Saturday, February 07, 2009

Kat's Korner: Springsteen's serving up a dud

Kat: Adam Sandler used to do a parody of Bruce Springsteen on Saturday Night Live, a parody of love. What happens when love is tossed out of the equation? And what happens when it's a self-parody? Those are questions that Bruce's new album, Working On a Dream, raises. Repeatedly.

bug

Take the first track. Over what he hopes sound John Ford-ish but really is just the love theme to St. Elmo's Fire, Bruce babbles and wheezes through lyrics so embarrassing you're only boggled that he didn't toss in his favorite (and lame) phrase of "wee-wee hours." The phrase actually would have fit for a change since, if he's not sending himself up, he appears to be writing for the next Rugrats movie:


He was born a little baby on the Appalachian Trail
At six month he'd done three months in jail
He robbed a bank in his diapers
And his little bare baby feet
All he said was folks
My name is Outlaw Pete
I'm Outlaw Pete
Can you hear me?

Yes, Bruce, I can, though I wish I couldn't and you might wish that soon as well. At 59-years-old (he turns 60 later this year), I'm really not sure Bruce should be singing he's Outlaw Pete, a bank robber in diapers, unless he's thinking of some sort of TV ad tie-in with Depends adult diapers.

Bad lyrics and a rip-off of the love theme to St. Elmo's -- the mid-section of the song. Can it get worse? Yes. For example he can take the opening of the love theme to St. Elmo's (I'm really starting to fear Bruce last got out of the house in 1985) and use it for "Queen of the Supermarket."

The title tells you just how awful the song is going to be but still you don't fully believe it until he starts singing:

There's a wonderful world where all you desire
And everything you long for is at your finger tips
Where the bittersweet taste of life is at your lips
Where aisles and aisles of dreams await you
And the cool promise of ecstasy fills the air
At the end of each working day
She's waiting there
I'm in love with the queen of the supermarket

Uh, Bruce, I don't know where you shop but on good trips, baked goods fill the air of my supermarket and, on a bad trip, spoiled yogurt or some other milk product. Possibly before writing about a supermarket, you might try shopping in one? Just a thought, but one that might have prevented you from writing Rogers & Clark's follow up to "Wardrobe Of Love." Don't believe me? The Ishtar singing duo played by Warren Beatty and Dustin Hoffman offered up, "She said come look, there's a wardrobe of love in my eyes, take your time look around and see if there's something your size." Of course, the difference is, Beatty and Hoffman are playing bad songwriters and Bruce presumably wants to be a good one.

He's in love with the supermarket queen, you understand. So he takes his "groceries and I drift away . . . a dream awaits on aisle number two." Yeah, the song and the whole album bring to mind number two. As he drones on and on, you realize that he may be in love with the supermarket queen but he's never told her. In fact he "prays for the strength to tell her" he loves her. Not since Rick Springfield asked "How Do You Talk To Girls?" has a falser pose been struck. In case Bruce is truly being sincere, let me assist: Make her your backup singer. That's how you ended your first marriage and started your second, right?

"Tomorrow Never Knows" starts with a hackneyed title, a really bad finger-picking arrangement, Bruce trying to wheeze like Dylan (the Dylan who just allowed "Blowing In The Wind" to be used in TV commercials) and never has a thing to say deeper than the title. If you're begging for comparisons to Lennon & McCartney with your choice of song title, it's probably a good idea to have something actually worth saying.

When not borrowing from St. Elmo's Fire, Ishtar or the Beatles, Bruce apparently takes his inspiration from The Carol Burnett Show. How else to explain "Surprise, Surprise"? Yeah, I saw that skit where Carol, as Eunice, says "Surprise, surprise." She's very funny. Carol's a wonderful comedian. But is Bruce trying to make us laugh?

Well surprise, surprise, surprise, surprise
Yeah surprise, surprise, surprise, surprise
Well surprise, surprise, surprise, surprise
Come on open your eyes
And let your love shine down
Well surprise, surprise, surprise, surprise
Yeah surprise, surprise, surprise, surprise
Well surprise, surprise, surprise, surprise
Come on open your eyes
And let your love shine down.

That's how the song opens and if you're thinking, "Well, it has to get better," you haven't heard it. Hint, next two lines are, "Well today is your birthday, We've traveled so far, we too . . ." As Phyllis Diller would say, "That's a personal call." And boring to all the rest of us. There's a little life in "Last Carnival" if you enjoy it when professional singers can't reach a note and their voices crack. If that's your bag, by all means enjoy Crackling Brucie trying to sing "train" and "break" throughout the song.

He nods to Paul Simon's "One Trick Pony" in what can be seen as his sole attempt at confessional songwriting: "If you've ever seen a one trick pony, then you've seen me." That's "The Wrestler" and, in it, he asks, "Tell me friend, can you ask for anything more?" How 'bout an album with something other than mindless lyrics, musical rip-offs and a third grader's point-of-view?

Meanwhile, the title track is like a slowed down version of a Bruce-penned Donna Summer song. No, not "Cover Me." He wrote that for her, but I mean the one she recorded, "Protection." Double the speed of "Working On a Dream" and it's pretty much that. Doubling up the speed would allow him to be done singing "dree-um" a lot quicker and he might be able to hold the note he loses currently. Does no one have the guts to tell the 'Boss' when he sings flat? It shouldn't take anyone to tell him he missed the phrase so, since he rarely makes it to the "mm" of "dream," maybe they figured telling him he was flat wouldn't have made a difference either? As you listen to him wheeze his way through the simplest three note phrase and never complete it, you start to wonder if he has any breath control left? The whistle in "Working On a Dream" will only have you wondering more.

Mainly, you'll grasp this is the worst album of the year. It's the worst musically, vocally, lyrically. If they gave Golden Raspberries for music, Bruce would go home with every last one. He can't even write a song anymore. You grasp that when you listen to "What Love Can Do." This song that never seems to end (for 2:56, it sure seems a lot longer), has Bruce encountering a girlfriend or wife (presumably a woman), telling her "the remedies you've taken are all in vain, let me show you what love can do." That's the first verse and start of the chorus.

What does a songwriter do? A real one allows the speaker to, indeed, "show you what love can do." Bruce never gets around to that. He offers a lot of rhyming lines about what's gone wrong in the woman's life, but he never gets around to showing her what love can do. I don't know if he's lost it for good or if it's temporary, but he shows up this go-round with about less than half the talent of the worst Springsteen impersonator.

I opened noting Adam Sandler's parody of Bruce and I'll close with a question that Bruce might have asked in better times, "Is a parody a parody if it don't get laughs, or is it something worse?"
----------
[Illustration by Betty's oldest son.]









The US military announces another death

Today the US military announced: "TIKRIT, Iraq -- A U.S. Soldier died as a result of a non-combat related injury near Balad Ruz, Iraq, Feb. 6. The name of the deceased is being withheld pending notification of next of kin and release by the Department of Defense. The incident is under investigation." This is the first announced death for the month of February and brings the total number of US service members killed in Iraq to 4238.



