Saturday, August 15, 2009

The forgotten benchmarks

Dark humor flips on when the lights go out in a city that still suffers from crippling power outages despite the billions of dollars that have been invested in its grid.
"Electricity is dead. Pray for its soul," reads graffiti scrawled along a wall in central Baghdad's Karrada neighborhood.
"I miss electricity so much I want to feel an electric shock, just so I know we have it," said Falah Hasan Ali, 23, a resident of Baghdad's Sadr City district who sleeps on his roof to escape the nighttime heat.
Electricity long has been a benchmark for reconstruction success in Iraq. Even as American troops have withdrawn from Iraqi cities and there's talk of a faster U.S. pullout from the country, however, electricity remains elusive for millions of Baghdad residents.


That's the opening to Laith Hammoudi's "6 years after invasion, electricity still scarce in Baghdad" (McClatchy Newspapers). The benchmarks. No one seems to remember them. The White House proposed them. They were supposed to be the way 'success' could be measured. Congress was all for them. Nouri al-Maliki signed off on them. That was 2007. By 2008, movement on any benchmark would be hailed as 'success!' That's all you needed, movement. Wasn't movement 'achievement'? Weren't they the same thing.

As the 'results' demonstrate in 2009, no. They weren't the same thing. And by 2009, they're all but forgotten even though, generally, when two parties sign off on something, what you have is a binding contract.

But for it to be binding, it would have to be enforced.

The White House's benchmarks were supposed to measure 'success' and the measurement was to justify the continued funding of the illegal war by Congress. Back then, Pelosi and company refused to stop funding the Iraq War but they hinted they would. At some point. Maybe. If these benchmarks weren't met.

The benchmarks were never met.

And yet they continue to fund the illegal war.

The war that continues to kill.

Bombings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports two Baghdad bombings which left six people injured, a Baghdad sticky bombing which injured two people and a Mosul grenade attack that left nine people injured. Reuters notes the sticky bombing claimed 2 lives.

Shootings?

Reuters notes 3 Iraqis were left dead ("another wounded") by US and Iraqi troops staging a "firing exercise". Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 person was shot dad in Mosul.

Meanwhile, what's more embarrassing: To report wrongly or just to ignore? Sam Dagher's piece in today's New York Times begs that question. They're finally noting the draft law that would destroy any free press in Iraq. But they can't even get the basics right. Here's Dagher's opening paragraph:

Nearly 100 Iraqi journalists, news media workers and their supporters protested in Baghdad on Friday against what they said was a growing push by the country’s governing Shiite political parties to muzzle them.


Drop back to yesterday's snapshot and check the video link provided in it, you will count man, many "hundreds" not a hundred marching past the cameras. Sam Dagher can't even cover it correctly when 'reporting' didn't require leaving the villa NYT occupies. (And there's nothing in the article which suggests he left the villa.)

While the New York Times repeatedly portrays the illegal war as winding down (despite the 130,000 US troops still on the ground there), Eric Stoner addresses some realities in "Mercenaries and murder in Iraq" (Guardian):

The killing last Sunday in Baghdad's Green Zone of two armed contractors working for the London-based mercenary firm ArmorGroup by another British contractor from the company, serves as a grim reminder that Brits are still deeply involved in the prosecution of the war.In fact, with no countries officially left in the so-called "coalition of the willing", contractors are now playing a more important role than ever, as the Obama administration begins to slowly scale back the war in Iraq.
In June, a Pentagon report revealed that there are still 132,610 contractors in Iraq -- effectively doubling the size of the occupation -- and that the use of armed "private security contractors" in the country actually increased by 23% during the second quarter of 2009. The US defence department doesn't break down its data by nationality, but the report does specify that there are 60,244 "third country nationals", or contractors that are neither American nor Iraqi, on the payroll in Iraq. Therefore, the number of British citizens that are part of this shadow army is likely in the thousands.


