Burns, Kimberley, Street and Parry

In an otherwise upbeat assessment, Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the second-ranking American commander in Iraq, told reporters that leaders of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia had been alerted to the Baquba offensive by widespread public discussion of the American plan to clear the city before the attack began.

That's from John F. Burns' "Top Targets Fled Before U.S. Push, Commander Says" in today's New York Times (only Iraq article) and you can finger the Bully Boy for his non-stop jaw boning (in which case, please note that the Bully Boy put the troops and the mission at risk!) or you can also wonder how many al Qaeda there were in the region to begin with? Puzzle it because there are no answers.

If Mark Mazzetti says it, you know the CIA wants it. But, as the Stones long ago pointed out, you can't always get what you want. Nor should you. In a nonsense article by a nonsense writer, Michael V. Hayden is repeatedly referred to as "general." He is not a general. That is an old title. He is now Director of the CIA. He is "Director Hayden." If Hayden wants to be a general, with the nation engaged in two wars, by all means resign the post and return to the military. But Hayden is the director and that is his title. There is enough militarization of the government without someone holding a civilian post being being billed with a military title. It's not up for grabs, it's not open to discussion. He took the position of director and that's the title that came with the position. Mazzetti and the Times need to be accurate.

The following community sites have updated since yesterday morning:

Rebecca's Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude;
Cedric's Cedric's Big Mix;
Kat's Kat's Korner;
Betty's Thomas Friedman is a Great Man;
Mike's Mikey Likes It!;
Elaine's Like Maria Said Paz;
Wally's The Daily Jot;
and Trina's Trina's Kitchen

Kyle was the first to note Margaret Kimberley's "Supreme Injustices" (Freedom Rider, Black Agenda Report):

George W. Bush is president because of the United States Supreme Court. Were it not for the decision to stop counting votes in Bush v. Gore, Al Gore would be president of the United States instead. The right wing presidential victory was the culmination of many years of effort to take over the federal judiciary. Now Bush has two Supreme Court justices confirmed on his watch, and the damage to the justice system in this country is immense.
In the past month, the Roberts court has lived up to predictions that the worst case scenario has come to full fruition. In Ledbetter v. Goodyear, the court essentially advised workers to file discrimination lawsuits as soon as they begin a new job. Discrimination complaints under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act must now be made within 180 days of the discriminatory pay practice taking place. If the victim smells a rat after 180 days, there is no legal remedy and employers have no fear of legal retribution.
Ledbetter was just the beginning of hell month for the American justice system. In the Uttecht v. Brown decision, the Supreme Court ruled that potential jurors who express any reservations about the death penalty can be excluded from death penalty eligible cases. In his dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens said, "Millions of Americans oppose the death penalty. A cross section of virtually every community in the country includes citizens who firmly believe the death penalty is unjust but who nevertheless are qualified to serve as jurors in capital cases."
Pro-death penalty jurors are more likely to convict. That means mostly black and Latino defendants have the deck stacked against them from the beginning with prejudiced, partial and almost always white jurors. These jurors are predisposed to see people of color behind bars and they are no more generous when the matter is life or death. As the use of DNA evidence has proven the innocence of hundreds of wrongly convicted persons, the death penalty has lost some measure of its popular support. That loss of support matters little if only racist, conviction happy jurors sit in judgment.
The Supremes weren't finished stacking the cards against defendants. Keith Bowles appealed his murder conviction in an Ohio court, but because of incorrect instructions from a judge, he did so three days too late. "Too bad," said five of nine justices. They ruled that the court's 40-year old doctrine of "unique circumstances" was wrong to begin with, and Bowles and anyone else like him will not get his day in court.

And Eddie notes this from Paul Street's "Barack Obama’s White Appeal and the Perverse Racial Politics of the Post-Civil Rights Era" (Black Agenda Report):

The technically biracial Obama's campaign and persona are perfectly calibrated for this era of victim-blaming neoliberal racism. He allows whites to assuage their racial guilt and feel non-racist by liking and perhaps even voting for him while signaling that he won't do anything to tackle and redress the steep racial disparities and systemic racial oppression that continue to deeply scar American life and institutions. "What... me and my country racist? You can't be serious: we're thinking seriously about voting for a black man as president. My wife and son just love Oprah and Jamie Fox."
This brings me to the third reason not to sing racial justice hosannas over the sudden rise of Obama. Race- and racism-avoidance have become the orders of the day in an officially "color-blind" neoliberal age in ways that are unintentionally suggested at the end of the professor's comment given at the beginning of this article.
The main problem with the conventional white wisdom holding that racism no longer poses relevant barriers to black advancement and black-white equality in post-Civil Rights America is a failure to distinguish adequately between overt "state of mind" racism and covert institutional, societal, and "state-of-being" racism (Street 2002; Street 2004a; Street 2007).

Kayla notes Robert Parry's "Is Obama Getting 'Colin-ized'?" (Consortium News) where Parry's offering a recent historical perspective on the Democrats (and the illegal war). Earlier in this piece, he's already outlined the events of the 2004 DNC convention and where we pick up, he's just noted the 2006 election campaigns:

Since then, however, the congressional Democrats have again listened to the consultants and drifted back into an avoidance of hard-fought confrontations with Bush over the Iraq War and the "war on terror."
Although House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other party leaders vowed they would never again give Bush a blank check on the Iraq War, key Democrats, including Sens. Carl Levin and Barack Obama, started running up the white flag even as the legislative battle was beginning, by saying Democrats would never let the troops go without funding.
That concession signaled to Bush that he could simply keep vetoing troop withdrawal plans until the Democrats folded. As the Democrats eyed their Memorial Day recess -- and feared that Bush would use the holiday to bash them as anti-troop -- the surrender became official with the approval of another $100 billion blank check for Bush.
Obama hesitantly did join with the 29 Democrats who opposed the war funding bill -- along with his chief rival Hillary Clinton -- but neither Obama nor Clinton took the lead in the legislative battle.
More generally, Obama appears to have opted for a campaign strategy in which he will float above the partisan fray rather than jump into the trenches.
His decision to seek the counsel of Colin Powell -- a move leaked by the Obama campaign and confirmed by Powell on NBC’s "Meet the Press" -- suggests that the Illinois senator is hoping Powell's "gravitas" inside Washington might rub off. Powell also retains popularity with many centrist Americans despite his Iraq War role.
But the Obama-Powell alliance may mean, too, that Obama won't press very hard for an end of the Iraq War since Powell's current position is that the United States can’t afford to withdraw despite the many errors in implementing the war strategy.

For more on Powell, you can go to “Behind Colin Powell’s Legend” which is a folder of Consoritum News' hard-hitting coverage of Colin Powell (that begins before 2000 -- Parry and company are both covering the time before 2000 and they were also reporting on Powell in the 90s.) The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.



the new york times
john f. burns
paul street
robert parry
margaret kimberley
like maria said paz
kats korner
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
trinas kitchen
the daily jot
cedrics big mix
mikey likes it
thomas friedman is a great man

8 US service members announced dead in Iraq

Today, the [PDF format warning] US military announced, "An MNC-I Airman died of wounds suffered when an improvised explosive device detonated near his vehicle Saturday in Tikrit."
And [PDF format warning] they announced: "Four Mulit-National Division-Baghdad Soldiers were killed when a roadside bomb detonated near a Coalition vehicle during combat operations northwest of Baghdad June 23. An Iraqi interpreter was also attacked." And they announced: "A Multi-National Division - Baghdad Soldier died from a non-battle related cause June 23. The incident is under investigation." And they announced: "Two Multi-National Division-Baghdad Soldiers were killed and three others were wounded when their unit was struck by a roadside bomb, then received small arms fire in eastern Baghdad early June 23."

8 deaths have been announced today. The ICCC number for US service members killed in the illegal war since it started in March 2003 is currently 3555. AP is running with headlines of 7 killed (by roadside bombings) and ignoring the incident involving "non-battle related cause".

We're staying with the public account for this entry. (I'll have the normal entry -- Times, Margaret Kimberley, et al -- later this morning. Betty's working on her latest chapter right now so I'll wait to do that entry.) An e-mailer who says to call him "Mark P" is in a tizzy that Adam Kokesh uses the f-word at his site and says I have two standards.

Actually, I have many standards. But in terms of language, I'm only responsible for what's here. Here, we try to be work-safe because some community members check from work computers and some only have the option of checking from work computers. That's here and that's how it's been from day one here. Rebecca uses the f-word at her site all the time. Every community member knows it is not work-safe and I never note that when I link to Rebecca because just seeing Rebecca's name is the clue to members. When I link to anyone else in the community's site and know there's a word that might cause trouble, I will do "language warning" (in some wording) because that might not be expected from their sites. (With The Third Estate Sunday Review, if the f-word is used -- all letters spelled out -- or something else that might cause trouble -- a mass e-mail is sent out to those checking the site on work computers who have guidelines at their job.)