In today's New York Times, Stephen Farrell and Alissa J. Rubin serve up "Italian Sightseer's Iraq Tour: Take Your Photos and Leave" about Luca Marchio causing a commotion while visiting the Falluja police station . Marchio states, "I am a toursit. I want to see the most important cities in the country. That is the reason why I am here now. I want to see and understand the reality because I have never been here before, and I think every country in the world must be seen." He can't see Falluja overnight as he was advised to leave town. He ended up being 'detained' ("for his own safety") and note that one "American marine working with the police suggested taking him to the city limits and dropping him where Falluja met the main highway." Note that is not what Americans do in other countries, especially ones where allegedly democracy is emerging. When an American makes such an insulting and dumb ass statement is indicates to everyone that even those countries with democracy do not value it. Should Marchio have gone to Iraq? It's not illegal. There is no travel ban to Iraq. On top of that, he entered the country using his passport and crossing through the border checkpoints. Could he have gotten killed? Unless he's the luckiest person on the face of the earth, he most likely would have. But that doesn't excuse American representatives from making anti-democratic and dumb ass statements in a foreign country when surrounded by foreign officials attempting to figure out what to do with someone. That marine disgraced his or her self and disgraced the US. When an American spits on democracy in Iraq, it has a huge effect and indicates to Iraqi officials that democracy is nothing but a bunch of empty words. As a private citizen, the marine could have done whatever they wished. As someone sent to Iraq by the US government, he or she needs to always remember that they help set the tone, that they send the cues and that Iraqis are watching them.





Military Families Speak Out is in the midst of DC action that continues through Monday:

Come to Washington February 6-9 to demand "The Change WE Need"
President Elect Obama opposed the war in Iraq before it started, calling it a "dumb war." But he and his advisors have also said that they plan to spread the return of combat troops from that "dumb war" out over sixteen months and to keep
tens of thousands of other troops on the ground in Iraq indefinitely.
So from February 6-9, MFSO will be traveling to Washington to bring the new President and new Congress the message that it is long past time to bring all our troops home from Iraq. The four days of events will include:
* A
teach-in featuring the voices of military families, veterans, and Iraqis, explaining the need for an immediate and complete end to the war in Iraq -- and the human impacts of continuing the occupation. Friday, February 6 from Noon - 3:00 p.m. at Mott House, 122 Maryland Avenue.
* A solemn procession from Arlington National Cemetary to the White House beginning at 11:00 a.m. on Saturday, February 7. Meet at the front gate of the cemetery right outside the exit of the Arlington Metro stop. Please arrive early.
* A "Meet and Greet" and Legislative Briefing from 3:00 - 7:00 p.m. on Sunday, February 8 at the Mariott Metro Center.
* Lobbying members of Congress to end the war in Iraq. Meet in the cafeteria of the Rayburn House Office Building at 9:00 a.m. Monday, February 9.


Vic notes Darrell Bellaart's "War deserter's mom worries about death penalty" (Nanaimo Daily News):

Annie Nichols imagines the worst for her adopted son, U.S. Army deserter Cliff Cornell, when he turns himself in to the American government on Tuesday.
"They will probably court-martial him. What happens from there I don't know," Nichols said by telephone from Mountain Home, Ark. "It can be anything from 'you can go home' to life in federal prison. In wartime, it can be a death sentence."
Cornell, a quiet, unassuming man, has fallen into the unlikely role of firebrand in the divisive issue of whether deserters fit into Canada's longstanding tradition of harbouring conscientious objectors. Because they willingly signed up, some critics say deserters who avoid the battlefield are cowards.



The following community sites updated last night:


Cedric's Big Mix
The fear card
11 hours ago

The Daily Jot
THIS JUST IN! FEAR NOT HOPE!
11 hours ago

Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude
green party news
12 hours ago

Mikey Likes It!
Dennis Loo and this week's Dumb Ass pick
12 hours ago

SICKOFITRADLZ
The Cuban Five
12 hours ago

Thomas Friedman is a Great Man
Washington Week
12 hours ago

Trina's Kitchen
Sauerkraut and weinies in the Kitchen
12 hours ago

Ruth's Report
Iraq
12 hours ago

Oh Boy It Never Ends
The Cheap Detective
12 hours ago

Like Maria Said Paz
Striking in France, John Pilger
12 hours ago

Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills)
Kellogs, FDA, etc.
12 hours ago

Kat hopes to do two album reviews this month and ideally would like to have them completed this weekend (and posted here). She said to word it that way.

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

iraq
the new york times
alissa j. rubin
stephen farrell
cliff cornell

When 'emerging' news emerged some time ago

In this morning's New York Times, Alissa J. Rubin offers "U.S. Military Violated Security Agreement Twice in 2 Weeks, Iraqi Leaders say" and the most recent time, according to 'Iraqi leaders' was shooting "a 58-year-old man" yesterday in Kirkuk (from yesterday's snapshot, "Reuters reports, "U.S. and Iraqi security forces killed a civilian and arrested six suspected militants in raids on towns southwest of Kirkuk".). Rubin describes the shooting as "an American raid" and says the second incident is "when Americans soldiers fatally shot an Iraqi couple in their home near Kirkuk after the wife reached for a pisotl hidden under a mattress." She says this "was reported at the time" but only now are allegations surfacing that it was not coorinated with the Iraqi government.



Oh really? Is that to be the official story?



"The shooting was reported at the time, but the charges of failure to coordinate emerged on Friday . . ." Emerged on Friday?



The couple was shot dead January 24th (their daughter was wounded). From January 25th's "And the war drags on . . .:"



In today's New York Times, Timothy Williams reports on a Saturday raid by US forces in Hawija in which a husband and wife were killed by US forces and their young daughter was wounded. The house raid, Williams reports, required helicopters and was done at two in the morning. For killing the wife, the official story is she reached for something and, later, a gun was allegedly found under a mattress. After he saw his wife slaughtered, the husband went after the US soldiers and was killed. Ahlam Dhia, the eight-year-old daughter, was shot by US soldiers for no official reason cited and she is quoted stating, "They killed my mother and father right in front of me. I was under the blanket. I heard my mom screaming, and I started to cry." Based on descriptions, Williams hypothesizes the soldiers were American Special Ops. It is interesting that when Iraq supposedly has control over their country, US forces -- not Iraqi forces or, for that matter, US forces and Iraqi forces -- are conducting house raids. Ned Parker and Saif Hameed (Los Angeles Times) report, "The chairman of the Hawija Council said the woman's husband, Dhia Hussein, had not been linked to Al Qaeda in Iraq, as the U.S. military claimed" and quote Hussein Ali Salih (the chair) stating, "I personally know Col. Dhia Hussein; he is one of the former army officers and he was trying to return to the new Iraqi army. He has no affiliations with any armed groups." NPR's Lourdes Garcia-Navarro (All Things Considered -- link has video and text) reports:

The U.S. military said the operation was conducted with and approved by Iraq's security forces, as stipulated by a security agreement that went into effect at the beginning of the year. But a senior Iraqi government spokesman said there were no Iraqi forces present and is calling for an investigation of the deaths.

"The Americans were on foot," said Hussein Ali, the father of the man who was killed. "They threw percussion hand grenades at the door, then they started shooting. When I got inside the house, the Americans were gone. I found [my son and daughter-in-law] in the bedroom, dead beside each other. They shot my son at close range. His blood was all over the wall."

Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) waits until paragraph eight to note that Iraqi officials say they did not approve the raid and that it wasn't an Iraqi operation. The first seven paragraphs are the US military's assertion (presented as fact) that the US military, with Iraqi forces and Iraqi approval, conducted the house raid. China's Xinhau cites an unnamed police source, "The source also said that local security forces were not informed about the raid and that the reasons behind the killings are unclear yet."



So the day after the shooting, you have at least Xinhau, NPR and McClatchy noting that the raids were not coordinated with the Iraqis and Rubin wants to say the charge emerged yesterday? That's not reality.



The 58-year-old man was a ministry employee with the government. His sixteen-year-old son Nihad Muhammed Hassan al-Bachary staes, "The American forces stormed into our house, and they handcuffed me, my two brothers and my uncle. When my father came out of his room, they opened fire on him point blank and then they stuffed his body in a large, black plastic bag."