The British contractor Stoner refers to is Danny Fitzsimons who is facing a trial in Iraq and could be sentenced to death. He served in the British military for eight years and was stationed in Afghanistan and Kosovo. He is accused of being the shooter in a Sunday Green Zone incident in which 1 British contractor, Paul McGuigan, and 1 Australian contractor, Darren Hoare, died and one Iraqi, Arkhan Madhi, was injured. Eric and Liz Fitzsimons spoke to the BBC (link has video) and noted that they are not asking for Danny to 'walk.' They stated that he has to take responsibility. But they want a fair trial and do not believe that is possible in Iraq. His legal defense team doesn't believe he can get a fair trial either stating today that the British military's presence in Iraq during the war means that Fitzsimons will be used as scapegoat. Jonathan Owen (Independent of London) reports that his legal time is flying to Iraq on Sunday and quotes attorney John Tipple stating, "Our intentions are to bring him back home to face trial in the UK. Mr Fitzsimons is a British national and needs just two things -- specialist medical help for his psychological problems and a fair trial -- neither of which he is likely to get in Iraq."

And Charles Levinson explores Iraqi politicians efforts to woo the electorate in the upcoming (January 2010) elections in "Iraqi Candidates Peer Over Sectarian Gap" (Wall St. Journal). From the article:


A key question is whether Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's Dawa Party will join the new Shiite alliance or run independently, under the steam of his newfound popular appeal.
If he joins the alliance, he runs the risk of losing the nonsectarian credentials that have won him a broadened base of support in the Iraqi street. If he runs independently, he risks alienating the Shiite backers who made him prime minister in the first place.
He also risks jeopardizing his relationship with Iran, which Shiite lawmakers say is heavily pushing for Shiite unity ahead of January's vote.
"Maliki has a big problem if he goes back to the Shiite coalition because he's sold himself over the past year as a leader of all Iraqis," says Omar Mashhadani, an Iraqi political analyst with close ties to Iraqi lawmakers. "But he is also under pressure from other Shiites and from Iran to join the alliance."
Mr. Maliki could adopt a strategy that would allow him to placate both camps.


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









sam dagher

As if Iraqi refugees haven't suffered enough . . .

kamikazesammy

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 14, 2009
Statement by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs on the Appointment of Two Senior Officials Responsible for Iraqi Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons
President Obama has long made clear that the United States is committed to working closely with the Iraqi government to aid Iraqis who have been displaced or are otherwise vulnerable as a result of the violence in Iraq. Since April, the United States has made available approximately $196 million in additional support for these populations for a total of $346 million to date in FY 2009.
Further to discussions that took place during Prime Minister Maliki's recent meetings in Washington, President Obama is pleased to announce that Samantha Power, Senior Director for Multilateral Affairs and Human Rights at the National Security Council in the White House, will coordinate the efforts of the many parts of the U.S. government on Iraqi refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs), including the Department of State, U.S. Agency for International Development, Department of Homeland Security, and Department of Defense.
We are also pleased to announce that Mark Storella, a Senior Foreign Service officer who recently served as Deputy Chief of Mission in Geneva, has arrived in Baghdad to take up the post of Senior Coordinator for Iraqi Refugees and Displaced Persons. Storella will coordinate our government's work in Iraq on refugees and IDPs, and will represent the United States in its dealings with the Iraqi Government, the international community, and non-governmental organizations on these issues.
###


Haven't Iraqi refugees suffered enough without Barry shoving the old war whore Sammy Power off on them?

The very masculine and testosterone heavy Sammy Power is a threat to herself and others. The illustration is Isaiah's "Kamikaze Sammy" from March 9, 2008. It's worth recalling the caption to that illustration when you read the s**t the Boston Globe pulled out of its ass and attempted to serve up. They note the "monster" remark. That's not why she stepped down you damn liars. Maybe you do deserve to be shut down? If you're going to sell that kind of garbage, maybe your lying ass needs to be forever closed.

Caption to Isaiah's comic back in March 2008:

Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Kamikaze Sammy." Samantha Power swoops down declaring, "You can't make a commitment in whatever month we're in." Her comments to the BBC about how Barack Obama (whom she was an advisor to) making a 'pledge' to withdraw combat troops from Iraq within 16 months is nothing but pretty words that the campaign cannot and does not intend to live by.

And that is why she stepped down. She didn't give a damn about the monster remark. The campaign was doing spin control but Robert Gibbs, among others, wasn't especially worried about those comments. It was when news started leaking about what she'd told the BBC and that the BBC would be airing it that Samantha decided -- she decided -- to step down because she realized she would be a liability. She also grasped by quitting before the BBC interview aired the always-in-the-tank-for-Barry US press would be sure not to make too much of her remarks that there was no promise to pull all troops out in 16 months.