To be clear, my language 'standard' only applies to my not wanting anyone to be written up for something I've written. In my own daily life, I use the f-word. I have no objection to curse words. And I'm also not concerned with visitors. My only responsiblity is to community members.

As for Adam Kokesh's use of the f-word. Two obvious things there. One, if you're only now discovering that he can and will use the f-word, then let me say, "Good, you're finally learning about his story." (Did any mainstream report not stress language as they distorted his story?)
Second of all, he's a grown man and he served in the Marines. If you think he's going around saying "darn" and "shoot" no wonder you (Mark P) also write that you "still support George Bush" -- obviously reality and you have an estranged relationship.

Mark P thinks that "leftists who use swear words reveal they are not all about peace." That's an opinion and Mark P's entitled to have it (and I'm entitled to disagree). But in terms of Kokesh (the subject of Mark P's long and rather obsessive e-mail), Kokesh isn't a "leftist." He's got an education so he knows what "libertarian" is when he uses the term. (Some don't. Some here "libertarian" and think it means "liberalism" -- sad but true.) Mark Levine's Inside Scoop interviewed Kokesh for the hour. Go to the site, it's Monday's interview. Kokesh (again) self-describes a libertarian. So he is not a "leftist."

Mark P goes on to use all of the Bully Boy's pre-war lies for the illegal war and he notes he can be quoted in full. I won't quote. I do get that choice (and the choice to completely ignore an e-mail) and I have no interest in repeating lies long since revealed to be lies. He ends his e-mail obsessing over Adam Kokesh's crotch which, I will assume, is the real source of his obsession with Kokesh (even if Mark P can't or won't admit it to himself).

Also noted at the public account was Bill Fletcher Jr.'s "Choices for Black Labor" (The Black Commentator) was noted at the public e-mail account:

I came of age politically in the middle of the Black Power movement. Within the ranks of organized labor, both the Black Power movement and the Anti-Vietnam War movement had a significant impact through the mid-1970s. Caucuses were being formed to challenge the bureaucratic leaderships of many unions. Wild-cat strikes were taking place in workplaces around the country. And in some locales, independent unions were being established, where workers had concluded that the established union movement was incapable of making any significant changes to address the needs and demands of rank and file workers. At the national level, the Coalition of Black Trade Unionists emerged as a major voice, arguing that organized labor needed to take a new and different look at the Black worker, a look and engagement that was based on the need for respect and equality.
As we enter the 21st century, Black labor is in disarray. Within the ranks of organized labor, the various institutions that have often spoken on its behalf, have ossified. Black caucuses in various unions have stepped back from challenging and pushing the union leaderships and, instead, have in all too many cases, degenerated into social clubs or step-ladders for individuals to get positions within the union structure. While there are greater numbers of Black staff and, in some cases, elected leaders, there is an emphasis on acceptability - to the leadership of organized labor - within the ranks of the movement, rather than an emphasis on challenge and struggle.
How this situation evolved would be the material around which a book could be written. Suffice to say that the economic crisis affecting Black America, a crisis that became very evident in the mid-1970s, cut the ground beneath a major portion of the Black working class. Combined with political attacks on Black America by the Right, we went on the defensive. In organized labor, the declining percentage of workers organized in unions, along with the brutal climate built up during the Ronald Reagan years, worsened the conditions under which struggle could take place.

That's an excerpt. It's a very strong essay. That came in earlier this week (Wednesday) and there wasn't time for it. Our focus is Iraq. Including it is another reason I'm doing this grab bag entry. ("Grab bag"? Mark P's back to drooling and dreaming of Adam.)

A college student working on a paper e-mailed to say she wants to quote from Amy Goodman's interview with Jimmy Presson about how his high school silenced and censored all discussion "and even any mention" of the illegal war but the link was not working last night. The section noted Friday and Wednesday (noted here) was from Democracy Now!'s official transcript. So unless I have a typo, you can quote that if the site's not working. (She also tried going to the Democracy Now! site last night and it wouldn't display.) DN! puts the name of the speaker (before the ":") in all caps. Anytime you see that here, it's usually a copy and paste from the transcript. If only the first letter in the first and last name is caps, that's my transcribing (either because the transcript wasn't yet up or because I didn't have time to go to the site). For more of the interivew (or to verify the transcript), on the left are the things we link to. Pacifica Radio carries the show over to their site and you're looking for Wednesday's show. WBAI, KPFK and KPFA have archives. Use the links on the left, access any archives (we even have links on the left to go straight to the archives). Most communiy members find KPFA the easiest to navigate because their archives are by day -- there's even a calander you can use to click on the day in question -- while WBAI and KPFK tend to offer a long list of broadcasts that you have to scroll down through. I'd further recommend KPFA because they are keeping their archives. Other stations are doing 90 days or less. KPFA is building an online archive. To get Wednesday's show (if you're reading this today or within approximately 90 days of this going up), you can utilize any of the Pacifica stations. After that, you'll have Democracy Now!'s website and KPFA.

She, the college student, is working on a paper currently and also thinks she could build this into a bigger topic in the fall for a journalism class she'll be taking. She wondered if there was "a hard copy of this or any other episode"? Democracy Now! offers DVDs of all their programs -- correction, they offer discs. Democracy Now! wasn't always also visual. Some of the earliest shows (it's in it's eleventh year now) are just audio because it was a radio program only at that time. But all broadcasts are available for purchase (I believe it's $30 for a disc but look that up and each purchase goes to supporting the program's continuation). You can order online or, during the week, I believe they still have a number you can call. You can also use regular, postal mail to send in a check or money order with the date of the broadcast you'd like a copy of. (The address for that, as well as the prices, are at their website.)

Democracy Now! got linked to (in this entry) and not stations or Pacifica Radio because I know that web address. (I also know Sir! No Sir! by heart.) That's probably because Amy Goodman gives it out on air. But I'm not hunting down links for what I hoped was a quick entry. (All stations mentioned and Pacifica Radio are linked to on the left of this site.)

Brad forwarded an e-mail that we addressed Thursday in "And the war drags on" (scroll down or use the weekly archive, I'm trying to finish this entry). It's also been sent to the public account so we'll note it again. I commented in "And the war drags on" so you can find my comments there. Here's the e-mail:

Dear Member of the Nation Community,
One-half million dollars. That's what the latest round of rate-juggling by the United States Postal Service will cost The Nation in the next year. Rate increases go into effect July 15, 2007. We are fighting this increase as best we can, but even if we "win," which is a long shot, we are still facing hundreds of thousands of dollars in additional postage. Now it's time to accept the reality: The Nation needs your help and we need it now. Click here. Here's the history of this situation:
In an unprecedented move, postal regulators rejected the rate plan submitted by the United States Postal Service in favor of a complex scheme designed by Time Warner, the country's largest publisher!
The new plan gave much lower increases, or in some cases decreases, to mega-magazines like Time Warner's own Time, People and Sports Illustrated, shifting the burden to smaller publications like The Nation.
We were given just eight working days to prepare a response to the 758-page rate plan before it was declared a fait accompli. The result: an 18% increase in postal costs for The Nation. Please help now. For the media mastodons that increasingly control the information that gets out to you and their Washington flacks, it's just business as usual. For The Nation it's a potential disaster -- but not exactly a surprise. We have two choices: start cutting back on our investigative reporting and coverage of what’s missing in the mainstream/corporate media, and on our efforts to expand our outreach programs to students and decision-makers. Or hope that friends and supporters like you will help us fill the shortfall. Click here to help.
Given the state of things in this country at this time, and a historically decisive election on the horizon, the timing couldn't be more critical. We need your help, if you can possibly give it, and we need it now. In advance, accept our very real gratitude.
Sincerely
Teresa Stack, President
P.S. We will shortly be inviting you to a very special phone conference to discuss the postal rate increase issue in more depth. Join your fellow Nation readers, Nation editors and writers, as well as special guest experts and learn more about this serious issue. Stay tuned!

A visitor notes Laura Flanders' show in an e-mail (he enjoys it but enjoyed it more when it was live and three hours on Saturday and three on Sunday -- no one in this community would disagree with you on that). He's afraid that the community (or at least me) has dropped their support for the program and he says, if it continues to get support, Air America Radio will realize their mistake and return to it live and a longer broadcast. Dealing with the latter first. Air American realize a mistake? You must be a new listener to Air America Radio.

Laura Flanders anchored the weekend and was the weekend face for the network. The fact that, when they are already monkeying around with their week day schedule, they think they can also alter their weekend demonstrates that the new owners are just as lost as all the ones before. Even a minor change can cause an uproar, so you do one thing at a time and, if you're reworking the week days, you leave the weekend alone to provide consistency. It was a huge mistake on their part to mess with the show. It's also true that Flanders now freed from having to spend every weekend in the studio might not even want to return to giving up each Saturday and Sunday night.