Rubin then adds:



The soldiers who came in were directed by an American in a military unifiorm, the son said, but unlike most soldiers, he had a beard. The other armed men with him were wearing masks and Iraqi commando uniforms and speaking in "Kurdish and inaccurate Arabic," the son said. He said that his father was an Agriculture Ministry employee, and that several other family members were detained elsewhere in the village at the same time.


It keeps happening because it's not called out. And arriving tody to underscore that point is Samir Sumaida'ie's "The Promise In Iraq's Rebirth" (Washington Post column) which is fully of frothy nonsense like this:

Those who had descended upon Iraq to defeat the United States through terrorism, initially finding favor and support from the "rejectionists," have themselves been rejected by the Iraqi people. Their strategy to ignite a sectarian civil war has failed. And though they still pose a threat to security, those extremist Islamists were comprehensively and strategically defeated in a Muslim country, a development of profound significance.

Sumaida'ie is not only Iraq's US ambassador, he's also one of those exiles that really cashed in after the invasion. Since the invasion, he's held one cushy position after another. Don't you just love these "Men of Iraq" (and they're all men) who stand so bravely today . . . after cowering in exile for decades, after being too chicken s**t to stage their own attack on Iraq so they helped lie the US into an illegal war. They are as guilty as the Bully Boy and it's the real shame of Iraq that their puppet government is made up of so many damn cowards who chose to flee the country (like most, Sumaida'ie went to England) and live in exile for decades. But a foreign military goes in and topples Saddam Hussein and suddenly all the 'brave' chickens come home to roost.

Sumaida'ie is a pathetic liar and if you doubt that, grasp he has one less son today.

Why is that? In what was an illegal raid, the US military shot and killed his son.

But Sumaida'ie is happy to whore himself out (and if that seems especially harsh, you ought to hear his family that remains in England's remarks) for the US because they are the puppet masters and he wants to be a puppet.

One very real reason Iraq cannot expell the US is that there are no independent players, only exiles put in place by the US, exiles beholden to the US who have no problem staying silent as Iraqi's children are slaughtered because they have no problem staying silent when it's their own children. Sumaida'ie's son is never coming back but the coins they toss at him keep Sumaida'ie dancing. Dance, Fools, Dance. (That's the title of a very early Joan Crawford film and for those who have forgetten, June 27th of last year saw one of Nouri al-Maliki's own relatives killed by US Special Forces in a Karbala raid and yet the puppet continues dancing for his American masters.)

Military Families Speak Out is in the midst of DC action:


Come to Washington February 6-9 to demand "The Change WE Need"
President Elect Obama opposed the war in Iraq before it started, calling it a "dumb war." But he and his advisors have also said that they plan to spread the return of combat troops from that "dumb war" out over sixteen months and to keep
tens of thousands of other troops on the ground in Iraq indefinitely.
So from February 6-9, MFSO will be traveling to Washington to bring the new President and new Congress the message that it is long past time to bring all our troops home from Iraq. The four days of events will include:
* A
teach-in featuring the voices of military families, veterans, and Iraqis, explaining the need for an immediate and complete end to the war in Iraq -- and the human impacts of continuing the occupation. Friday, February 6 from Noon - 3:00 p.m. at Mott House, 122 Maryland Avenue.
* A solemn procession from Arlington National Cemetary to the White House beginning at 11:00 a.m. on Saturday, February 7. Meet at the front gate of the cemetery right outside the exit of the Arlington Metro stop. Please arrive early.
* A "Meet and Greet" and Legislative Briefing from 3:00 - 7:00 p.m. on Sunday, February 8 at the Mariott Metro Center.
* Lobbying members of Congress to end the war in Iraq. Meet in the cafeteria of the Rayburn House Office Building at 9:00 a.m. Monday, February 9.



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

iraq

the new york times

alissa j. rubin


ned parker



the los angeles times

anthony shadid

the washington post

npr



lourdes garcia-navarro
military families speak out

Friday, February 06, 2009

Iraq snapshot

Friday, February 6, 2009.  Chaos and violence continue, Barack moves back his "immediately" pledge on Iraq, Military Families Speak Up launch their DC action, US war resister Cliff Cornell has returned to the US from Canada, the (partial) election results are sifted through, and more.
 
Jon Allen (People's Weekly World News) reports on a teach-in entitled "War's Real Impact: Our Voices" that a number of groups staged in Chicago:
 
Eugene Cherry joined the army at the age of 19 in the hopes of getting money for college. Despite being a good student, he found his options in his impoverished south side neighborhood limited. "I thought the military would be my ticket out, but I found an organization based on racism, sexism and misogyny" he testified before the assembled audience. Later he spoke of "[a] culture of violence and racism" that the military promotes within its ranks. These pressures proved to be too much for Sherry. He deserted for 16 months after being refused mental health support by the army. "I found myself fighting and oppressing a group of people in the name of the war on terror" concluded his remarks to the gathering.   
The plight of women in the armed forces proved to be a recurring theme. Patricia McCann, a National Guardsman deployed in 2003, noted during her testimony that instances of sexual assault and sexual harassment within the armed forces have risen but court-martials for these crimes have declined. Another veteran (and current Chicago police officer), Lisa Zepeda, added that victims of assault have no outside authority they can report assaults to; a victim must go through her immediate superior within her unit.
 
Allen notes that US House Rep "Jan Schakowasky and several Chicago aldermen also took the floor and addressed the audeince.  Representative Jesse Jackson Jr. and Illinois Senator Roland Burris also sent staff members to reaffirm their support of bringing the troops home."
 
Military Families Speak Out  was among the organizations participating in the Chicago event and today they started a DC action that will run through Monday:

Come to Washington February 6-9 to demand "The Change WE Need"
President Elect Obama opposed the war in Iraq before it started, calling it a "dumb war." But he and his advisors have also said that they plan to spread the return of combat troops from that "dumb war" out over sixteen months and to keep tens of thousands of other troops on the ground in Iraq indefinitely.
So from February 6-9, MFSO will be traveling to Washington to bring the new President and new Congress the message that it is long past time to bring all our troops home from Iraq. The four days of events will include:
* A teach-in featuring the voices of military families, veterans, and Iraqis, explaining the need for an immediate and complete end to the war in Iraq -- and the human impacts of continuing the occupation. Friday, February 6 from Noon - 3:00 p.m. at Mott House, 122 Maryland Avenue.
* A solemn procession from Arlington National Cemetary to the White House beginning at 11:00 a.m. on Saturday, February 7. Meet at the front gate of the cemetery right outside the exit of the Arlington Metro stop. Please arrive early.
* A "Meet and Greet" and Legislative Briefing from 3:00 - 7:00 p.m. on Sunday, February 8 at the Mariott Metro Center.     
* Lobbying members of Congress to end the war in Iraq. Meet in the cafeteria of the Rayburn House Office Building at 9:00 a.m. Monday, February 9.