The hag with the bad dye job is now going to 'help' Iraqi refugees? If you've ever prayed for them before, pray for them now. They will need all the help they can get.

And it's one more sign of how little Barack cares about Iraq or the peace movement. The woman who revealed there was no plan for withdrawal has now been put in charge of the refugees. That says a great deal. Hey, she did such a bang up job on Camp Ashraf didn't she? She Doug Lute really demonstrated how wonderful and talented they were, didn't they? (No, they didn't. They did a lousy job and they both swore they knew what they were doing. As usual, Sammy Power didn't know s**t.)

Since Thursday night, the following community posts have gone up:

"Love Is The Answer ""Barbra Streisand""Chicken Sop for the Soul""Thoughts on Barbra Streisand""Pasta Bake in the Kitchen""Bob & Barbra""LGBT and geography""hillary's africa trip""barbra & hillary""Michael Winship's 'The Gorilla Dust of Health Care'""Her name is . . . Barbra""40 years later""Lina Thorne, Hillary Clinton""Memories ""100 lucky people will get to see Barbra perform live""The Proposal""The hatred""Kenneth J. Theisen and Stephanie Tang""Nouri attacks the press, press fights back""Kenneth J. Theisen, Sandra Bullock, animal rights""Cheeky bastard""THIS JUST IN! INGLORIOUS BASTARD!"

Written that way because the sidebars on Stan, Ann and Isaiah's sites are not working. I grabbed that from Wally and Cedric and their latest joint-post is "THIS JUST IN! NATURAL BORN LIAR!" and "Barack's distant relationship with the truth."

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











thomas friedman is a great man






oh boy it never ends

Friday, August 14, 2009

Iraq snapshot

Friday, August 14, 2009.  Chaos and violence continue, the US military releases some suicide data, journalist protest in Iraq, Iraqi women get some press attention, and more.
 
Starting with US military suicides which are increasing by the DoD's own figures.  The June figures for the army were released July 9th and they were "no confirmed suicides and nine potential suicides."  Yesterday, the Defense Department released the July figures and noted that "four of the nine potential suicides [for June] have been confirmed and five remain under investigation."  For July they are investigating eight possible suicides. They also state, "There have been 96 reported active-duty Army suicides during the period Jan. 1, 2009 - July 31, 2009.  Of these, 62 have been confirmed, and 34 are pending determination of manner of death.  For the same period in 2008, there were 79 suicides among active-duty soldiers. During July 2009, among reserve component soldiers not an active duty, there were four potential suicides.  During the period Jan. 1, 2009 -- July 31, 2009, among that same group, there have been 17 confirmed suicides and 28 potential suicides; the potential suicides are currently under investigation to determine the manner of death.  For the same period in 2008, there were 32 suicides among reserve soldiers not on active duty."
 
Independent journalist Dahr Jamail (at CounterCurrents) observes, "Soldiers are returning from the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan destroyed mentally, spiritually, and psychologically, to a general population that is, mostly, willfully ignorant of the occupations and the soldiers participating in them.  Troops face a Department of Veterans Affairs that is either unwilling or unable to help them with their physical and psychological wounds and they are left to fend for themselves.  It is a perfect storm of denial, neglect, violence, rage, suffering, and death." Dahr's latest book was released last month month and is The Will to Resist: Soldiers Who Refuse to Fight in Iraq and Afghanistan.  July 31st on NPR's The Diane Rehm Show, a caller, Pamela, phoned to discuss a family member in the service who took his own life: 
 