But we still support Flanders. Hold on. Okay, checked with Jim because we've toyed with writing about this at The Third Estate Sunday Review. (It's the summer read edition tomorrow.) He said it was fine to grab the consensus for this entry because we probably won't have time to get to it anytime soon.

The Nation magazine is barely worth reading most weeks now. The idea that Flanders' program is now used solely to push that magazine has not enchanted us anymore than losing her wonderful monologues or the five hours extra it used to be. Flanders focus was wide ranging and included the illegal war. One of the biggest hits the new program takes is discussions on Iraq because the magazine isn't interested. Having to promote a weekly magazine for one hour isn't a show. There have already been guests on discussing articles that we didn't feel were worth publishing and we certainly didn't feel they were worth hearing about.
If The Nation were smart, they'd have one guest from the magazine (the show is entitled RadioNation with Laura Flanders) who came on for part of the show. They would then let Flanders do what she does so well and provide a mix for the rest of the show. That would increase interest in the magazine because, for instance, if she has Rickie Lee Jones on and someone tunes in for that and also hears from David Corn about his article in the magazine (I can mention Corn without fear of boos and hisses, can't say the same about others), then the magazine may be picked up by someone who wouldn't normally do so. As it is, the program is now an advertisement for the magazine that really is only for the devoted. (I'm speaking in terms of guest. Flanders draws her own crowd and has earned it.) Mother Jones tried this approach on Air America and it didn't work out very well.

Reducing the (now reduced to an hour) program to just the scope of what The Nation covers in print and guests to those who have articles in that week's magazine (the 'weekly' sometimes does double issues) really reduces Flanders' scope and her power and, in doing so, reduces the interest. We'll probably not hear Patrick Cockburn, Rickie Lee Jones, Kate Taylor, Phyllis Bennis, or any of the other guests we came to expect and to enjoy. And going non-live means none of the call ins, from listeners (which included, one Saturday, Susan Sarandon).

This community likes Flanders. This community is bored and angered with so many in independent media's refusal to address Iraq. At a time when Iraq is not even the focus of one independent media program, the shift to an hour long infomercial for each week's edition of the magazine (a magazine which is really not concerned with Iraq) isn't going over well. Flanders was a strong voice on the war. Having her discuss dippy, sh**ty articles on things that are not pressing doesn't fly with this community. And too much of The Nation is about follow the leader as opposed to providing leadership, too much is about responding as opposed to standing.

It is a huge mistake, HUGE, to turn Flanders' show into an infomercial. She should be allowed to do what she did. In terms of promoting the magazine, if you really want to promote it, you grasp that a mix is necessary. You grasp that most AAR listeners have heard the constant commercials and know the magazine is out there. They are not unaware of it. To make them pick up the magazine, you need a draw and a draw is not "let's review what's in this week's issue." A draw is a guest from outside the magazine that listeners will make a point to listen to. Whether it's an artist, an activist or what have you. And tuning in because you're a Holly Near fan, for instance, to hear Holly Near and then also hearing Katha Pollitt discuss a column might make you pick up the magazine. But no one's served by "Here's what in this issue and are guests wrote for this week's issue." Listeners aren't served and the magazine's not served. The program goes from a wide ranging program that could give the magazine exposure to an isolated clump of listeners who are already reading and aware of the magazine.

That's idiotic. The Nation, like Angelina Jolie, is not box office. Ava and I shared our thoughts on the movie last Sunday. But sure enough there was one of the Water Cooler Set in the New York Times yesterday calling Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie the biggest stars of the year. They aren't. Check the box office, neither can pull in an audience on their own. Brad Pitt's gotten by on the fact that people hope he is the next Robert Redford but nothing in his box office demonstrates that. Take out the group films and he's got nothing but a lot of films America avoided (Seven Years In Tibet, Meet Joe Black, etc.) . Team him with Morgan Freeman or the Ocean's crowd and he can be in a hit film. He has never, to this day, demonstrated that he can carry or open a film. Jolie is almost exactly the same. Have her in sexy garb and she stands a better chance at carrying a film. (Have her go full out, as with that film co-starring Antonio Banderas, and no one wants to see it. It's a fine line. Tease, don't show.)

The Times can pimp them as movie stars but if movie star means (as it's supposed to) filling the seats, neither has demonstrated a record of doing that. (In the tease films, Lara Croft, Jolie has a better record than Pitt.) They have demonstrated that they can interest tabloid readers and viewers of tabloid TV in their off screen lives. In fact, from Juliette Lewis, through Gwenth, through Jennifer, up to Jolie, Brad Pitt's made quite a name for himself out of who he's been involved with. (Something Redford didn't have to do in order to be famous or to be box office.) He's not made a name for himself as an actor who can get audiences to pay for what he does on the big screen. That's reality. That's reality for Jolie as well though, with the Lara Croft films, she did carry those and they did interest audiences. The bulk of her career, audiences have avoided her films and stuck to the tabloid stories.

Though heavily pimped, the Danny Pearl story will not change that. That's due to the fact that the performance isn't that interesting (and Michelle Pfeiffer may want her Russia House accent back -- Michelle Pfeiffer gave a strong performance in The Russia House) in a film that's pure TV movie it makes futher mistakes by casting Danny Pearl as sitcom nebbish. Pearl was a very good looking man. Ben Affleck could have played the part and there might be some interest in the film. No one needs that film. No one wants to see it. No one's interested in it. Jolie can work the premiere and fool the Water Cooler Set at the Times but she can't fill seats in a theater.

By the same token, a line up of guests from The Nation doesn't provide enough of a mix to make for a strong radio program. You need a mix. Interest in the program at this point is all due to Laura Flanders and how long even someone as talented as she is can keep that up while having to promote one magazine, week after week, will be answered quickly. (I believe the answer's already in.) The magazine should promote one guest and one guest only on her show and allow her to mix the rest of her program up the way she did before. That would actually draw interest to the magazine.

Lastly, a visitor wants this linked to. It's linked to. It's not excerpted. The facts in that piece are in question and go against what Adam Kokesh has stated publicly re: college to give just one example. The same visitor e-mailed that four times. It has been linked to. It will not be excerpted because, though well intentioned (and well written in other parts), the Kokesh retelling seems to be at odds with the public record. Both Kokesh and his attorney have stated that his college funds should not be effected.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

bill flatcher jr.
laura flanders
adam kokesh
amy goodman
democracy now
robert redford
angelina jolie
brad pitt

Iraq snapshot

Friday, June 22, 2007.  Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces another death, CounterSpin covers a report the mainstream media (domestic) has shown no interest in, Falluja is addressed (and on going), watch out for that tidal wave of Operation Happy Talk!,  and more.

 

 

Starting with news of war resistance.  Joshua Key's The Deserter's Tale continues to garner good reviews.  Anita Joshua (India's The Hindu) reviews the book and concludes, "For over a year, he lived in the U.S. in constant fear of being caught before he fled with his family to Canada in search of asylum.  But, he makes no attempt to exaggerate his travails to sell his story, and it is this honesty that reflects through all the detail."  Key served in Iraq and, while back in the US, made the decision to self-check out instead of returning to an illegal war.  He, his wife Brandi Key and their children then lived underground in the US before crossing the border into Canada where he is attempting to win refugee status.  From page 171 of his book (written with Lawrence Hill):

 

One morning in Ramadi, while I was sitting on top of my armored personnel carrier outside a little house controlled by men from another platoon in the 3rd Armored Calvary Regiment, I saw soldiers open the door and push a naked prisoner outside.  The prisoner looked like he was about forty years old.  One soldier kicked him as he stumbled out the door and into the light, and another soldier kicked him as he passed through the gate.  The detainee was sent to stand in the middle of the street, and for an instant I wondered why he had been brought out like that.  And then, in full view of passerby, the naked man defecated in the street.  I turned my head guiltily, but not before I had witnessed his humiliation.  He stood up and was kicked on his way back inside the building.  I never saw him again, and I don't know what happened to him.

It would not be until much later, after I deserted the army, that I heard of Abu Ghraib prison, west of Baghdad, or about the abuses of Iraqi prisoners at the hands of Americans, or about human rights violations at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

 

Also noting Key is Kim Peterson (Dissident Voice) in his exploration of genocide which puts the illegal war into that context and quotes Key and Jimmy Massey.  Massy is quoted stating, "As far as I'm concerned, the real war did not begin until they saw us murdering innocent civilians.  I mean, they were witnessing their loved ones being murdered by US Marines.  It's kind of hard to tell someone that they are being liberated when they just saw their child shot or lost thei husband or grandmother."

 

The movement of resistance within the US military grows and includes Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Augstin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder , Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Joshua Key, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Jeremy Hinzman, Stephen Funk, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Care, Kyle Huwer, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.

Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters.

 

Speaking out to end the war is a duty Iraq Veterans Against the War takes very seriously.  Monday IVAW's Adam Kokesh  appeared on Mark Levine's Inside Scoop  for the hour. We've noted the interview all week (and the link was left out of yesterday's snapshot when it first went up, my apologies) and we'll close out the week by noting it again:

 

Mark Levine: Tell me about combat stress?