The teach-in takes place this afternoon. Actions continue through Monday.   Meanwhile US war resister Andre Shepherd is seeking asylumn in Germany (we last noted Andre in  Wednesday's snapshot). Wednesday, he was making his case for asylum to Germany's Federal Office for Migration and Refugees. Andy Eckardt (NBC News) offers a strong report on Andre who explains, "When I enlisted in 2004 and later was sent to Iraq, I believed I was doing the right thing.  But then, like other comrades around me, I started questioning why we were there and what we were fighting for. . . . My job was harmless until I factored in the amount of death and destruction those helicopters caused to civilians every day.  The government made us believe we would be welcomed as heroes in Iraq, but we saw nothing but hostility from the Iraqis that came to work for us, they wanted to kill us."  Meanwhile James M. Brnaum's GI Rights Lawyer.com explained yesterday:
 
 
U.S. war resister Cliff Cornell surrendered himself to U.S. border police on Wednesday after being ordered to leave Canada. He was promptly arrested for being AWOL from the U.S. Army, and is now being held at the Whatcom County Jail in Bellingham, Washington, twenty miles south of the U.S.-Canada border.       
Cornell's attorney and supporters expressed outrage at the arrest.          
"Clifford Cornell came back to the United States so that he could voluntarily return to his old unit at Fort Stewart," stated attorney James Branum. "He stated this intention to the Border Patrol, both verbally and in writing, by way of a letter I drafted on his behalf. I am disappointed that the Border Patrol chose to arrest my client and place him into a county jail with general population prisoners. This should not have happened."         
Cornell, 28, fled to Canada four years ago after his Army artillery unit was ordered to Iraq. But despite a popular outcry to provide sanctuary to soldiers who refuse to fight in illegal wars, Canada's Conservative government is pressing ahead with deportations. Cornell, an Arkansas native, had come to call British Columbia home. But he now faces a possible court martial and imprisonment in the United States.   
"Cliff Cornell should not be going to jail," said Gerry Condon, director of Project Safe Haven, a war resister advocacy group. "He had the guts to follow his conscience and obey international law," continued Condon. "President Obama should grant amnesty to Cliff Cornell and all war resisters."    
Cornell is the second Iraq War resister to be held in the Whatcom County Jail. He follows Robin Long, who was deported from Canada in July. Long is now serving a 15-month prison sentence at Miramar Naval Consolidated Brig near San Diego.           
"We want Bellingham to be a Sanctuary City for war resisters," said Gene Marx of Veterans For Peace, "not a way station for war resisters being sent to prison." Bellingham is known for being a progressive city, having passed two anti-war resolutions through its city council.    
A public vigil in support of Cliff Cornell will be held outside of the County jail on Thursday from 10 am -- 1pm, organized by the Whatcom Peace and Justice Center.    
A legal defense fund for Cliff Cornell is being established by Courage To Resist, a war resister support group, at www.couragetoresist.org.         
CONTACT:              
Marie Marchand, Executive Director, Whatcom Peace & Justice Center
(360) 734-0217 (office); (434) 249-5957 (cell), WhatcomPJC(at)fidalgo.net
Gene Marx, Bellingham Veterans For Peace, Chapter 111, 253-653-4423 (cell)
Gerry Condon, Project Safe Haven, 206-499-1220 (cell),
projectsafehaven(at)hotmail.com
           
 
In an update, AP reports that Cliff is being allowed to travel "by bus to Georgia" and will "turn himself in Tuesday at the Army base near Savannah."   And, as Gerry Condon stated, Barack Obama should grant amnesty to all war resisters.  But the reality is Barack's not even in a rush to end the illegal war.
 
Staying with the White House, US vice president Joe Biden is headed to Germany.  Before he left the US today, he made some public remarks.  Edward Epstein (CQ) reports, "He listed the economic crisis and ongoing fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan as the most pressing issues.  Biden used a football analogy to describe the situation in Iraq, saying the United States is 'on the 20-yard-line' and 'driving toward the goal'." Jared Allen (The Hill) states the Biden "admitted that any victory is far from certain, and he reiterated that a victory through military means alone is unattainable."  AFP quotes him stating, "Our administration is going to have to be very deeply involved not only keeping the commitment that we've made drawing down our troops in an orderly fashion consistent with what we said."
 
McClatchy Newspapers' Nancy A. Youssef is convinced that Barack's decision to request a variety of options for 'withdrawal' from Iraq is "the first indication that the Obama administration may be willing to abandon a campaign promise of a 16-month withdrawal."  Or it may be Barack wanting to see all options, wanting to check if opinions ever see withdrawal possible (would you listen to someone's opinion if they didn't think the US could pull out in 16, 19 or even 23 months?).  Who knows.  But withdrawal' is not withdrawl. It is "combat" troops only. The White House unofficially says the number left behind would be approximately 70,000. That's not withdrawal.  Youssef reports, "Obama is likely to announce his strategy for Iraq by mid-March, a senior administration official told McClatchy."  That would be an indication of a broken promise and Youssef misses that point. At Hopey Changey "Three Facts about Barack Obama and Iraq" which includes this 'fact:' "Immediately upon taking office, Obama will give his Secretary of Defense and military commanders a new mission in Iraq; successfully ending the war.  The removal of our troops will be responsible and phased." 
 
What did Barack promise? "Immediately upon taking office, Obama will give his Secretary of Defense and military commanders a new mission in Iraq: successfully ending the war. The removal of our troops will be responsible and phased." Mid-March? Mid-March is "immediately upon taking office"? Immediately upon taking office was when Barack was sworn in. That was last month. It's February. And a White House source is telling McClatchy it will be mid-March before anything's announced. Another case where "Barack kicks the can" and here he's promised "immediately upon taking office". (I have no idea who Nancy Youssef spoke to and this morning I'm being told that is not correct and that Barack will be making an announcement "this month" on Iraq. He may or he may not. But Youssef didn't make up that source. Even if an announcement is made this month, as two insisted this morning, the fact that some White House insider would tell Youssef it wouldn't be until mid-March goes to how unimportant Iraq is in the Obama White House. And "this month" would not be "immediately upon taking office".)
 
 
"Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's strong performance in Iraq's provincial elections was also a victory for American goals." No. al-Maliki wasn't a candidate. That's the lede to Sudarsan Raghavan and Ernesto Londono's Washington Post article and it's incorrect and they are not the only reporters/outlet to get it so wrong.

Nouri al-Maliki was not a candidate in provincial elections. These, as Londono himself has explained, are the equivalent of state legislature elections in the US. Did anyone assert that victory for Republicans in (pick one of fifty states) in (pick 2001 through 2007) was a victory for George W. Bush? No.

al-Maliki wanted to get some press and wanted to make the elections about him. He estimated a minimum of 70% of registered Iraqis would turn out. (51% did.) He thought this was going to be his big moment on the international scene.

For a reporter, it is very tempting to make it about al-Maliki for a number of reasons. For example, making provincial elections about the prime minister frees you of having to . . . cover the actual candidates. And there were 440 winners -- none of whom were named "Nouri al-Maliki." It's so much easier to stamp "al-Maliki Victory" and be done with it. This afternoon Alissa J. Rubin (at the International Herald Tirbune) focuses on Yusef Majid al-Habboubi who "managed to defeat not only the religious parties who controlled the province of Karbala but also Maliki's preferred candidates by a 2-1 margin in one of the bigger surprises in the provincial elections last week." In the preliminatry vote, Rubin explains, it appears al-Habboubi has 17% of the vote over twice what "the next two closest parties" appeared to have received.

This morning, Rubin's "Prime Ministers Party Wins in Iraqi Vote but Will Need to Form Coalitions" (New York Times) did a little better than the Post. The headline writer captures it and Rubin does as well for most of her article; however, sentences like the following trip her up: "In Baghdad, where Mr. Maliki ran a strongly nationalist campaign, he appeared to have had some success in winning votes from Sunnis, but in the Sunni-majority provinces to the north, his party's slate barely made a showing." He ran a strong nationalist campaign? And how many votes did he receive? What did he say in his victory speech? When will he be sworn in?

