President of Iraq.  In 2006, he and Tareq al-Hashemi were Iraq's two vice presidents; in 2010 he and al-Hashemi were again named Vice Presidents and, in 2011, Khondair al-Khozaei was named a third vice president, weeks later Abdul-Mahdi resigned his post in protest of the ongoing corruption and other issues.  He is a member of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (led by Ammar al-Hakim) and he has often been mentioned as potential prime minister -- most often in 2005 and 2006.

Al-Monitor:  What is a decision taken by Maliki that you wished he had not taken or thought it wiser that he postponed taking?


Abdul-Mahdi:  His candidacy for a second term. I hoped that the principles of power rotation be better promoted, particularly considering that Mr. Maliki and the State of Law Coalition failed to receive the preponderance of votes and never had a parliamentary majority, even after they formed an alliance with the Supreme Council, the Sadrist movement and the remaining National Coalition forces that formed the National Alliance. He did not garner the majority of votes until after the Kurdistan Alliance and the Iraqiya bloc endorsed him following long months of complications and secret deals that were detrimental to him and the state during his second term, causing it to become more complex than it was during the first term. For, to rule during his second term, he had to disrupt the legislative and oversight role played by parliament. … And he reneged on the Erbil Agreement, leading to a period of complex conflicts that even reached the ranks of the National Alliance. The country then entered a period when it was ruled through a cult of personality, militarization, a system of quotas and the manufacture of new crises without solving older ones first. … The post and office cannot be of utmost importance. If each of us always claimed that others were wrong and we were always right, and never realized that right and wrong are subjective and not an objective reality, we would disrupt any possibility for change and the opportunity to discover the potential of others. This makes the battle for the premiership a complex one, akin to facing a military coup every time [elections are held]. … But in fact, it is a natural and simple process predicated on the majority that will be formed in parliament. In his capacity as a leader who gained his mandate and legitimacy through free and direct elections, I would have hoped that Mr. Maliki would have become a role model in this regard. Doing so would not have only benefited the country, it would have also been beneficial for his legacy, in accordance with the popular saying that states, “Look at the actions of others and realize how good mine are.” The halo of quarrelsome personalities and leaders would thus fade, to be replaced by agendas and actions, the goodness and usefulness of which could be clearly seen by the people, who would fight to maintain them through democratic means.


He's an artificial 'leader.' He was never chosen by the people.  He remains an illegitimate leader and illegitimate leaders will always use violence against the people to maintain a hold on power.

A real leader would have listened.  A real leader would have honored power-sharing agreements (like The Erbil Agreement).  A real leader would have listened to the protesters in 2011 instead of lying that if they'd leave the streets, he'd end corruption in 100 days!  He didn't end it.  He doesn't even care about it anymore.  The protests started back up December 21, 2012 and they continue.

He doesn't want to meet the protesters demands.  He doesn't want to inspire or lead.  He just wants to destroy.

Abdulaziz al-Mahmoud (Peninsula) explains:


After about a year of peaceful protests in Al Anbar province, the Prime Minister of Iraq, Nouri Al Maliki, has sent army troops to end the sit-in by force.
The troops, as always, were holding sectarian flags and shouting chants of revenge for Al Hussein ibn Ali’s death by Yazid bin Muawiya and his allies, so they killed, burned and captured a large number of people.
Consequently, as an already known spontaneous reaction, residents of Al Anbar wielded weapons to defend their lives, homes and dignity. As a result, Iran immediately declared that it supported Al Maliki in his war against terrorism and that it was ready to send him necessary support.
The US declared the same thing; it even rushed weapons Al Maliki had asked for. The United Nations Security Council, the UN Secretary-General and the Arab League adopted the same stance.
What is this nonsense?
Is it possible that all these parties do not know that Sunnis in Iraq are suffering under a savage and sectarian regime, which works its fingers to the bone to humiliate, marginalise, displace, impoverish and exclude them, using every villainous way created by a sadistic and ruthless mind? Has Iran begun reaping the fruits of its long stand-off with the US?