 

Adam Kokesh: As you said, it's hard to get care.  It's one of those things we're fighting for with  Iraq Veterans Against the War, full funding of the Department of Veteran Affairs.  But for me, when I came home, I didn't even allow myself to get into PTSD because I didn't want to think about my experiences in a way that would have that kind of emotional reaction.

 

Mark Levine: Denial.  Just forget.  Denial. [crosstalk]

 

Adam Kokesh:  . . . and for me, when I came back, I had combat stress which is distinctly different because it's much more superficial and about habitual things. But the worst of it for me, was I had, I had a few anxiety attacks. You know, you just lose control of your brain for a few minutes and it's a little disturbing but it was something we were warned about.  And for me, it was kind of a good thing.  [cross talk] . . . No, no, no.  You lose control of your brain and you just shut down. It's more of a --

 

Mark Levine: You just shut down.

 

Adam Kokesh: It's more of an internal thing than an external thing.

 

Mark Levine: So people don't even realize it's going on maybe.

 

Adam Kokesh: Yeah, sometimes.  Sometimes I would cry.  Sometimes I would shake.  But it was internal.  But it's mainly because of being overwhelmed by the environment and being in such a beautiful enivornment as my college campus was.  To go from Falluja one week to campus the next week. . . . That caused the anxiety for me.  The other things were I would wake up early well before my alarm and feel this strange sense of urgency, like I had to be somewhere, and not be able to go back to sleep.

 

Adam Kokesh's service in Iraq was not ingored by the US military.  It was 'rewarded' with a witch hunt and Liam Madden and Cloy Richards are also targeted.  The US military feels harrassment is a form of a 'thank you'.  That's the reality of the US administration and the US military brass when it comes to veterans.

 

And if how little the lives and wounds (on all sides) from the illegal war matter isn't coming through, check out Robert Gates and Peter Pace.  Josh White (Washington Post) reports Gates and Pace have launched a new wave of Operation Happy Talk -- the number of US service members who have died and are dying in Iraq is not an issue, that's the "wrong metric".  That is the wrong thing to focus on, say Gates and Pace, as CBS and AP note that at least 16 US service members have been announced dead "over the past three days."

Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers) notes that the Operation Happy Talkers also said success "should be measured not by whether violence is reduced, but by whether Iraqis feel better about their nation's future."  Gates and Pace, after splashing one another with waves of Operation Happy Talk, ran down to the beach to enter a wet t-shirt contest before expounding further on the notion of deluded levels of self-esteem being the true measure of success while living in a combat zone.  No word on whether the rumors are true that both will dress up in silk nighties and have a pillow fight late tonight.

 

 

Realities on Iraq were addressed today on CounterSpin where co-host Janine Jackson interviewed Celine Nahory, co-author of [PDF format warning] "Independent Report on Iraq" which examines the causes of violence in Iraq.  A sample of the discussion.

 

Janine Jackson: Well, I want to draw you out on another issue in the report -- there are many of them, of course -- but you talked about attacks on cities and I think many people, of course, as we've mentioned may believe that the 'coalition' is in the position of mainly defending or protecting but I think they still could tell you that the US-led 'coalition' did fiercely attack  the city of Falluja.  I think most people remember that but that would be a very incomplete picture, wouldn't it? 

 

Celine Nahory:  Well, at the very moment the US is actually imposing another siege on Falluja.  There were two in 2004 and there is one going on right now -- for about a month now.  But Falluja is absolutely not the only city on which there have been assaults.  Part of the "anti-insurgency operation" that the US  is pursuing  in Iraq.  A dozen other cities have suffered:  Najaf,  Tal Afar,  Samarra, al Qaim, Haditha, Ramadi, Baquba, many others.  And this is not something that happened here and there.  It's really ongoing operations. And usually those operations follow the same pattern where the city is sealed off, a very harsh curfew is imposed, residents are encouraged to leave resulting in massive displacement of people. After awhile they assume that those who stay inside are only 'insurgents'  and they cut water, food, electricity, medical supplies and carry massive bombardments on urban households and this destructs a very large part of the city.  Reports say that more than 75% of the city of Falluja lies in ruins today.  And many of those occasions, the US military has taken over medical facitilies such as hospitals.  In those cities, very often hospitals are the tallest building in those cities. So the US takes them over and puts snipers on top and you have once again control over the city or neighborhoods.

 

Jackson observed that outside of AFP, she hasn't seen any press coverage of the report.  The report is in PDF format and you can read it by sections:

Executive Summary [Read] [French]
Map of Major Coalition Attacks, Bases and Prisons [See map]
Political Map of Iraq [See map]
1. Introduction [Read]
2. Destruction of Cultural Heritage [Read]
3. Indiscriminate and Especially Injurious Weapons [Read]
4. Unlawful Detention [Read]
5. Abuse and Torture of Prisoners [Read]
6. Attacks on Cities [Read]
7. Killing Civilians, Murder and Atrocities [Read]
8. Displacement and Mortality [Read]
9. Corruption, Fraud and Gross Malfeasance [Read]
10. Long-Term Bases and the New Embassy Compound [Read]
11. Other Issues [Read]
- Iraqi Public Opinion and the Occupation- Cost of the War and Occupation
12. Conclusion and Recommendations [Read]

 

 

On the subject of Falluja, let's turn to a speech from last weekend's conference in Chicago, given by Dahlia Wasfi and focus on the Falluja section of her talk, "Falluja -- God help us for what we have done to the people of Falluja.  On March 31, 2004, four American civilians lost their lives in Falluja.  They were civilians with military backgrounds, in the same that a paramilitary death squad in El Salvador responsible for the brutal rape, torture and murder of four American nuns was comprised of civilians. Though they had GPS systems from Blackwater, those systems were not working that day, and they became disoriented.  But they should have known long before, when they were boarding a plane for Baghdad, that they were going the wrong way.  Perhaps they only signed a contract with Blackwater to achieve financial security for their loved ones.  But there is a word in the English language to describe an individual who sells his body, his principles and his soul for monetary reward.  That's a congressman.  In the same way that Nazi soldiers fell victim to their system during the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, these hired killers from Blackwater got justice served to them on a silver platter.  Then, revenge was carried out on a people who can truly be identified as civilians.  In April 2004, U.S. Marines closed the bridge to the city and a hospital road -- a war crime.  The U.S. military and its vehicles stood at the hospital entrance -- a war crime.  And snipers were positioned on rooftops, targeting ambulances and the clinic doors.  Between 600 and 800 civilians were killed in that siege, but that wasn't enough.  In November 2004, the second major siege of Falluja began.  The Nazzal Emergency Hospital, protected by the Geneva Conventions, was leveled to the ground, and Falluja General Hospital, was seized by the U.S. military.  Doctors described being tied and beaten, despite being unarmed and having only medical instruments.  Burhan Fasa'a, a cameraman with the Lebanese broadcasting company, reported that there were American snipers on top of the hospital, shooting everyone in sight.  In addition, the U.S. military blocked the Iraqi Red Crescent from entering the city for seven days.  The result was a death toll of between 6,000 and 8,000 civilians.  This means that the Iraqi death toll in November 2004 alone surpassed the invaders' death toll for all of Operation Enduring Freedom thus far."

 

 

Many of those people driven from their homes can't go back. In chapter eight of [PDF format warning]  "Independent Report on Iraq," the issues involved in Iraq exploding refugee crisis are explored (over 4 million if you combine internally displaced and externally displaced).  It is noted that, on the Iraqi death toll, "Washington insists that the lowest numbers are most accurate, while refusing to publish its own official statistics."  As Nancy A. Youssef noted almost exactly one year ago, the US is keeping figures, the US military in Iraq is provided with those figures, and yet the American people are kept in the dark.  The section concludes with the following:

 

Iraq faces a growing humanitarian emergency, with unprecedented death and displacement.  As of April 2007, the United Nations estimated that up to 8 million people were vulnerable and in need of immediate assistance.  Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been forced to flee from their homes and hundreds of thousands more are casualties of the violence through death and injury.  Education has broken down.  Unemployment has reached about 60% and the annual inflation rate peaked at about 70% in July 2006.  An estimated 54% of the Iraqi population lives on less than a dollar day, among capacity.  Electricity is in short supply.  Only 32% of Iraqis have access to clean drinking water.  The Public Distribution System food ration has stopped functioning in certain areas of the country, leaving 4 million Iraqis acutely vulnerable due to food insecurity.  Severe malnutrition doubled between 2003 and 2005.  Iraq's humanitarian emergency has reached a crisis level that compares with some of the world's most urgent calamities.

 

And as the crisis grows even worse, some of the violence in Iraq today includes . . .

 

Bombings?