Here's reality, if you're going to wrongly make the provincial elections about Nouri al-Maliki, you're going to have to judge the success or failure of al-Maliki and the reality is "his party's slate barely made a showing" in the north. The reality is that Iraq has 18 provinces -- three of which have scheduled votes for this spring -- and to claim al-Maliki has 'won' a national campaign is not only premature, it doesn't even jibe with the actual (preliminary) results.

Raghavan and Londono tell you that the Dawa Party (al-Maliki's party) "won in nine provinces" -- with "an outright plurality" (NOT a majority) in Baghdad and Basra while it was a narrow win for Dawa "in the other seven provinces." Or, as Rubin puts it, "the party fell short of being able to operate without coalition-building."

That's a win? 14 provinces held elections last Saturday and Dawa didn't squeak out a majority win in any province, it only got "an outright plurality" in two provinces and, to govern, they need to coalition-build with other parties. That's not a win. Not for al-Maliki -- who was not a candidate -- and certainly not for Dawa.

What is troubling - - and what no one's pointed out -- is that we don't expect, for example, Barack Obama to head over to Oregon when they're electing their state legislature. We don't expect him to campaign for them or butt in. That al-Maliki was allowed to hit the road (attempting to buy votes) goes to how problematic the election actually was. Rubin writes, "Some politicians have voiced concerns in recent months that too much power was being concentrated in Mr. Maliki's hands, and the election results suggested that Iraqis were not ready to rally around a single leader." It's a shame the press never bothered to question why a prime minister was attempting to repeatedly inject himself into provincial elections?

Rubin writes, "Except in areas where Sunnis were voting for the first time, the large, prominent parties with nationally known leaders won the most seats, showing the power of incumbency and the difficulties facing the newer secular parties." Well if you're going to make that observation, you might also question why the country's prime minister is interfering in provincial elections? These are not the equivalent of US Congressional elections (that would be Iraq's Parliament). That issue was never raised. But, no, it is not normal for the highest office holder in the country to try to inject her or himself into local elections. And it's not normal -- when the press is lauding 'democracy' -- for no one to question that injection. Another question to ask: Did al-Maliki's injection depress voter turnout?

In the final paragraphs of Rubin's article she notes Anbar and quotes various complaints from Tamouz ("a nongovernment organization monitoring the elections"). She tells us that the Iraqi Islamic Party is Sunni. She tells us nothing about the make up of Tamouz. Tamouz is making accusations. Readers have a right to know who they are and the use of "nongovernment" will translate to some as 'from outside Iraq.' That's not reality. But we don't get a lot of reality in this morning's election coverage. Back to the Washington Post's article, the following should never happen:

The Obama administration appeared as pleased at what did not happen on election day as it was about the results. "Any election where [there is] fairness and generally aboveboard practices, where the people get a chance to vote and they're not rioting in the streets and throwing bombs . . . is a good result," a senior administration official said in Washington. "We should celebrate that. So far, so good."

There is no reason to grant anonymity for the above. If the 'celebrator' can't be named, his or her comment doesn't need to be included. When you start granting anonymity for prattle, you're degrading journalism standards.  James Kirkup (Telegraph of London) attempts to write up Moqtada al-Sadr's political death stating, "British officials see the political setback as the latest sign of Mr Sadr's diminished importance in southern Iraq."  Diminished importantce?  Rubin says al-Sadr "did surprisingly well, given that his movement decided to support them only two weeks before the elections."  BBC notes, "Finals results are not expected to be known for weeks."  What is known is that the violence continues with Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports,  "Abdulmajeed al Nuaimi, member of the incumbent provincial in Mosul" called the police about an unidentified object outside his home that turned out to be a roadside bomb.
In other reported violence today . . .
 
Bombings? 
 
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing at a liquor store that left "material damages to the store," a Baghdad grenade tossed at a supermarket leaving "material damages to the store".
 
Shootings?
 
Reuters reports, "U.S. and Iraqi security forces killed a civilian and arrested six suspected militants in raids on towns southwest of Kirkuk". 
 
Nawal Al Samarrai is making news in Iraq.  Alsumaria Iraqi Satellite Network reports she has resigned as the Minister of Women's Affairs due to the fact that her job is for-show and contains no real power to improve anything. Waleed Ibrahim, Michael Christie and Katie Nguyen report Reuters exclusive interview with al-Samarai:

Iraq's minister of women's affairs resigned on Thursday in protest at a lack of resources to cope with "an army of widows, unemployed, oppressed and detained women" after years of sectarian warfare.
Nawal al-Samarai said her status as a secretary of state and not a full minister reflected the low emphasis given by the government to the plight of women in Iraq, once one of the most progressive countries in the Middle East for women's rights.
"This ministry with its current title cannot cope with the needs of Iraqi women," said Samarai, who was appointed in July.

The Times of India adds, "Samarrai, who took office in July 2008 and had recently chaired two committees on improving the conditions of women and another on the breast cancer, said she would seek a position where she could actually help women."  wowOwow covers the story and notes, "She has not, however, heard back from the Prime Minister's office on whether they accept her resignation or will heed her calls and provide more social services for Iraq's women."
 
Meanwhile, Barbara Starr and Mike Mount (CNN) report, "The Army said 24 soldiers are believed to have committed suicide in January alone -- six times as many as killed themselves in January 2008, according to statistics released Thursday." Stephanie Gaskell (New York Daily News) observes, "In a rare move, the Army released monthly suicide data Thursday to highlight the growing problem. Last week, Army officials said its suicide rates were at their highest in nearly 30 years. Last year, 128 soldiers committed suicide and another 15 suspected cases are pending. Last month, Army officials believe that 24 soldiers killed themselves - compared with just four in January 2008."  Lizette Alvarez (New York Times) quotes Gen Peter Chiarelli stating, "Each of these losses is a personal tragedy that is felt throughout the Army family. The trend and trajectory seen in January further heightens the seriousness and urgency that all of us must have in preventing suicides." If you mean your words, do something. If not, stop boring us. The military's had more than enough time to notice the suicides and to do something about it. It's done nothing other than a few pamphlets and a 1-800 number. The change has to come from the top in the military because it is a top-down command. Chiarelli wants to change the culture? Great. Otherwise, it's just him using a tragedy to look sympathetic. And if that's harsh, it's harsh that so many suicides have repeatedly taken place and the military has ignored the problem. Or lied about it. It wasn't all that long ago CBS News was catching the VA lying about the number of suicides. CBS Evening News' Kimberly Dozier most recently reported on the suicides in December noting that 1st Sgt Jeff McKinney's family (rightly, my opinion) called him "a casualty of war" because he served, ended up wtih PTSD and did not receive the treatment he needed and he took his own life while serving..  His father, Charles, McKinney, told Dozier, "I think he felt like he couldn't send one more broken body home, one more person home."
 
Throwing out a link for friends, Washington Unplugged is a new CBS News show.  It airs each Friday afternoon.  Haven't seen it?  It airs online only.  Face The Nation's Bob Schieffer is the anchor and I use anchor because it is news reports and, at the closing, Schieffer offers a commentary as he does on Face The Nation.  This week his comment is on Tom Daschle. Before that, Kent Conrad appears to make a fool out of himself.  Tom Daschle didn't report it to the IRS because he thought the driver and car were a "gift"?  Kent, learn the tax code.  Such a gift would have to be reported to the IRS.  Washington Unplugged streams live online Friday afternoons and archives are available seven days a week.   This week (tonight on most PBS stations) NOW on PBS offers:

Is there a solution to the foreclosure mess that's destroying communities?
Across the country, cities are in crisis because of the fallout from the mortgage mess -- property taxes are way down, and abandoned homes are bringing down property values, inviting crime, and draining government coffers. Neighborhoods are being destroyed. Yet the federal bailout money is not going directly to desperate communities and homeowners, but to local and national banks.
This week, NOW investigates the innovative way some cities are fighting back. The city of Memphis, Tennessee is suing major national lenders and banks for deceptive and discriminatory lending practices in an effort to recoup the cost of the financial mess. Other cities suing lenders for their role in the mortgage mess include Baltimore, Cleveland, Buffalo, and Birmingham.
With desperation climbing alongside debt, can the strategy help these blighted parts of America?