And the office of the European Union's Struan Stevenson issued the following:

“Iraq is plummeting rapidly towards civil war and genocide,” according to a senior EU lawmaker Struan Stevenson, a Conservative Euro MP from Scotland who chairs the European Parliament’s important Delegation for Relations with Iraq. Stevenson says that an onslaught against supposed Al Qaeda terrorists in 6 Iraqi Provinces is no more than a cover for the “annihilation of Sunnis opposed to the increasingly sectarian Shia policies of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.”

Speaking from Scotland Struan Stevenson said:


“When I visited Iraq in November I met with many of the leading Sunnis who had organised protests and demonstrations against Maliki in Anbar and Kirkuk and other Sunni Provinces. I also met with the Grand Mufti, one of only 2 religious leaders of the Sunnis in Iraq. All of them told me in detail how they were under constant attack by Maliki’s forces and how often these forces would be infiltrated by highly-trained assassins from Iran, who could be identified easily because they spoke Farsi rather than Arabic. They told me how thousands of Sunnis have been killed in these attacks and how Sunni Imams and mosques were being ruthlessly targeted.
“Maliki’s determined efforts to eradicate all leading Sunnis from the Iraqi government, including trumped-up charges of terrorism against the leading humanitarian, Vice President of Iraq Tariq al-Hashemi, has led to an upsurge of protests which have continued for more almost two years. The last straw was the violent arrest of the senior Sunni MP and Chair of the Iraqi Parliament’s Economics committee – Dr Ahmad Alwani – on 28th December, when an assault force of 50 armoured vehicles, helicopter gunships and hundreds of heavily armed troops massacred 9 members of his family and arrested him and over 150 of his staff on baseless charges of terrorism. Dr Alwani has been a key critic of Maliki and of Iranian meddling in Iraq.
“Just as I was told in November, Maliki’s ploy, aided and abetted by the mullahs in Iran, is to label all of the Sunnis as terrorists, claiming that they are active members of Al Qaeda. In fact I have been assured that there are no foreigners involved in the uprisings in the 6 SunniProvinces. Although some Al Qaeda jihadists had infiltrated Ramadi in al-Anbar Province, near the Syrian border, they were quickly driven out by the locals. The people who have now taken up arms against Maliki’s forces are ordinary Iraqi citizens, forced to defend themselves against a ruthless dictator. Shamefully, the Obama administration has fallen for this ploy and supplied Maliki with, 75 Hellfire air-to-ground missiles which are now raining down on his own people in Ramadi and other Sunni cities. 10 reconnaissance drones are expected to follow in March, with a further 48 drones and the first of a batch of F-16 fighter jets later in the year.
“The Americans seem unable to accept the fact that their blundering intervention in Iraq has so far led to over 1 million Iraqi deaths, changed that oil-rich nation into a virtual basket-case and simply replaced the brutal Saddam Hussein with another corrupt and bloody dictator in Nouri al-Maliki. Providing him with US arms to wage outright war on the Sunni minority in Iraq, as the Iranian mullahs cheer from the side-lines, will solve nothing and will certainly lead to civil conflict. The only solution is to remove Maliki from office and replace him with a non-sectarian government of all the people, which respects freedom, democracy, human rights, women’s rights and the rule of law and stops the growing interference from Tehran. Even senior Shias whom I met in Iraq have voiced their concern over Maliki’s malign regime.
For the Americans to hide behind Maliki’s lies and fabrications that Al Qaeda terrorists have taken over Ramadi and Fallujah and other Sunni cities will pave the way to the genocide of Iraq’s Sunni population.”
On behalf of Mr Struan Stevenson MEP

Where are the Americans speaking out for the residents of Anbar?  