 

Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad mortar attack that wounded four people, a Baghdad roadside bombing that wounded 2 police officers, US missiles launched from US helicopters that killed 17 Iraqis whom the US says were suspected 'gunmen' or suspected 'al Qaeda' or both depending upon the report but 17 are dead and they are dead on nothing more than, at best, suspicion, a Qara Taba roadside bombing that wounded three Iraqi soldiers, and an al Hawija roadside bombing that wounded one peson.  Reuters reports that a Falluja bombing killed two civilians and left four wounded.

 

Shootings?

 

Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a person shot dead in a Bahgdad market today and a person shot dead in Dali Abbas village.

 

Corpses?

 

Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 11 corpses were discovered in Baghdad today.

 

Also today, the US military announced: "A Multi-National Division-Baghdad Soldier was killed during combat operations in a southwestern section of the Iraqi capital June 21.

 

Finally, in political news, US Senator Hillary Clinton would like to be the Democratic nominee in 2008 for president.  Turkish Daily News reports that she announced Tuesday she was happy to keep US forces in Iraq to defend "close U.S. allies" Iraqi Kurds. Due to the pronounced and ongoing tensions between Turkey and northern Iraq, they would highlight that because it goes to their own security but . . . what's the excuse for that photo of Hillary?  Seriously.  Ouch.

 

In other political news, Robin Wright (Washington Post) reports that the US House of Representatives -- in a 355 pro and 69 against vote -- decided to get James Baker to round up his friends in the James Baker Circle Jerk to listen to the September reports from the US administration and the US military about 'progress' in Iraq, decipher and figure out what to do.  Translation, the US House would like to outsource their own jobs, duties and responsiblities to a center-right group which can provide cover.  If the duties are too much for any US House Rep, I do believe they have all been informed of the resignation process and possibly some should considering putting that process in motion?  James Baker and Lee Hamilton were not voted into Congress in 2006.  The Democratic upset resulted from voters wanting change and believing Democrats could deliver.  So far Americans join Diana Ross in singing, "And I'm still waiting . . . Ooooh-oooh-oh . . . Still waiting . . ."

 

iraq

counterspin
celine nahory

dahlia wasfi

robin wright
the washington post

---

Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.
Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.

Other Items

A national veterans advocacy group criticized Camp Pendleton on Thursday for its "discouraging" treatment of Marines who return from Iraq with signs of post-traumatic stress disorder.
Investigators for the Washington-based Veterans for America said they learned from a week's worth of interviews with about 30 Marines and family members at Camp Pendleton and the San Diego Naval Medical Center that Marines are being punished, sometimes even booted from the service, for behavior problems linked to the disorder.
"I think we have the obligation to do the right thing for those Marines," said Steve Robinson, the group's director of veterans affairs.
Among the problems at Camp Pendleton, Robinson said, is a lack of support for family members of Marines with post-traumatic stress disorder. Some "uneducated and vindictive leaders," he added, are punishing veterans without considering that their behavior problems might be related to combat experiences.

The above is from Tony Perry's "Veterans advocates criticize Camp Pendleton" (Los Angeles Times). I think that's fairly straightforward, so let's move to Erika Hayasaki's "With Iraq play, students act on beliefs" (Los Angeles Times):


SHE could not look at her principal. The words coming out of his mouth infuriated her.
There would be no play about the war in Iraq, he told the drama class at Wilton High School: The topic was too controversial, too complicated.
Sitting in the front row of the campus theater on a March morning, Erin Clancy squeezed another drama student's hand and tried to hold back tears. They had been preparing for the production of "Voices in Conflict" for two months. One student sitting onstage began to yell and curse. The performing arts department head ordered her to address the principal with respect.
Erin didn't want to offend him either. In her four years at Wilton High, she had grown to like the principal. But this play meant more to her than others she had acted in, like "West Side Story" and "Grease." She had to say something.
Her voice trembled. She was 18 -- old enough to fight in the war, Erin told him, and old enough to vote for leaders who send people to war. So why couldn't she perform in a play about it?
It was not open for debate. Principal Timothy Canty told the students his mind was made up.
He left, and the students swarmed their drama teacher. It had been Bonnie Dickinson's idea for them to research the war and come up with monologues based on the words of U.S. soldiers culled from documentaries, books and articles. Dickinson had stayed quiet during the principal's talk. The students asked her: What do we do now?
Dickinson told them she didn't think there was anything they could do: He was the principal, and he made the rules.
The students talked of writing letters to the local newspaper or protesting the principal's decision. There had to be something they could do to change his mind.
It didn't seem fair, Erin recalled telling her father in their family room later that evening. There was a war going on, and she wanted her classmates to care about it.

No, it's not fair. It also isn't fair that while media big and small so frequently take a pass on addressing the illegal war, students fight for their right to do so. Again, don't say students are apathetic. If you're new to the topic, Amy Goodman wrote about this in "War and Censorship at Wilton High" (Truthdig):

I asked the student actors about their opportunities to discuss the war at school. Jimmy Presson, 16 years old, said his U.S. history class has a weekly assignment to bring in a current-event news item, with one caveat: "We are not allowed to talk about the war while discussing current events." The students said that they can discuss the war in a Middle Eastern studies class, but, they said, it is not being taught this year. "Theater Arts II was the only class in the school where students were discussing the war,” Dickinson said. Jimmy added, "We also get to speak about it with the military recruiters who are always at school."

That was June 12th at Truthdig. Wednesday, Goodman (Democracy Now!) spoke with Presson, student Courtney Stack and drama teacher Bonnie Dickinson about how the students won and Iraq Veterans Against the War's Charlie Anderson appeared to discuss how he enjoyed the play as an audience member and as someone in the audience who saw his words onstage. We're going to zoom in again on this exchange between Goodman and Presson:

AMY GOODMAN: Jimmy, how often do you get to talk about war at school?
JIMMY PRESSON: We very rarely to never talk about the war through the curriculum. In classes in which we discuss current events, we are required to not bring in current events that relate to the war.
AMY GOODMAN: Wait, what do you mean? What about social studies or history?
JIMMY PRESSON: In history classes, the current events that we bring in are -- we've been instructed to have the articles be unrelated to the war.
AMY GOODMAN: You're not allowed to talk about war in your history class?
JIMMY PRESSON: We're not allowed to talk about the war.
AMY GOODMAN: Why?
JIMMY PRESSON: Because it's too controversial, I guess. Because they don't want kids arguing in class.
AMY GOODMAN: Is there any class that you can talk about it?
JIMMY PRESSON: We can talk about it a little bit in Middle Eastern studies, a little bit, but it's not even that much in that class.
BONNIE DICKINSON: That class is not offered.
JIMMY PRESSON: Every year. It's only offered every other year.
AMY GOODMAN: So this past year, it wasn't offered?
JIMMY PRESSON: It was not offered this past year.
AMY GOODMAN: So the only class to discuss this was in drama?
JIMMY PRESSON: Yeah.

The US is engaged in a war and a high school has basically banned the discussion. I would say censored. But note, Presson points out that recruiters can and do visit the high school. That is shameful and residents who are upset that Ira Levin revealed the town was the basis for Stepford (see Levin's novel The Stepford Wives) might do better to focus on how their public high school is refusing to educate the students about a war the US is engaged in, refusing to allow young adults a forum to exchange their views on the topic and pretty much failing every notion of education and citizenship anyone could think of. Instead of taking offense at Levin, they should be offended that, in a time of war, a high school thinks it can avoid the topic. It should be focused on next fall right now and demanding that a war the US is engaged in is part of history, civics, etc. As Presson points out, recruiters can come to campus. So a sales pitch is okay? Education isn't but your child can be subjected to more advertising in the public schools? As Clancy points out, she's 18. She could sign up without any parental permission required. So what kind of a school system stays silent? What kind of a school system doesn't present a lively debate so that the students can make up their own minds? That's not education and only a town full of zombies (male and female) would stand for it. Offended by Levin's remarks? Prove him wrong.

PBS' NOW with David Brancaccio has an online exclusive, Brancaccio interviews Robert Redford "about why he thinks 'change is in the air' as businesses find value in going green. Redford says enviornmental issues are gaining traction and that global warming will be 'huge' in the 2008 presidential election." You can listen by clicking here. Last week featured Laura Dunn discussing her documentary The Unforseen. Redford produced the documentary and you can click here for more on that at the NOW website or here for more at YouTube.

NOW with David Brancaccio will offer a look at charter schools in New York in their latest episode that begins airing tonight (check local listings for air dates and times). No, I do not support charter schools.

Turning to the topic of Yaderlin Hiraldo, the wife of missing-assumed captured US soldier Alex Jimenez, Micah notes Richard Sisk's "It's Chertoff to the rescue for war hero's wife" (New York Daily News):

"With my greatest respect for her husband's service to our nation and my sincere hope for his safe return, I ... have instructed [immigration officials] to take immediate action to resolve her immigration issues," Chertoff wrote Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.)
Kerry, who has argued the case for Yaderlin Hiraldo, wife of Spec. Alex Jimenez, applauded Chertoff's action and asked the Army "to determine if any other servicemen are caught in similar problems."