Washington Week also begins airing tonight on most PBS stations and joining Gwen this installment is Ceci Connolly (Washington Post), Charles Babington (AP), Michael Duffy (Time magazine) and Jackie Calmes (New York Times). And on broadcast TV (CBS) Sunday, no 60 Minutes:

Saving Flight 1549
Hero pilot Capt. Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger and his flight crew together reveal for the first time the sights, sounds and physical sensations they experienced as they pulled off an incredible water landing last month, saving the lives of all 155 people aboard US Airways Flight 1549. Katie Couric reports. (This is an extra-length story. | Watch Video
Coldplay
The British rock group that has taken its place among the most popular bands in the world gives 60 Minutes a rare look inside its world that includes a candid interview with frontman Chris Martin. Steve Kroft reports. | Watch Video
60 Minutes, Sunday, Feb. 8 at 7 p.m. ET/PT.
60 Minutes Update
Beckham Leaving The L.A. Galaxy?
David Beckham wants to leave the Los Angeles Galaxy and stay with AC Milan after his loan to the Italian club is scheduled to end next month. The 33-year-old English midfielder announced his intentions Wednesday after playing in Milan's 2-2 exhibition tie at Glasgow Rangers. Beckham is about two years into a $32.5 million, five-year contract with Major League Soccer. In March 2008, CNN's Anderson Cooper profiled Beckham for 60 Minutes, discussing his widely publicized move to Los Angeles. | Video
 
 

'Iraq Can Wait,' cries Barack

In case you missed it, I'm not a Barack cheerleader. Nor, if another Democrat or Ralph Nader or Cynthia McKinney, were in the post, would I be a cheerleader for a presidency. The president works for you, not the other way around. JFK's nonsense of "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" was nothing but hogwash intended to distract the people who should have, in fact, been asking, "What is our country doing? What are you authorizing? What are you keeping from us?" I toss all that out there for the drive-bys who may think I'm some sort of Barack enabler or apologist. Nancy A. Youssef's "Military Iraq withdrawal plans include 19-, 23-month options" (McClatchy Newspapers) argues that the military commanders preparing 19 and 23 month 'withdrawal' options is "the first indication that the Obama administration may be willing to abandon a campaign promise of a 16-month withdrawal." Really?

No, I'm not debating the "first indication" -- although we could. There have been many indications. I'm stating that they were asked to prepare multiple options and they did. And that's not even news -- although the press has largely elected to ignore that request. But that Barack would ask for multiple options does not in and of itself indicate that he may be willing to break a 'promise.'

Youssef never gets around to spelling out what the 'promise' is which is why so many of us who see Barack as the Corporatist War Hawk that he is can anticipate the reaction when the uninformed supporters who flocked to him discover 'withdrawal' is not withdrawl. It is "combat" troops only. The White House unofficially says the number left behind would be approximately 70,000. That's not withdrawal.

There is something alarming in the story, a detail that Youssef could have hung the story around and said, "This is an indication." She lets that reality just slide by. See if you can catch it:

. . .The commanders and Crocker didn't recommend an option, but instead spelled out the pros and cons of each timetable.
Obama is likely to announce his strategy for Iraq by mid-March, a senior administration official told McClatchy.
Aides to Obama who were involved in the policy review stressed that the president has made no decisions. . . .

"Obama is likely to announce his strategy for Iraq by mid-March, a senior administration official told McClatchy." That's your indication. That's the disturbing moment.

Let's dip a toe into Hopey Changey:

Iraq Image

Blueprint for Change -- Iraq

Three Facts about Barack Obama and Iraq

  • Barack Obama will responsibly end the war in Iraq:

    Immediately upon taking office, Obama will give his Secretary of Defense and military commanders a new mission in Iraq: successfully ending the war. The removal of our troops will be responsible and phased.

  • Encourage political accommodation:

    Obama and Biden will press Iraq's leaders to take responsibility for their future and to substantially spend their oil revenues on their own reconstruction.

  • Increase stability in Iraq and the region:

    Obama and Biden will launch an aggressive diplomatic effort to reach a comprehensive compact on the stability of Iraq and the region. They also will address Iraq's refugee crisis.


See the problem Nancy Youssef misses? Three facts -- Hopey Changey used "facts". And what did they promise? "Immediately upon taking office, Obama will give his Secretary of Defense and military commanders a new mission in Iraq: successfully ending the war. The removal of our troops will be responsible and phased." Mid-March? Mid-March is "immediately upon taking office"? Immediately upon taking office was when Barack was sworn in. That was last month. It's February. And a White House source is telling McClatchy it will be mid-March before anything's announced. Another case where "Barack kicks the can" and here he's promised "immediately upon taking office". (I have no idea who Nancy Youssef spoke to and this morning I'm being told that is not correct and that Barack will be making an announcement "this month" on Iraq. He may or he may not. But Youssef didn't make up that source. Even if an announcement is made this month, as two insisted this morning, the fact that some White House insider would tell Youssef it wouldn't be until mid-March goes to how unimportant Iraq is in the Obama White House.)



The photo above is of Nawal Al Samarrai whom Alsumaria Iraqi Satellite Network reports has resigned as the Minister of Women's Affairs over the fact that her job is for-show and contains no real power to improve anything. Waleed Ibrahim, Michael Christie and Katie Nguyen report Reuters exclusive interview with al-Samarai:

Iraq's minister of women's affairs resigned on Thursday in protest at a lack of resources to cope with "an army of widows, unemployed, oppressed and detained women" after years of sectarian warfare.
Nawal al-Samarai said her status as a secretary of state and not a full minister reflected the low emphasis given by the government to the plight of women in Iraq, once one of the most progressive countries in the Middle East for women's rights.
"This ministry with its current title cannot cope with the needs of Iraqi women," said Samarai, who was appointed in July.

The Times of India adds, "Samarrai, who took office in July 2008 and had recently chaired two committees on improving the conditions of women and another on the breast cancer, said she would seek a position where she could actually help women. "

We last noted war resister Andre Shepherd in Wednesday's snapshot. That was the day he was making his case for asylum to Germany's Federal Office for Migration and Refugees. Andy Eckardt (NBC News) offers a strong report on Andre:


The ring tone on Shepherd‘s mobile phone is James Brown singing "I feel good. I knew that I would," and he sounds just as enthusiastic and confident about his asylum case when he answers questions from journalists.
"When I enlisted in 2004 and later was sent to Iraq, I believed I was doing the right thing," he said. "But then, like other comrades around me, I started questioning why we were there and what we were fighting for."
Shepherd was not directly involved in combat missions during his deployment to Iraq. As part of the "attack and lift unit" of the 412th Aviation Support Battalion, Shepherd’s mission was to repair and maintain AH-64 Apache helicopters.
"My job was harmless until I factored in the amount of death and destruction those helicopters caused to civilians every day," Shepherd said.
"The government made us believe we would be welcomed as heroes in Iraq, but we saw nothing but hostility from the Iraqis that came to work for us, they wanted to kill us," Shepherd said.
His base outside of Tikrit was shelled almost every night, which he said also left him unsettled.
"It is not the military itself that is bad," Shepherd said. "In fact, our unit did a lot of good things, giving schools books and bringing clothes to children." Those actions helped ease his conscience a bit, but he still questioned whether the Iraqis would have needed the aid if the United States had not invaded Iraq in the first place.