John Feffer writes another ridiculous piece (click here for Foreign Policy In Focus -- we're not linking to The Nation).  He never condemns the assault on Anbar.  This is a heavily populated province and Nouri's launching US-provided Hellfire missiles, it's bombing cities and towns, it's launching mortar attacks on cities and towns, it's prevented aid from reaching the province and so much more.  Feffer manages to mention Anbar -- but only in relation to 'al Qaeda.'

The reason that so many on the pathetic left could not call out the assault on Afghanistan was because toss out the words 'al Qaeda' and suddenly they lose their spine.  But the attack on Afghanistan destroyed lives -- and continues to do so.

If 10% of the population of Anbar was established to be al Qaead or al Qaeda linked, that still wouldn't justify the attacks.  There is no justification.  There is never a justification for collective punishment which is why it's classified as a War Crime.

The Latin American Herald Tribune reports, "Security forces killed more than 60 suspected terrorists in a 24-hour period, Iraqi authorities said Wednesday." Suspected terrorists?  Well, the killers never tell the truth, do they?  Look at all of Barack Obama's claims that his Drone War only kills 'terrorists.'

Feffer writes another ignorant and ill-informed commentary.  At one point, he writes:

“From 2006 to 2008, tribesmen were able to beat Al Qaeda with the cooperation of American forces and the support of the Iraqi government,” Sunni politician Osama al-Nujaifi toldThe New York Times. “After gaining victory over Al Qaeda, those tribesmen were rewarded with the cutting of their salaries, with assassination and displacement.” Many Iraqis complain that the United States has not done enough to pressure the al-Maliki government to heal the rift with the country’s Sunni minority.


Do you see a problem?

In 2008, was Nancy Pelosi billed as "a Democrat politician" by the press?  No, she was billed with her title: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.  Today, she's billed as House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.

Osama al-Nujaifi is a Sunni politician.  He's also Speaker of Parliament.  So if you're only going to reference him once in your article, you go with, "Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi."




Nouri's assault on Anbar continues with NINA noting military helicopters continue to bomb Falluja and Ramadi.  Wael Grace (Al Mada) reports that Anbar MPs say Nouri is attempting to extend the assault on Anbar up through the April 30th parliamentary elections.  MP Hamid al-Mutlaq notes a government acting wisely would have avoided a military campaign by listening to the cries of the protesters and granting concessions, would have avoided bombing cities by being in talks with the police and people of the city.  Nouri al-Ali al-Kilani (Kitbat) offers a column on how Nouri al-Maliki, and his double standards, endorse and breed sectarianism in Iraq.  He notes the thug and prime minister goes before the Iraqi people sullen and issues threats.

And the war's spreading to the airwaves and social media.  Al-Shorfa reports, "The local government in Iraq's Anbar province on Wednesday (January 22nd) announced the launch of a counter-terrorism radio station to raise awareness about threats posed by al-Qaeda and extremist groups." And Omar al-Jaffal (Al-Monitor) reports:

The administrator of the Facebook page for Rayat Ahl al-Sunnah Fil-Iraq (Flag of the Sunnis in Iraq), which views the army as occupying Anbari cities to harass and oppress the population there, pleaded with the media to support the “battle of the people of Anbar against the army.” In an interview with Al-Monitor, he asserted, “The media has not dealt fairly with our cause. We established a page on Facebook so that we could tell the world what is happening in Anbar.”
The group's page has attracted a large number of supporters from among Sunni youths, who share the page’s view that Anbar's “cities are being brought to ruin by the army.”
On the other side of the online battle, the Facebook page for the Iraqi Electronic Army seeks to close down pages that call for fighting the army by informing Facebook administrators of abuses aimed at Iraqi national figures on them. The page administrator, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told Al-Monitor, “Our page wages war against all the terrorist pages, from every sect and religion in Iraq.” He denied that his page had received “material support from any political faction in Iraq.” He said that it “communicates with all the soldiers of Anbar to relay word of what is happening on the ground there.”