In the article, you'll find a link to a PDF version of Chertoff's letter to Kerry. We'll note the last two paragraphs:

ICE intends to request that the immigration judge terminate the removal proceedings, and this afternoon, Ms. Hiraldo's attorney informed ICE counsel that he would not oppose that request. If the immigration judge grants the request, ICE will grant Ms. Hiraldo discretionary parole into the United States and USCIS may then consider and adjudicate her application for permanent residence.
The sacrifices made by our Soldiers and their families deserve our greatest respect, and we will ensure that Ms. Hiraldo's immigration case is given every possible consideration. If you have any qutions regarding this important matter, please contact my Office of Legislative Affairs at (202) 447-5890.

We're noting that because there was already spin coming out that Yaderlin Hiraldo was under 'no threat' of deportation. Chertoff (see above) writes "ICE intends to request that the immigration judge terminate the removal proceedings". Those proceedings have been on pause. They need to be stopped. Hopefully, they now will be and the government will cut through the red tape and award Hiraldo citizenship.

Meanwhile Reuters reports that 17 people have been killed by US helicopters outside Khalis -- suspected 'gunmen'.

Martha notes Robin Wright's "House Votes to Revive Iraq Study Group" (Washington Post) and I'm rushing (and sick) this morning so there's the link. The article addresses the James Baker Circle Jerk. Congress voted (355 in favor, 69 against) to bring back the James Baker Circle Jerk so that they could hear the reports Congress will receive in September on Iraq and then, hopefully within a month, report back to Congress.

Report back to Congress? Congress needs tutors? Can somone sign them up for some Sylvan Institute tutoring? The idea that Congress wants to farm out their responsiblities is ridiculous. The idea that they cannot come up with their own plan -- something they were damn well elected to do -- is nonsense. They want to hide behind the James Baker Circle Jerk and, for any who have forgotten, that was not a plan to be proud of. It argued for the theft of Iraqi oil, it blamed Iraqis and really helped get that talk of 'benchmarks' rolling.

Now Congress (the House only thus far) wants to shirk their own responsibilities and hide behind the James Baker Circle Jerk? That's not cutting it. Congress needs to do their job and they have refused to do so. We've all been informed that September is the big month. At last, we're told, some accountablity from the legislative branch. And of course, the administration and the military brass have begun trying to back off from September. Now Congress (the House only thus far) wants to join in? They want to say, "We'll listen but we're just members of Congress. What do we know? We're not capable of thinking of our own."

That's what then waiting for the James Baker Circle Jerk to come up with a reply (hopefully within 30 days) is. The James Baker Circle Jerk was not elected in 2006. None of the past members (including Rudy G who couldn't make meetings and was asked to leave) were elected to Congress in 2006. Citizens want to see some representation and farming out the issue is only prolonging the delay. If they pull this nonsense, the Democratically controlled Congress, the GOP should respond with ridiculing 2008 campaign ads because they will be deserved. If you are a member of Congress and can't come up with your own ideas, if you're so cowardly that you need to hide behind others to come up with a 'plan,' you really have no business serving in Congress.

Billie's already read Camilo Mejia's piece (noted in the previous entry) and wanted this from Dahlia Wasfi noted (US Socialist Worker):

On March 31, 2004, four American civilians lost their lives in Falluja. They were civilians with military backgrounds, in the same that a paramilitary death squad in El Salvador responsible for the brutal rape, torture and murder of four American nuns was comprised of civilians.
Though they had GPS systems from Blackwater, those systems were not working that day, and they became disoriented. But they should have known long before, when they were boarding a plane for Baghdad, that they were going the wrong way.
Perhaps they only signed a contract with Blackwater to achieve financial security for their loved ones. But there is a word in the English language to describe an individual who sells his body, his principles and his soul for monetary reward. That’s a congressman.
In the same way that Nazi soldiers fell victim to their system during the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, these hired killers from Blackwater got justice served to them on a silver platter.
Then, revenge was carried out on a people who can truly be identified as civilians. In April 2004, U.S. Marines closed the bridge to the city and a hospital road--a war crime. The U.S. military and its vehicles stood at the hospital entrance--a war crime. And snipers were positioned on rooftops, targeting ambulances and the clinic doors.
Between 600 and 800 civilians were killed in that siege, but that wasn’t enough. In November 2004, the second major siege of Falluja began. The Nazzal Emergency Hospital, protected by the Geneva Conventions, was leveled to the ground, and Falluja General Hospital, was seized by the U.S. military.
Doctors described being tied and beaten, despite being unarmed and having only medical instruments. Burhan Fasa’a, a cameraman with the Lebanese broadcasting company, reported that there were American snipers on top of the hospital, shooting everyone in sight. In addition, the U.S. military blocked the Iraqi Red Crescent from entering the city for seven days.
The result was a death toll of between 6,000 and 8,000 civilians. This means that the Iraqi death toll in November 2004 alone surpassed the invaders’ death toll for all of Operation Enduring Freedom thus far. As we sit here tonight, death, destruction and war crimes continue in this battered city.
As of October 2006, due to the desperate conditions in Iraq of no security, high crime and targeted assassinations, it is estimated that 18,000 of Iraq’s 34,000 physicians have fled the country. Two thousand doctors and 164 nurses have been murdered, and another 250 kidnapped for high-priced ransoms. Sixty-eight percent of Iraqis lack access to safe drinking water; 81 percent are without proper sewage.

Remember that Dr. Dahlia Wasfi is interviewed (transcript and audio) by James Harris and Robert Scheer (Truthdig). And Jonah notes that Celine Nahory is interviewed on this week's CounterSpin (which begins airing today and -- by the time this post, will have already aired on WBAI -- but WBAI does have archives you can listen to -- the program also airs on radio stations throughout the country and can be streamed online at CounterSpin as well). Nahory is the co-author of [PDF format warning] "Independent Report on Iraq" which she wrote with James Paul and is published by the Institute for Public Accuracy. All links about to be noted are PDF:

Executive Summary [Read] [French]
Map of Major Coalition Attacks, Bases and Prisons [See map]
Political Map of Iraq [See map]
1. Introduction [Read]
2. Destruction of Cultural Heritage [Read]
3. Indiscriminate and Especially Injurious Weapons [Read]
4. Unlawful Detention [Read]
5. Abuse and Torture of Prisoners [Read]
6. Attacks on Cities [Read]
7. Killing Civilians, Murder and Atrocities [Read]
8. Displacement and Mortality [Read]
9. Corruption, Fraud and Gross Malfeasance [Read]
10. Long-Term Bases and the New Embassy Compound [Read]
11. Other Issues [Read]
- Iraqi Public Opinion and the Occupation- Cost of the War and Occupation
12. Conclusion and Recommendations [Read]

We noted chapter six yesterday. Francisco is doing an overview of the report in Spanish for Maria, Miguel and his El Espiritu which publishes on Sunday. And Jim asked me to note that The Third Estate Sunday Review will be doing the summer read issue (fiction) this weekend.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

amy goodman
democracy now
robert redford
now with david brancaccio
erika hayasaki
tony perry
camilo mejia
dahlia wasfi
robin wright
the washington post
counterspin
celine nahory

Peter Pace & Robert Gates splash Operation Happy Talk at each other while giggling

Maybe there is a civil war in Iraq. Maybe there isn't. If there is, according to the Pentagon, 80 percent of the violence will end when the occupation ends.
But what is certain, at least in my opinion, is that promoting the yet-unproven idea that there is a civil war in Iraq is helping the war criminals in the White House to continue justifying the occupation of that country.
Those who are against the war but somehow still believe in Western divine intervention so that Iraqis don't kill one another rely on the idea that there is a civil war to continue supporting the occupation of Iraq--which is to support the continued slaughter of American soldiers and Iraqi civilians, close to a million and counting.
Understanding the Iraqi resistance requires us to view Iraqis and view ourselves outside of our culture and our religion. We need to put ourselves in their shoes and imagine, if only for a brief moment, that our streets were being occupied by the most powerful military on earth. Would we turn against one another?
When a bomb goes off by a Shia mosque, that’s exactly what it is--a bomb going off by a Shia mosque. To my knowledge, no American serviceman or --woman ever goes to look for IDs on the charred bodies of the bombers.
We don’t what happens. We know about the death squads, we know about the Salvador option, we know about the mercenaries. We cannot trust the embedded journalists, we cannot trust the Pentagon spokesperson. We cannot be certain that Iraqis are killing one another.
What we do know is that we have a resistance in the United States. What we do know is that we have Iraq Veterans Against the War.
We are war resisters. We have been incarcerated for refusing to go back to Iraq. We are in the active duty, we are in the reserves, we’re on the bases, we’re in the first GI coffeehouse. We are in the National Guard, we are in every branch of the military.
We are the muscle of the military, and we're going to see to it that the U.S. government can no longer rely on the military to fight illegal, criminal and immoral wars of aggression.
If it requires more Agustín Aguayos; if it requires more Jeremy Hinzmans in Canada; if it requires more Mark Wilkersons, who is in jail right now; then that's exactly what they’re going to get, because we’re not going to stop.
We're not going to stop until we bring down the war machine. We're here to end the war, and we're serious. Thank you for standing with us.