An action begins today. It will be noted in the snapshot but the snapshot will go up long after the action starts. Military Families Speak Out explains:

Come to Washington February 6-9 to demand "The Change WE Need"
President Elect Obama opposed the war in Iraq before it started, calling it a "dumb war." But he and his advisors have also said that they plan to spread the return of combat troops from that "dumb war" out over sixteen months and to keep tens of thousands of other troops on the ground in Iraq indefinitely.
So from February 6-9, MFSO will be traveling to Washington to bring the new President and new Congress the message that it is long past time to bring all our troops home from Iraq. The four days of events will include:
* A teach-in featuring the voices of military families, veterans, and Iraqis, explaining the need for an immediate and complete end to the war in Iraq -- and the human impacts of continuing the occupation. Friday, February 6 from Noon - 3:00 p.m. at Mott House, 122 Maryland Avenue.
* A solemn procession from Arlington National Cemetary to the White House beginning at 11:00 a.m. on Saturday, February 7. Meet at the front gate of the cemetery right outside the exit of the Arlington Metro stop. Please arrive early.
* A "Meet and Greet" and Legislative Briefing from 3:00 - 7:00 p.m. on Sunday, February 8 at the Mariott Metro Center.
* Lobbying members of Congress to end the war in Iraq. Meet in the cafeteria of the Rayburn House Office Building at 9:00 a.m. Monday, February 9.

The teach-in takes place this afternoon. Actions continue through Monday.

In the New York Times, Lizette Alvarez' "Army Data Show Rise in Number of Suicides" covers the news that a record number of US soldiers in the Army committed suicide last month (it may be as high as 24, Alvarez reports, 7 are confirmed and another 17 are still being examined): "If confirmed, the suicide count for last month would exceed those killed in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan during the same period. In January 2008, five soldiers committed suicide."

Gen Peter Chiarelli is quoted stating, "Each of these losses is a personal tragedy that is felt throughout the Army family. The trend and trajectory seen in January further heightens the seriousness and urgency that all of us must have in preventing suicides." If you mean your words, do something. If not, stop boring us. The military's had more than enough time to notice the suicides and to do something about it. It's done nothing other than a few pamphlets and a 1-800 number. The change has to come from the top in the military because it is a top-down command. Chiarelli wants to change the culture? Great. Otherwise, it's just him using a tragedy to look sympathetic. And if that's harsh, it's harsh that so many suicides have repeatedly taken place and the military has ignored the problem. Or lied about it. It wasn't all that long ago CBS News was catching the VA lying about the number of suicides.


This week (tonight on most PBS stations) NOW on PBS offers:

Is there a solution to the foreclosure mess that's destroying communities?
Across the country, cities are in crisis because of the fallout from the mortgage mess -- property taxes are way down, and abandoned homes are bringing down property values, inviting crime, and draining government coffers. Neighborhoods are being destroyed. Yet the federal bailout money is not going directly to desperate communities and homeowners, but to local and national banks.
This week, NOW investigates the innovative way some cities are fighting back. The city of Memphis, Tennessee is suing major national lenders and banks for deceptive and discriminatory lending practices in an effort to recoup the cost of the financial mess. Other cities suing lenders for their role in the mortgage mess include Baltimore, Cleveland, Buffalo, and Birmingham.
With desperation climbing alongside debt, can the strategy help these blighted parts of America?

Washington Week also begins airing tonight on most PBS stations and joining Gwen this installment is Ceci Connolly (Washington Post), Charles Babington (AP), Michael Duffy (Time magazine) and Jackie Calmes (New York Times). And on broadcast TV (CBS) Sunday, no 60 Minutes:

Saving Flight 1549
Hero pilot Capt. Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger and his flight crew together reveal for the first time the sights, sounds and physical sensations they experienced as they pulled off an incredible water landing last month, saving the lives of all 155 people aboard US Airways Flight 1549. Katie Couric reports. (This is an extra-length story. | Watch Video
Coldplay
The British rock group that has taken its place among the most popular bands in the world gives 60 Minutes a rare look inside its world that includes a candid interview with frontman Chris Martin. Steve Kroft reports. | Watch Video
60 Minutes, Sunday, Feb. 8 at 7 p.m. ET/PT.
60 Minutes Update
Beckham Leaving The L.A. Galaxy?
David Beckham wants to leave the Los Angeles Galaxy and stay with AC Milan after his loan to the Italian club is scheduled to end next month. The 33-year-old English midfielder announced his intentions Wednesday after playing in Milan's 2-2 exhibition tie at Glasgow Rangers. Beckham is about two years into a $32.5 million, five-year contract with Major League Soccer. In March 2008, CNN's Anderson Cooper profiled Beckham for 60 Minutes, discussing his widely publicized move to Los Angeles. | Video

And a friend at NPR asks that I note the following and point out that the live concert series continues:

Live Friday: Dr. Dog In Concert

Listen Online At Noon ET

Dr. Dog 300
courtesy of the artist

Dr. Dog.

WXPN, February 5, 2009 - Filtering classic rock and pop hooks through a willfully lo-fi aesthetic a la Pavement or Guided by Voices, Philadelphia's rapidly rising Dr. Dog sounds both timeless and immediate. Return to this space at noon ET Friday to hear Dr. Dog perform live in concert from WXPN and World Café Live in Philadelphia.

Formed in 1999 as a recording project for two members of the more traditional indie-rock band Raccoon, Dr. Dog became a full-time gig when Raccoon folded in the early '00s. Dr. Dog's first two records, 2001's Psychedelic Swamp and 2002's Toothbrush, were both self-released but failed to make an impact outside of the Philadelphia area. Still, the group's fortunes changed when My Morning Jacket's Jim James handpicked Dr. Dog to open for his band on its 2004 tour. Subsequently picked up by an indie label for 2005's Easy Beat, the group won raves for its fascinating combination of psychedelic pop hooks and Beach Boys-esque vocal harmonies.

As Dr. Dog's national reputation continues to grow -- its fifth album, Fate, was a critics' darling in 2008 -- the band remains true to its bouncy rock style, which mixes intricate harmonies with '60s pop beats. Dr. Dog wasn't afraid to come back with another concept album: This one is built around the titular theme of fate.

Related NPR Stories

NPR Music has many things worth streaming and a wonderful music archive. If you stream online and haven't checked it out, please make a point to. Streaming, it should be noted, includes not only audio but video from time to time. They have folders at the site for various artists so you can also search by your favorite artist and, chances are, find an interview or a concert for many of them. (Many, not all.)

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








andre shepherd

 military families speak out



60 minutes
cbs news
pbs
 washington week
now on pbs




Even if you spin it, not good news for Nouri

"Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's strong performance in Iraq's provincial elections was also a victory for American goals." No. al-Maliki wasn't a candidate. That's the lede to Sudarsan Raghavan and Ernesto Londono's Washington Post article and it's incorrect and they are not the only reporters/outlet to get it so wrong.

Nouri al-Maliki was not a candidate in provincial elections. These, as Londono himself has explained, are the equivalent of state legislature elections in the US. Did anyone assert that victory for Republicans in (pick one of fifty states) in (pick 2001 through 2007) was a victory for George W. Bush? No.

al-Maliki wanted to get some press and wanted to make the elections about him. He estimated a minimum of 70% of registered Iraqis would turn out. (51% did.) He thought this was going to be his big moment on the international scene.