And the signs of Nouri's leadership failure are all around.  Xinhua reports:


Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al- Maliki on Wednesday said that the time has come to end al-Qaida presence in the city of Fallujah in the volatile province of Anbar, while four people were killed and nine wounded in violent attacks across the country.
"The time has come to settle this subject and end the presence of this gang in this city (Fallujah) to save its residents from their evil," Maliki said in his weekly televised speech to the nation.

"I ask the sons of this province, its tribes and notables and all who live there to be ready to take serious stands against those dirty people without casualties and without sacrifices," Maliki said without specifying a time for any action.


He didn't ask for his help when he started the assault, didn't even think about them.  But now that he's created yet another mess he can't clean up, he's dependent upon others to accomplish what he couldn't.

Again, Iraq Times notes that Nouri's assault on Anbar has displaced over 22,000 families.  Loveday Morris (Washington Post) reports from Karbala:

The plush accommodation halls on the outskirts of this southern Iraqi city, normally reserved for visiting Shiite pilgrims, now teem with displaced Sunnis fleeing violence in the Western province of Anbar.
There and elsewhere, sectarian tensions are brewing as Iraq spirals into the worst cycle of violence it has experienced in years. But here, in one of the holiest cities for Shiite Muslims, Sunni children play on brightly painted swings as families gather in the waning winter light beside clipped magnolia-lined lawns.

The refugees Nouri's assault has created should be seen as shocking and disgusting.  Iraq can't afford more displaced people and to ask the citizens of Anbar to live through Nouri's assault on the province is to ask a great deal of a province that's already suffered more than enough.  Hamza Mustafa (Ashraq Al-Awsat) reports:

The Anbar Provincial Council has formed a crisis unit ahead of a possible military raid on Fallujah in the hopes of resolving the conflict in the city peacefully.
Council head Sabah Karhout issued a statement Tuesday, saying: “Anbar has formed a crisis cell led by Governor Ahmad Al-Dulaimi,” adding: “The military solution will be the last resort if the ongoing negotiations between officials and tribal leaders fail.”


National Iraqi News Agency reports:

The Political Council in Kirkuk called on those who are described as the owners of the decision not to invade Fallujah to spare the blood of Iraqis and not to aggravate things.
Head of the Council , Sheikh Abdul Rahman Munshid al- Assi told / NINA / that "We appeal to the Prime Minister and the acting ministers of defense, interior and chief of staff , intelligence and the national security, that the responsibility is great in taking such decision to invade Fallujah and areas of the rest of Anbar .


Through yesterday, Iraq Body Count counts 791 violent deaths for the month so far.  Today, Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) notes, "Armed confrontations and roadside bombs made for a bloody day in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul on Wednesday, claiming the lives of at least 16 people -- including militants who died in a battle with the Iraqi army, police in Mosul said." National Iraqi News Agency reports 2 fighters were shot dead in Tikrit, Nouri's federal police boasted they killed 10 suspects "in the area of Aljazeerah south of Mosul,"indiscriminate military artillery shelling at Falluja left 1 person dead and two more injured, an Alaaskari bombing left three police officers injured, an Ein al-Jahesh Village roadside bombing left 1 Iraqi soldier dead and three more injured, a Mosul armed attack left 1 police officer dead and two more injured, a Baghdad shooting (Camp Sara area) left 1 person dead, a Baghdad shooting (Tarmiyah area) left one person injured, a southwest Baghdad mortar attack (Radwaniyah area) killed 1 person and left two people injured, 2 fighters were shot dead in Mousl, a Kirkuk shooting left SWAT officer Mohamed Kamel injured, and 1 corpse was discovered in Kirkuk (38-year-old male with "signs of torture and gunshot wounds"). All Iraq News notes 1 "Iraqi Army officer with a Major rank was kidnapped to the west of Ramadi city." 1  Alsumaria notes that late last night, 1 farmer was kidnapped in Tikrit with assailants then setting a house bomb which killed 1 woman and left five people injured.