The above is from Camilo Mejia's "Confronting empire" (US Socialist Worker). Turning to the New York Times, Alissa J. Rubin offers "14 Americans Are Killed in Combat in 2 Days:"

Fourteen Americans were killed in combat in five attacks, most in Baghdad, in a 48-hour period ending Thursday, the military announced.
[. . .]
While the American military has not yet said whether any of the attacks in the last 48 hours involved the very powerful explosively formed projectiles, which are capable of hurling a solid fist of copper through armored vehicles, that type of bomb has also become a regular tool in the arsenal used by Shiite and Sunni Arab insurgents.
The most lethal attack came Thursday in northeastern Baghdad, when a powerful roadside bomb exploded near a vehicle, killing five soldiers, their Iraqi interpreter and three Iraqi civilians who were traveling with them.

The two-day toll, for some reason, is actually getting attention for a change. So Peter Pace and Robert Gates rush out to distort. Lloyd notes this from Josh White's "Iraq Deaths Don't Mean Failure, Pace Says" (Washington Post):

The recent rise in U.S. troop deaths in Iraq is the "wrong metric" to use in assessing the effectiveness of the new security strategy for Baghdad, Marine Gen. Peter Pace, the outgoing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said yesterday in a news conference with Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates.
Despite military reports to Congress that use numbers of attacks and overall levels of violence as an important gauge of Iraq's security status, Gates and Pace told reporters at the Pentagon yesterday that violence is not a useful measure of progress. Setting the stage for mandatory reports to Congress in September, both officials said violence could go up in the summer months as troops try to give the Iraqi government time to set the country on the right track.
"If you had zero violence and people were not feeling good about their future, where are you?" said Pace, emphasizing that the sentiment of the Iraqi people is a much better measurement than the number of attacks. "So it's not about levels of violence. It's about progress being made, in fact, in the minds of the Iraqi people, so that they have confidence in their government in the way forward."

Deaths aren't a sign of failure, violence isn't a sign of failure. How about this then: When Operation Happy Talkers rush out to spin, it's a sure sign of failure. How about, when the insanity is so great that Happy Talkers move from ignoring the deaths to dismissing them as unimportant and not real indicators, lost is not only the sanity but the sense of humanity. This may be the most extreme drink the kool-aid version of Operation Happy Talk and that's saying a lot.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

the new york times
alissa j. rubin
the washington post

And the war drags on . . .

Though Americans disapprove of President Bush's handling of the situation in Iraq by more than two to one, they don't seem to be expressing that disapproval to anyone but pollsters. A plan to establish a monthly Iraq Moratorium Day may provide a way for them to do so.
Refitting an idea from the Vietnam era to the age of the Internet, organizers of the Iraq Moratorium Day are inviting ordinary Americans to demand an end to the war in targeted activities in their local communities and viral activities online. The goal is a "monthly expression of determination to end the war."
The initiators, a handful of individuals from different corners of the antiwar movement, are asking people to make a simple pledge:
"I hereby make a commitment that on Friday, September 21, 2007, and the third Friday of every subsequent month I will break my daily routine and take some action, by myself or with others, to end the War in Iraq."
US Labor Against the War and Progressive Democrats of America have already signed on to the Moratorium effort. Individual supporters include some of the usual suspects in the antiwar movement–Susan Sarandon, Howard Zinn, Anne Wright, Tom Hayden and Eve Ensler, as well as Edwidge Danticat, Danny Glover and Gold Star dad Fernando Suarez de Solar. But the movement is also tapping unusual suspects like Adam Neiman, CEO of the fair-trade fashion house No Sweat, actress Mercedes Ruehl and the antiwar Freeway Blogger.
"We felt that it was critical to move beyond the periodic national demonstrations in Washington, DC, New York and/or San Francisco, and instead develop and advance an approach that encourages increasingly massive local actions that suggests, more than anything else, no more business-as-usual," said Bill Fletcher Jr., a Moratorium organizer who is former president of TransAfrica Forum. "The Iraq Moratorium will allow local actions integrally connected at a national level such that each effort is understood and felt to be part of a national movement without at the same time creating a new organization or coalition."

The above was noted by Lucy and it's from Jeremy Brecher and Brendan Smith's "A Moratorium Wired to Stop the War" (The Nation via Common Dreams). Lucy wondered if it was okay to highlight? Yes, it is. Brecher and Smith covered Ehren Watada (repeatedly) and it's not their fault that someone else made the call that the writing or the topic wasn't worthy of being printed. (It was the topic, let's all be honest, that's what prevented their articles on Watada from being in the print magazine.) They did their part and *no* writer spends that much on a topic for a magazine and thinks, "Gosh, I hope this is an online only exclusive! I'll take a picture of my computer screen and show it to the folks!" This was going in this morning's entry but then the issue of the special needs Iraqi children came up and there wasn't time for both (which is why I noted Lucy in that entry and that her highlight would go up tonight). Writers who do the work can be highlighted especially if we can do via Common Dreams. It is not their fault that, though they covered Watada repeatedly in 2006, his name never appeared in print. It is not their fault that the first time Watada pops up is in 2007 and in an article where he's called a coward. They've done their part. If everyone did, the Democrats might have realized that symbolic 'action' wasn't going to cut it and maybe the illegal war would be over?


They're just there to try and make the people free,
But the way that they're doing it, it don't seem like that to me.
Just more blood-letting and misery and tears
That this poor country's known for the last twenty years,
And the war drags on.
-- words and lyrics by Mick Softly (available on Donovan's Fairytale)

Last Thursday, ICCC's number of US troops killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war was 3515. Tonight? 3545. That's thirty deaths announced in seven days. To some, for instance running an article about Hong Kong in a magazine called The Nation while avoiding an illegal war the US involved in? Doesn't say "I care." For the record, the article highlighted at the top? Not in print. Not in the new July 9th issue, not in the issue before it, or the one before that. Iraq is an "online exclusive." Or sometimes it's run a badly abridged article written for TomDispatch.com. -- gotta' abridge it. Can't spend too much time on Iraq!

Now those just visiting the website may have no idea what makes it into print, but the authors excerpted at the top have covered Iraq seriously and their reward has been "online exclusives." The magazine's readers, their subscribers, never get any of that in their mailbox. Doing that is a bit like Congressional Democrats -- who toss out sop when they feel the need to in order to make it seem like the Iraq war really is a priority with them.

The yearly editorials aside, Iraq hasn't been a priority with The Nation. What you decide is worthy (or not worthy) of print says a great deal. A weekly can't do an issue on Iraq and can go many issues without ever even mentioning Iraq. But they want to run with an essay 'winner' that said students are apathetic?

Student Nigel Yin wrote about Adam Kokesh in "The rights of a war vet" (The Daily Egyptian). And The Nation? Not one damn word. Now give Katrina vanden Heuvel a water cooler topic and she'll rush to an idiot's defense and she'll also embarrass herself and anger women. If you missed it, Matthew Rothschild wrote about Kokesh and didn't feel the need to carry water for a hack journalist who launched a sexist attack. I'm going to repeat, you need to be sure to check all community sites on July 4th for a joint-entry we're all working on. (There will also be a joint entry on Labor Day.)

The tone is set at the top and vanden Heuvel has made it very clear that Iraq is not a priority. In fact, though she disappeared her post on American Idol [as Ava noted: "Go to Mike's 'The Third Estate Sunday Review ' for the first section, to Elaine's 'Monday' for the second and then Rebecca's 'cynthia mckinney' for the last part. It is now preserved and out of Katrina's power to make it 'disappear.'"] it did exist days before Cindy Sheehan left the peace movement noting that some would rather focus on American Idol than the war. And sadly, that's been the reality.

But don't pin it on the people. The people care about the illegal war. It's the media that's failing. And when the too generously praised The Nation thinks it can turn Iraq into an after thought, then pin the blame on them as well. And that goes to why a left magazine -- one that identifies as such -- should never put someone in charge who is a member of a centrist organization (the Council for Foreign Relations). After I noted the embarrassing comments by one roundtable member awhile back, friends called to say, "You know her, she's Katrina's friend." No. No, I didn't. The dumpy one? No. With the weak chin? Oh, yeah. They're both on the Council for Foreign Relations. Which is where all the ones who worry about 'respectability' and taste and 'Sweet Victories!' run to while assuring that they're only in it to change the organization from within.