For a reporter, it is very tempting to make it about al-Maliki for a number of reasons. For example, making provincial elections about the prime minister frees you of having to . . . cover the actual candidates. And there were 440 winners -- none of whom were named "Nouri al-Maliki." It's so much easier to stamp "al-Maliki Victory" and be done with it.

Alissa J. Rubin's "Prime Ministers Party Wins in Iraqi Vote but Will Need to Form Coalitions" (New York Times) does a little better than the Post. The headline writer captures it and Rubin does as well for most of her article; however, sentences like the following trip her up: "In Baghdad, where Mr. Maliki ran a strongly nationalist campaign, he appeared to have had some success in winning votes from Sunnis, but in the Sunni-majority provinces to the north, his party's slate barely made a showing." He ran a strong nationalist campaign? And how many votes did he receive? What did he say in his victory speech? When will he be sworn in?

Here's reality, if you're going to wrongly make the provincial elections about Nouri al-Maliki, you're going to have to judge the success or failure of al-Maliki and the reality is "his party's slate barely made a showing" in the north. The reality is that Iraq has 18 provinces -- three of which have scheduled votes for this spring -- and to claim al-Maliki has 'won' a national campaign is not only premature, it doesn't even jibe with the actual (preliminary) results.

Raghavan and Londono tell you that the Dawa Party (al-Maliki's party) "won in nine provinces" -- with "an outright plurality" (NOT a majority) in Baghdad and Basra while it was a narrow win for Dawa "in the other seven provinces." Or, as Rubin puts it, "the party fell short of being able to operate without coalition-building."

That's a win? 14 provinces held elections last Saturday and Dawa didn't squeak out a majority win in any province, it only got "an outright plurality" in two provinces and, to govern, they need to coalition-build with other parties. That's not a win. Not for al-Maliki -- who was not a candidate -- and certainly not for Dawa.

What is troubling - - and what no one's pointed out -- is that we don't expect, for example, Barack Obama to head over to Oregon when they're electing their state legislature. We don't expect him to campaign for them or butt in. That al-Maliki was allowed to hit the road (attempting to buy votes) goes to how problematic the election actually was. Rubin writes, "Some politicians have voiced concerns in recent months that too much power was being concentrated in Mr. Maliki's hands, and the election results suggested that Iraqis were not ready to rally around a single leader." It's a shame the press never bothered to question why a prime minister was attempting to repeatedly inject himself into provincial elections?

Rubin writes, "Except in areas where Sunnis were voting for the first time, the large, prominent parties with nationally known leaders won the most seats, showing the power of incumbency and the difficulties facing the newer secular parties." Well if you're going to make that observation, you might also question why the country's prime minister is interfering in provincial elections? These are not the equivalent of US Congressional elections (that would be Iraq's Parliament). That issue was never raised. But, no, it is not normal for the highest office holder in the country to try to inject her or himself into local elections. And it's not normal -- when the press is lauding 'democracy' -- for no one to question that injection. Another question to ask: Did al-Maliki's injection depress voter turnout?

In the final paragraphs of Rubin's article she notes Anbar and quotes various complaints from Tamouz ("a nongovernment organization monitoring the elections"). She tells us that the Iraqi Islamic Party is Sunni. She tells us nothing about the make up of Tamouz. Tamouz is making accusations. Readers have a right to know who they are and the use of "nongovernment" will translate to some as 'from outside Iraq.' That's not reality. But we don't get a lot of reality in this morning's election coverage. Back to the Washington Post's article, the following should never happen:

The Obama administration appeared as pleased at what did not happen on election day as it was about the results. "Any election where [there is] fairness and generally aboveboard practices, where the people get a chance to vote and they're not rioting in the streets and throwing bombs . . . is a good result," a senior administration official said in Washington. "We should celebrate that. So far, so good."

There is no reason to grant anonymity for the above. If the 'celebrator' can't be named, his or her comment doesn't need to be included. When you start granting anonymity for prattle, you're degrading journalism standards.

Yesterday Diyala Province was rocked by a bomber who took his/her own life as well as the lives of at least 15 civilians. Monte Morin and Tina Susman cover it in "16 killed in suicide attack in northern Iraq" (Los Angeles Times):

"I was sitting at the back of the restaurant having my lunch when a very huge explosion took place," said Majid Hussein, 25. "I felt everything around me smashing and the pressure of the explosion pushed me through the window."
Tensions are high in Khanaqin between Arabs and Kurds, who control a semiautonomous area in northeastern Iraq known as Kurdistan.
Although Khanaqin is part of Diyala province, the Kurdistan government wants to include the oil-rich city in the planned referendum on whether to incorporate Kirkuk and other disputed areas into its region.
Last summer, Iraqi security forces and Kurdish troops nearly clashed over Khanaqin after Prime Minister Nouri Maliki sent soldiers there to remove fighters from Kurdistan who had secured the predominantly Kurdish city for years.
Local media reported that most of the victims in Thursday's bombing were Kurds, and added that the bomber was a woman, a statement U.S. and Iraqi authorities could not immediately confirm.

Iran's Press TV reports United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is in Iraq and meeting with Nouri as well as Jalal Talabani, Iraq's president.

The Kurdish Regional Government notes the following:

The Wall Street Journal, 14:44:02 05 Feb. 2009
Minister Falah Bakir's letter to Wall Street Journal: "Don't forget Kurds' role in Iraq"

Wall Street Journal,
Letters to the Editor

Your editorial "Obama and Iraq" (January 27) highlights many factors regarding the US strategy in Iraq but neglects to mention the role of the Kurds. Within Iraq, the Kurds have been America's strongest ally in both Iraq's liberation from Saddam Hussein and in the democratic transition after the fall of the previous regime. Our peshmerga forces have fought and died alongside US soldiers combating terrorists in Iraq. The Kurds deeply appreciate what the US has done by ridding Iraq of a regime that employed chemical weapons against us and that was responsible for the death or disappearance of more than 180,000 Kurds.

The autonomous Kurdistan Region is a model for the rest of the country with respect to our culture of tolerance and our commitment to good governance. The Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) is also unwavering in its support for federalism and the Iraqi constitutional process. We are also concerned about any possible trends that seek to accentuate tensions between Arabs and Kurds, whether in Mosul, Kirkuk, Diyala or elsewhere.

The KRG agrees that the drawdown of US forces must be responsible, and driven more by conditions inside Iraq rather than by a timetable. The gains in Iraq over the past year have been substantial, but the politics remain fragile, especially following the provincial elections held on January 31. We still must navigate the referendum on the US-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement to take place late this summer, and parliamentary elections to be held by the end of 2009. Should there be a US redeployment in Iraq, the KRG is fully committed to working as a partner with the US to ensure security and stability in Iraq.

Falah Mustafa Bakir
Erbil, Kurdistan Region
Iraq

Minister Bakir is head of the Department of Foreign Relations for the Kurdistan Regional Government.


The following community sites update last night:


I included this site because Joan references last night's "I Hate The War" and notes David M. Herszenhorn's "Senators Draft List Of Cost Cuts In Stimulus Plan" -- "A draft. According to the New York Times." Yes and the story makes the front page (and that is the print edition headline). Joan's right, it's a draft. Still being written. Most people who endorse legislation wait until it's written to do so.

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


the washington post

ernesto londono
the new york times
alissa j. rubin
the los angeles times
monte morin
 tina susman


thomas friedman is a great man





oh boy it never ends