We noted the death of Iraqi journalist Firas Mohammed Attiyah in Monday's snapshot.  Today the Guardian's Greenslade Blog noted the death and these details:

The bomb exploded as Attiyah accompanied a government patrol to a ceremony in the city of Khalidiya. Muayad Ibrahim, a journalist for Anbar TV, was also wounded in the incident.

They're wrong.  We were as well.  Despite early reports claiming the journalist was 'embedded' with the military at the time of his death, that is not correct.  Kitabat reports today that his news outlet has confirmed that Firas Mohammed Attiyah was not with the military when he died, he was enroute to Ramadi to meet with displaced families.

Yesterday, we noted the pretty spin AP put on Nouri's decision to carve up areas of Iraq (where he polls especially poorly and where the judiciary does not bend to his will) to create new provinces out of the city of Falluja, Tuz Khurmato and the Valley of Nineveh.

Alsumaria reports an emergency session was called today by Anbar's provincial council and that, yesterday, Kurdish MP Khalid Shwani called Nouri's efforts a flagrant violation of the Iraqi Constitution.  National Iraqi News Agency adds:

The head of the provincial council in Anbar, Sabah Karhut rhot confirmed that: "Fallujah is part of Anbar province, and cannot be a governorate at this time ."
He told the National Iraqi News Agency / NINA / : "Anbar provincial council held an urgent meeting to discuss the government's decision to make the city of Fallujah a governorate without informing the local government officials in Anbar ."
He added : "The local government in Anbar have not contacted the central government to make Fallujah a province by itself, and this raised signs of surprise among officials in the province, in light of the security situation ."

Iraq Times also notes the surprise and quotes council member Suhaib al-Rawi stating that the proposal is strange and raises many questions. Strange that it raises so many questions and objections but AP missed all that and presented it as normal.

Not only is not normal, it's leading others to make requests.  NINA reports:

Hundreds of Khanaqin district of Diyala province , demanded the central government to transfer their district to a province in accordance with the law and the Constitution.
The head of the municipal council in Khanaqin said to NINA reporter ,that citizens believed that their demand is a legal and a constitutional entitlement.


The following community sites -- plus Dissident Voice, Cindy Sheehan,




iraq
the new york times
tim arango
Alice Walker
bbc news
all iraq news
national iraq news agency
al mada
wael grace
kitabat
nouri al-ali al-kilani
the washington post
loveday morris
alsumaria
iraq times
cnn
mohammed tawfeeq
asharq al-awsat
hamza mustafa
the latin american herald tribune
al-monitor
mustafa al-kadhimi
xinhua

Friday, January 24, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, Nouri continues to terrorize Anbar, Iraqis continue to protest Nouri, Iraq's Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi has no "Red Notice" with INTERPOL (though the press 'forgot' to tell us that), and much more.


This month, Larry Everest (Revolution Newspaper) asked, "How is the U.S. imperialist media dealing with the ongoing carnage in Iraq?"

And he answered, "One example was the January 10 New York Times front-page story titled, “Fallujah’s Fall Stuns Marines Who Fought There.” Thisarticle is an exposure of the bankruptcy and illegitimacy of the U.S. imperialist media. People need to reject this drumbeat to think like Americans, and see the world through the lens of the American empire, and start thinking about humanity!"

And that is one answer.  But the reality is that you can count on a handful the number of outlets outside of Iraq treating Nouri's assault on Anbar Province with any reality.  Most either ignore what's taking place or else they carry the party line of 'bad terrorists are here and must be killed!' Say the word "terrorist" and everyone loses their voice apparently.

That's why it's been so effective in killing liberties in the US, this so-called War on 'Terror.' It's a mental stop sign in the same way "Communist" was for so many in the US at the middle of the 20th century. For some, the term terrifies them.  For others, they're just terrified someone will call them "terrorist." But not many want to say,"Hold on a second, let's get serious." So if you holler "terrorism!" or "terrorist!," you can usually dominate the conversation and the narrative.  No one asks you for proof, no one questions.