That's how you end up with Katrina vanden Heuvel drawing a line between the magazine and Harry Belafonte whose only 'crime' was speaking his truth (that many agreed with). That's how you end up with centrists popping up all over the magazine including one sexist pig who only has time for 'scantily clad' sex workers but actual female reporters, respected ones, are slammed by him for, basically, being 'emotional.' That's how you end up with a lot of things including 'theme issues' which are the hallmark of a lazy mind. The food issue actually got good ad revenues. Anyone familiar with publishing knows where that leads next.

But the weekly that can offer themes on the important and the minor can't offer a theme issue on the illegal war. The weekly can't cover war resisters. (Ehren Watada as a sidebar is not covering war resisters.) The weekly can only cover wishy-washy veterans (yes, we remember that 'online exclusive' article). The weekly can't cover the peace movement. The weekly couldn't even mention Abeer in real time when the Article 32 hearing into the murder of her parents and five-year-old sister and the gang-rape and murder of Abeer was going on. Not only could the magazine not cover it [Abeer was finally noted in April 2007 and that came via a column by Alexander Cockburn which also ran at Cockburn's CounterPunch] but the Editor's Cut blog wasn't interested -- it wasn't a 'fun' water cooler topic like Dan Rather or Joe Lieberman or American Idol. Who's not taking the war seriously?

It's not the people that are at fault here. A20 of Thursday's New York Times features a sidebar ("More Republican or Democrat?") that covers a number of issues. It's a CBS News - New York Times poll. (They bill it with "/" and not the dash. As if it's a CBS News OR a New York Times poll.) We'll zoom in on Iraq. The question: "Do you think the United States should or should not set a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq?" The results? Democrats said yes, it should be 81%. Now, note, the country is not just Democrats and Republicans. But that's all the Times can see. How many Republicans said a withdrawal timetable should happen? 44%.

Over two-thirds of Democrats and over one third of Republicans favor a timetable for withdrawal set by Congress. Who's not serious about the illegal war? Maybe the one running a political weekly that wants to yammer on about American Idol but can't mention Kokesh, Liam Madden or Cloy Richards? Or Kyle Snyder, Mark Wilkerson . . . Get the point?

What you can get is non-stop campaign gas bagging. It's 2007, but look and see what you get in issue after issue. And on that note, returning to Ava and my "Lakshimi shows up late and lost (Ava and C.I.)" from Tuesday, Marci sent in the highlight the next day, "Why Women Hate Hillary" (In These Times), we weren't aware that Susan J. Douglas had written on the topic -- she did. In April. And possibly Lakshimi's article ran in The Nation and not In These Times because Douglas had already covered it (in April) so there was no need for it to be picked up again?

And what made it as a hard hitting column (in April) was churned into endless gas baggery that circled around itself making one mistake after another. Again, that goes to the editor. But the reality is, what was a hard hitting column (in April) in In These Times became a soft, mushy, stupid cover story of The Nation in June. That's really sad. From a publishing standpoint, that's really sad and embarrassing. And it goes to the lack of leadership at the magazine today.

Being editor and publisher of the magazine is a full time job. Someone who needs to 'go slow' because time has been spent on another trip to Russia (who runs this magazine?) which didn't even result in a write up (not even online) clearly is out of their depth. Someone who thinks they can run straight to the sugary topic of American Idol while never addressing hard news from Iraq is the last one to rush to prop up Dan Rather and attack Katie Couric (at a time when, though KvH apparently didn't know this either, CBS aired 11 minutes on Iraq the week prior and Charlie Gibson's ABC program? Two minutes. Two minutes for an entire week. But facts aren't compatible with the water cooler or gas baggery.)

Even so, it should be obvious that 'disappeared' or not, when you've used your political forum to go dizzy over American Idol, you're the last entitled to lecture over declining news standards. And before a coffee fetcher e-mails -- and pisses off Ava -- to note that Ava and I write TV commentaries at The Third Estate Sunday Review, we never asked for that and both said, when the first edition was being put together, "Oh, no, not TV." We cover it because we take a feminist look -- not 'the' -- each week. It's a popular feature that brings in readers. We'd be more than happy to drop the coverage. And especially the expectations that are built up each week. That is not just our 'beat,' it is our assigned beat. A coffee fetcher already wrote in about Sunday's piece noting that it covers daytime TV. No, little boy, it covers the issue of women not getting the credit they deserve. Genie Francis, 31 years later, finally got the credit she deserves. We're also covering Iraq. And anyone reading that just for Genie Francis also learned of Kokesh and Madden.

Here's some more reality. Brad passed on an e-mail from The Nation. We'll include the links in it for fundraising (at the magazine, we don't fundraise here):

One-half million dollars. That's what the latest round of rate-juggling by the United States Postal Service will cost The Nation in the next year. Rate increases go into effect July 15, 2007. We are fighting this increase as best we can, but even if we "win," which is a long shot, we are still facing hundreds of thousands of dollars in additional postage. Now it's time to accept the reality: The Nation needs your help and we need it now. Click here. Here's the history of this situation:
In an unprecedented move, postal regulators rejected the rate plan submitted by the United States Postal Service in favor of a complex scheme designed by Time Warner, the country's largest publisher!
The new plan gave much lower increases, or in some cases decreases, to mega-magazines like Time Warner's own Time, People and Sports Illustrated, shifting the burden to smaller publications like The Nation.

Well, if it's a pressing issue (I believe it is), maybe the editor and publisher should have been hitting on that topic repeatedly and not Water Cooler topics. Leadership is supposed to come at the top. If you're facing a half-million dollar increase, you either have no time to dither about American Idol or you better be working the rate increase into that post with the hope that someone coming by for American Idol will also learn about the rate increase.

We were given just eight working days to prepare a response to the 758-page rate plan before it was declared a fait accompli. The result: an 18% increase in postal costs for The Nation. Please help now. For the media mastodons that increasingly control the information that gets out to you and their Washington flacks, it's just business as usual. For The Nation it's a potential disaster -- but not exactly a surprise.

A disaster? Repeating, the editor and publisher should not have wasted time on Joe-mentum and on American Idol.

We have two choices: start cutting back on our investigative reporting and coverage of what’s missing in the mainstream/corporate media, and on our efforts to expand our outreach programs to students and decision-makers.

Brad asked, "What investigative reporting?" Well there was an article on DiFi that was funded by The Nation even if nothing on it ever appeared in The Nation.

Or hope that friends and supporters like you will help us fill the shortfall. Click here to help. Given the state of things in this country at this time, and a historically decisive election on the horizon, the timing couldn't be more critical. We need your help, if you can possibly give it, and we need it now. In advance, accept our very real gratitude.
Sincerely
Teresa Stack, President

At another time, the magazine could count on checks flooding in. Right now, it may be very hard to get that cash together. (I'm not saying anyone shouldn't contribute. The magazine's in a very hideous phase but, and this is true even with KvH at the helm, it could pull itself out.)

P.S. We will shortly be inviting you to a very special phone conference to discuss the postal rate increase issue in more depth. Join your fellow Nation readers, Nation editors and writers, as well as special guest experts and learn more about this serious issue. Stay tuned!

So, you'll learn about it on a phone call -- a conference call -- as opposed to at the magazine. If they want to raise funds, they need to prove they deserve them to their readers and the only way they can do that is by getting serious. That's not hop around the world from topic to topic. That's not by ignoring the arts (Richard Goldstein last appeared in what issue?). And it's certainly not going to happen by treating War As An After Thought (Mike's phrase).

I am offended by what passes for coverage in most of the magazine and offended that I've had to address it repeatedly because it's that bad. Iraq was the deciding factor in the 2006 election. That a political weekly thinks they can reduce Iraq to a minor topic goes a long way towards explaining my frustrations with the magazine.

If Katrina vanden Heuvel is not up to the job, she needs to step down. If she can handle it, she needs to demonstrate it real quick. You can't beg for money and expect people to pay it when the magazine refuses to regularly address the illegal war. If she wants to turn it around and pull it off, I will be the first to applaud her publicly. But since the 2004 elections, Iraq has hardly registered in the magazine. It's a topic than can be brought up when nothing else is going on. It has not been made the leading topic by the magazine. Freelancers have learned to shop Iraq stories elsewhere. Friends say that topics other than Iraq are encouraged for the staff. The message (intended or not) comes from the top. (See Cedric's "They drank the kool-aid" and Wally's "THIS JUST IN! JONESTOWN II ENDS IN BOREDOM!" for a humorous take.)

I was honestly thrilled for KvH when the news came down. But there is no leadership going on at a magazine that can't address the issue that resonated with the voters, the issue that especially needs addressing because the illegal war drags on, people die daily and the right and the centrists aren't being silent. While The Nation plays mute, plans are put foward (splitting Iraq up, for one) and the 'leading magazine' is not in there fighting. That's disappointing and it's disgusting. And it's one more reason the illegal war drags on.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.


iraq
and the war drags on
donovan
jeremy brecher
brendan smith
liam madden
adam kokesh
nigel yin
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
the daily jot
cedrics big mix
mikey likes it
the third estate sunday review