Saturday, August 22, 2009

Nouri talks about his "open war"

Reuters reports Nouri al-Maliki, thug of the occupation, went on state television in Iraq today and spoke. He's quoted stating:

I want to tell the Iraqi people we are still in an open war against them. I reassure the Iraqi people that the security forces can still keep up the battle and achieve victory despite breaches here and there.

"Them" is being interpreted to mean 'terrorists'; however, it's probably not a mistake to read 'them' in the normal sense of the sentence: "I want to tell the Iraqi people we are still in an open war against them." Meanwhile Iraq's Foreign Minister also issued statements today. Khalid al-Ansary, Muhanad Mohammed, Michael Christie and Andrew Roche (Reuters) explain he denounced Nouri's previous decision (now on hold) to take down the Bremer walls throughout Baghdad and that he noted how it appeared to him that there was collaboration between whomever planned Wednesday's bombing attacks in Baghdad and Iraqi security forces. He is quoted stating, "According to our information, there has even been collaboration between security officers and the murderers and killers."

Wow. That would mean Nouri's alleged Ba'athis cell that he insists is responsible would have roots and tentacles throughout Iraq's security forces. Time for Nouri to go off another one of his paranoid benders.

Violence continued today. Reuters notes a Baghdad roadside bombing left two people injured, a Kirkuk roadside bombing left an Iraqi soldier injured, a Mosul roadside bombing resulted in three people being injured, a Baghdad checkpoint attack resulted in 2 Iraqi soldiers being killed and a third being wounded and 1 person was shot dead in Mosul. Xinhua reports 1 Iraqi soldier killed in a bombing outside Baquba which also left four other Iraqi soldiers wounded.

Meanwhile the New York Times (not surprisingly) weighs in finally on Camp Ashraf today with a we're-not-sure-what-to-say-but-we-sure-say-it-poorly. Yes, they can!

That's most obvious in this section of the editorial, "Residents say that Washington has now betrayed that commitment. They have a legitimate complaint. But the MEK has also made no effort to reduce tensions with the Iraqis." Gee, residents confined to a camp haven't reduced tensions. Let's see, they denounced violence, as the editorial admits, so exactly what were they supposed to do. Oh, I know! They could have traveled throughout Iraq via astral projections and worked on 'reducing tensions' that way, right?

Has there ever been a more stupid editorial from the New York Times? The residents of Camp Ashraf are? Refugees. Anyone want to explain how it's the job of (confined) refugees to "reduce tensions" in a country? Forget the MEK, use any refugee population. Use the Haitian population in the nineties who were prevented from entering the United States. It was, apparently, the Haitian refugees responsibility, from those Guantanamo prisons, to "reduce tensions."

Camp Ashraf was assaulted July 28th. The New York Times finally weighs in with an editorial August 22nd. And to make sure they don't appear to "rash," they're eager to blame the refugees.
Susan asked that we remind about the demonstration next week against the illegal and ongoing wars:

Next week, Cindy Sheehan will join other like-minded peace activists to have a presence near the expensive resort on Martha's Vineyard where President Obama will be vacationing the week of August 23-30.
From her home in California, Ms. Sheehan released this statement:
"There are several things that we wish to accomplish with this protest on Martha's Vineyard.

First of all, no good social or economic change will come about with the continuation or escalation of the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. We simply can't afford to continue this tragically expensive foreign policy.
Secondly, we as a movement need to continue calling for an immediate end to the occupations even when there is a Democrat in the Oval Office. There is still no Noble Cause no matter how we examine the policies.
Thirdly, the body bags aren't taking a vacation and as the US led violence surges in Afghanistan and Pakistan, so are the needless deaths on every side.
And, finally, if the right-wing can force the government to drop any kind of public option or government supported health care, then we need to exert the same kind of pressure to force a speedy end to the occupations."
Cindy Sheehan will arrive on the Vineyard on Tuesday, August 25th.

For more information, or to request an interview with Cindy Sheehan please contact:
Laurie Dobson 604-8988
Bruce Marshall 767-6079

Now we're going to talk Kat. Kat's done more reviews in 2009 than she's done any other year here. Since the start of the year, she's written the following pieces:

Elvis Costello Goes Country
Regina Spektor Far
Ben Harper White Lies For Dark Times
Tori Amos Abnormally Attracted to Sin
David Saw Broken Down Figure
Stevie Nicks The Soundstage Sessions
Joshua Radin Simple Beauty
U2 No Line On The Horizon
Charity albums
Schuyler Fisk
Tracy Chapman Our Bright Future
Bruce Springsteen Working On a Dream
Best of Janis Ian
Phoebe Snow Live
2008 in Music

She'd mentioned that there was an album she wanted to review and since we're really not on the road this month (we're just speaking in California which means day-trips at worst), members are e-mailing asking where's that review!

We all love Kat's writing. But we need to remember she has a life. Right now she's working on her photography and making this month the work-month so she can go on the road the rest of the months. When she writes a review, it's not something she grinds out. She feels she has something to say and that something needs to be said, so she writes a review.

The album she planned to review will probably fall by the wayside because she's been listening to it for several weeks now and has "talked it to death" (her words). But.

But everyone e-mailing can expect a review tonight. Kat's writing it in long hand right now. She just heard a CD this morning and wants to review it. (It is not a 'rave.') It'll go up later tonight. I'll probably type it up to help out. So that's something to be excited about but, please, do not immediately go to, "Where's the next review, Kat? Huh? Where's the next review?" She came over this morning and was digging around looking for something new to listen to. She wasn't planning on doing a review, just looking for some new music. It'll go up tonight and that's "tonight." Tonight's the all night writing session for Third. Meaning it may go up here before midnight or a little after depending upon when we take our first break.

The e-mail address for this site is