And that's how Nouri al-Maliki, Iraq's chief thug and prime minister, has gotten away with a series of War Crimes over the last weeks.   The Geneva International Centre for Justice notes the continued assault on Anbar Province:

In the wake of the 1st of January 2014, the 600.000 residents of Fallujah, one of the main cities in al-Anbar, found themselves encircled by the government forces. The residential areas were under the military attack. This time it was claimed that al-Qaeda and ISIL (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) had taken over the city. Indeed some fighters wearing such signs were seen to have set police stations and government buildings on fire; however these people encountered strong resistance from the local residents.
Furthermore, the witnesses mentioned that these acclaimed terrorist fighters appeared as soon as the government’s army arrived and took positions in the surroundings of the city. Many of the contacts of GICJ in Fallujah and Baghdad therefore believe that disguised militia groups affiliated with the al-Maliki’s party were channelled into the city in order to provide the necessary pretext for an attack and gain the military support from the Western countries.
As of January 6, the main eastern, northern and southern checkpoints were closed and the army refuses to allow people, medicine or food items to enter or leave the city.  Even the Iraqi Red Crescent could not enter anymore. Families who wanted to flee could only leave under extreme difficulties. These sanctions were imposed even though the residents of Fallujah publicly affirmed numerous times that the city had not been taken over by any terrorist.
Al Maliki’s official portrayal of terrorists brought him the immediate support from the USA as well as from Iran. Also, Russia announced its support. Other voices however, such as the senior EU lawmaker Struan Stevenson, a member of the European parliament, warned in an open letter published on 7 January 2014 that “Iraq is plummeting rapidly towards civil war and genocide”. In a second letter published on 20 Januaray 2014 Stevenson’s further warned that claims by al-Maliki were “utter nonsense”. Still, he had “convinced his American allies that he is fighting a war on terror and they are pouring in rockets, drones and other military hardware which Maliki is using to bomb and kill civilian targets”.
Al-Maliki insists once again to demolish all demonstrations and to use force against all the cities that witness resistance against his policies. The continuing use of the army against densely populated cities can only lead to another huge humanitarian disaster. Many residents are fleeing, not in fear of terrorists but in fear of the government forces and over hundred people have already lost their lives during the attacks by tanks and by air that mainly targeted the residential areas in the outskirts of the city.


National Iraqi News Agency reports that the Iraqi military's mortar shelling last night left 4 people dead and 32 more injured "including women and children" and today's military shelling of Falluja left 5 people dead and 14 more injured -- "most of them women and children."  Collective punishment is what Nouri's pursuing.  If you doubt that:  Iraqi Spring MC notes that Nouri's army shelled Falluja General Hospital.


Attacking hospitals is an international no-no.  Nouri al-Maliki is a War Criminal and collective punishment is a War Crime.  Daoud Kuttab (Crimes Of War) explains:
By collective punishment, the drafters of the Geneva Conventions had in mind the reprisal killings of World Wars I and II. In the First World War, Germans executed Belgian villagers in mass retribution for resistance activity. In World War II, Nazis carried out a form of collective punishment to suppress resistance. Entire villages or towns or districts were held responsible for any resistance activity that took place there. The conventions, to counter this, reiterated the principle of individual responsibility. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Commentary to the conventions states that parties to a conflict often would resxort to “intimidatory measures to terrorize the population” in hopes of preventing hostile acts, but such practices “strike at guilty and innocent alike. They are opposed to all principles based on humanity and justice.”
The law of armed conflict applies similar protections to an internal conflict. Common Article 3 of the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 requires fair trials for all individuals before punishments; and Additional Protocol II of 1977 explicitly forbids collective punishment.



This week UNAMI issued their [PDF format warning] latest human rights report on Iraq which included, "The deliberate or indiscriminate targeting of civilians constitutes a gross violation of international humanitarian and human rights law and of Iraqi law."

So why is the assault on Anbar allowed to take place -- let alone continue -- without a huge outcry from all over?

It's accomplished nothing.

All Iraq News reports 2 Tikrit bombings left 1 Iraqi soldier dead and four more injured, an armed clash in Ramadi left 13 fighters dead and that a home invasion late last night in Basra left 2 women dead (mother and daughter).  NINA also notes a Hamrin home bombing which left two police injured, Joint Special Operations Command declared they killed 2 suspects in Mosul, 1 Sahwa was shot dead outside of Kirkuk, and an armed clash in Falluja left 2 Iraqi soldiers dead and four more injured.  Through Thursday, Iraq Body Count counts 839 violent deaths this month.

 Wael Grace (Al Mada) reports it is thought 75% of the residents of Falluja have fled.  The United Nations Refugee Agency issued the following today:

GENEVA, January 24 (UNHCR) – The UN refugee agency on Friday reported that more than 65,000 people had over the past week fled the conflict in the cities of Fallujah and Ramadi in central Iraq's Anbar province. Since fighting broke out at the end of last year, more than 140,000 people have been made homeless by fighting according to Iraq's Ministry of Displacement and Migration.
This is the largest displacement Iraq has witnessed since the sectarian violence of 2006-2008. This number comes on top of the 1.13 million people already internally displaced in Iraq and who are mostly residing in Baghdad, Diyala and Ninewa provinces.
UNHCR spokesman Adrian Edwards told journalists in Geneva that people in Anbar, including UNHCR staff, had reported that many civilians were unable to leave conflict-affected areas where food and fuel were now in short supply.
"Most of the recently displaced remain outside Fallujah city, accommodated by relatives or staying in schools, mosques and hospitals where resources are running low. Host families are having difficulties sustaining the burden of caring for the displaced," he said.
The spokesman added that UNHCR and its humanitarian aid partners had managed to distribute tarpaulins, blankets, sleeping mats, food, and hygiene supplies. On Thursday, UNHCR delivered 2,400 core relief kits. The Ministry of Displacement and Migration and the Iraqi parliament have also sent aid.
"Many of the displaced, nonetheless, are still in desperate need of food, medical care, and other aid. As the insecurity has spread, many families who fled several weeks ago have been displaced again," Edwards said.
The UN in Iraq has asked the government to facilitate the opening of a humanitarian corridor to reach displaced and stranded families in Anbar province. In recent weeks, several bridges leading into the conflict area and communities hosting displaced people have been destroyed, making access difficult. Currently, it is impossible to reach the area from Baghdad and relief agencies are using roads coming from northern Iraq.
Meanwhile, other areas of Iraq including Baghdad, Erbil, Kerbala, Salah-al-Din and Ninewa have witnessed the arrival of thousands of displaced people. People are reportedly without money for food and lack suitable clothing for the rainy conditions. Children are not in school and sanitary conditions, particularly for women, are inadequate.
"Establishing camps for the newly displaced is not our preferred option and may prolong displacement. But, if the government of Iraq opts to establish sites, UNHCR is ready to provide tents and core relief items as well as provide support to camp management," Edwards said in Geneva,
In northern Iraq, at the request of the Erbil government, UNHCR has refurbished the Baharka temporary site to host people arriving from Anbar. Tents, electricity and sanitation facilities have been installed and the facility is ready to accommodate up to 300 families should the government decide to open the site. In Suleymaniya, some sections of Arbat camp, originally built for Syrian refugees, have been made available to accommodate internally displaced Iraqis. There are some 300 displaced families in Suleymaniya.
Planning is under way to field additional mobile teams to strengthen capacity in Anbar and teams could also be dispatched to other provinces hosting the displaced.


F. Brinley Bruton (NBC News) quotes Peter Kessler, UNHCR spokesperson, stating, "“People are still fighting and mortars are still landing. People don’t have access to food." Yang Yi (Xinhua) quotes UNHCR spokesperson Adrian Edwards stating, "Most of the recently displaced remain outside Fallujah city, accommodated by relatives or staying in schools, mosques and hospitals where resources are running low. Host families are having difficulties sustaining the burden of caring for the displaced." And on the topic of mosques,  Kitabat reports that 'acting defense minister' Saadoun al-Dulaimi (he's not the Minister of Defense -- only Parliament can make someone that -- so he's something else, maybe Nouri's little sex toy?) declared that they (the Iraqi government) will bomb and target any home or mosque they think might contain a terrorist.  Any home or mosque.

Are we really so sick, twisted and fearful as a people that we're going to allow ourselves to be scared into silence by the calculated use of the term "terrorist"?


To me this looks a lot like genuine terrorism.



اعلام الربيع العراقي ‏@IraqiSpringMC11h

Again from UNAMI  [PDF format warning] latest human rights report on Iraq:


The impact of violence on ordinary Iraqi women, men, boy and girls cannot be underestimated. Apart from the increasing risk of becoming a direct victim of violence, the fear of violence severely limits their ability to enjoy fundamental human rights and freedoms, including freedom of movement, as many people start to confie their activities outside their homes to essential tasks, which in turn impacts on their ability to access basic services, such as education and health care. Furthermore, there are an increasing number of civilians who are the secondary victims of violence -- particularly those whose family members have been killed or wounded . Besides the psychological and emotional suffering, the death or injury of family members sometimes deprives households of breadwinners or those who are contributing financially to their households. Families of injured and disabled people have to bear significant costs (both financial and physical ) involved in ensuring adequate medical care and support.



The attacks from Nouri's forces are acts of terrorism.

But if anyone confronted him, Nouri would probably blow them off.

Earlier this month, Felicity Arbuthnot (Morning Star) pointed out, "Fallujah, Ramadi and much of western Iraq has been demonstrating for a year against the vicious, sectarian, US-imposed puppet government of Nouri al-Maliki." Since December 21, 2012, protests have been ongoing throughout Iraq over Nouri's corruption and criminality.  These protests continue.  Iraqi Spring MC notes protests continued in Anbar, Samarra, Rawa, Jalawla and Tikrit (pictured below) and also protests continued in Falluja, Baiji, and Baquba.

1. اعلام الربيع العراقي ‏@IraqiSpringMC10h

   الجمعة الموحدة في قضاء عنه بمحافظة الانبار: . pic.twitter.com/N3lKpxIYUW

    Expand

   •  Reply 
   •  Retweet 
   •  Favorite 
2. اعلام الربيع العراقي ‏@IraqiSpringMC10h

   الجمعة الموحدة في مدينة سامراء بمحافظة صلاح الدين: . pic.twitter.com/asaDWMkse4

    Expand

   •  Reply 
   •  Retweet 
   •  Favorite 
3. اعلام الربيع العراقي ‏@IraqiSpringMC10h

   الجمعة الموحدة في راوه بمحافظة الانبار: . pic.twitter.com/PCP7ePveI5

    Expand

   •  Reply 
   •  Retweet 
   •  Favorite 
4. اعلام الربيع العراقي ‏@IraqiSpringMC10h

   الجمعة الموحدة في جلولاء بمحافظة ديالى: . pic.twitter.com/wybh3EqmTm

    Expand

   •  Reply 
   •  Retweet 
   •  Favorite 
5. اعلام الربيع العراقي ‏@IraqiSpringMC10h

   الجمعة الموحدة في مدينة تكريت بمحافظة صلاح الدين: . pic.twitter.com/G12oWcINVO

    Expand

Nouri has repeatedly attempted to end the protests.  He's threatened them, he's labeled them terrorists, his forces have attacked them, have followed them from the protests to their homes, his forces have killed them, and so much more.  But of a year and a month, they've protested non-stop.