 Yes. Good morning, how are you? Thank you for taking my call. I am responding to a comment I heard earlier and it really just like shot me in my heart.  And the comment was that the suicide rates [in the US military] are skyrocketing and how this has to be addressed.  And I literally like I said stopped dead in my tracks.  I . . . lost my brother in service due to suicide. He was home on a leave and, uh, about to be, pardon me, to go back and to serve and, uh, was, uh -- the difficulty in getting the mental health services I believe that he needed -- I mean he was married with two children -- was most, most difficult and delayed and a long wait and this and that.  And then the unfathomable happened and, uh, when I, uh, at times decided to share how he died rather than just say he died in the war and I would say he died by suicide the remark I would hear unfortunately was, "Oh my goodness, he didn't die a hero then." And-and I continually hear this and I guess I want to make a statement that how someone dies, um, should not be -- that --  that is not a definition of how they lived their lives.  And here was a good man who gave and did so much for the community and yet because of how he died -- which you know is a mental illness health related, etc. etc. -- he is now being defined as -- not -- as a zero.  And not being defined. And I think you know this-this suicide issue is getting way out of control and for every person that dies by suicide there are at least six to ten people that are horribly effected as well to the point where their mental health also, uh, you know, begins to fall apart and the whole mental health, how to get help, starts all over again.  And I should say that the support groups for those that lose a loved one by suicide are now separated from regular grief groups and while attending one and sharing how my loved one died, people were going around the room, people said to me, "Oh my God, why is she here?" I've been asked to leave meetings because -- grief support meetings -- because of how my brother died and I don't think that's fair or correct or right and, um, so the issue goes far beyond the pain of losing a loved one and is extremely complicated.  And, um, I wanted to share all that.  And if ever anybody hears of someone that dies of a suicide please just say "I'm sorry for your loss" and ask about the person. And don't say anything cruel or unkind because, again, how one lives their entire life for 38 years should not be defined by a, you know, a irrational moment that effects -- that became a permanent solution to a temporary problem.
 
A caller named Mary also explained some of the stressors she sees (she's married to a service member) on that program (and there's transcripts of both calls in the July 31st snapshot). Moving to today's broadcast of The Diane Rehm Show.  The second hour found Diane discussing the international news with Aljazaeera's Abderrahim Foukara, CNN's Elise Labott and McClatchy Newspapers' Warren P. Strobel.  We'll come in on the Iran section where Shane Bauer, Sarah Shourd and Josh Fattal -- the three American citizens being held by Iran -- come up.
 
Diane Rehm: And Elise what is the fate of the Newsweek journalist who strayed apparently into Iran?
 
Elise Labott: Well you have a couple of detainees.  You have a Newsweek journalist, Maziar Bahari, whose been working in Iran, who's been licensed by the Iranian government to work and whose coverage frankly of the regime hasn't been all that critical and he's been caught up in this post-election crisis.  He's-he's one of forty -- more than forty journalists that are being tried as part of hundreds of opposition leaders -- some of the most well respected people of the country like Shirin Ebadi, noted Nobel laureate. And there's been a large campaign by Newsweek to-to free him.  And then you have three American hikers --
 
Diane Rehm: Hikers.  Right.
 
Elise Labott: Three American hikers that were hiking in northern Iraq in the Kurdish area in the mountains and it seems as if they strayed into uh, strayed into Iran and were detained by the authorities.  And after a kind of week or so of no news whatsoever, the Iranians finally confirmed that they do have them, they are in custody, there's been no consular access, no visits to them at all.  What US officials are saying is it's prob -- they don't think that Iran is irrational in these situations and that eventually it will probably shake out like it did in 2007 when Iran picked up these three British -- several British soldiers, held them, milked them for all they were worth and  then when the costs -- international outrage and costs of them were too high, they had this ceremony and let them go.  So they kind of think that after these hikers, they find out that they've satisfied themselves that they really didn't pose any risks -- the Iraqi government now is getting involved saying, 'They were really just guests of our country and they strayed in, please let them go' -- that eventually, as they did with Roxana Saberi journalist, they will let them go.
 
Warren P. Strobel: Yeah I think that's probably the case You did have one sort of hardline -- I think it was a member of Parliament, I hope I'm not wrong on that -- say --
 
Elise Labott: No, it was a member of Parliament, yeah.
 
Warren P. Strobel: -- that the only reason these three people could have strayed across the border is because they are part of a Western plot to keep things unhinged in Iran.  But by and large, I think Elise is probably right that they will be released.
 
Elise Labott: They just couldn't --
 
Warren P. Strobel: The costs are too high.
 
Elise Labott: -- have done it at a worse time.  I mean there should be some sort of a warning on your passport not to go into these countries.
 
Diane Rehm: Yes, you bet. You bet.
 
Abderrahim Foukara: Yes, I mean regardless of this ball being kicked back and forth between the Iranian government and the United States government as to the nature of what actually happened when those hikers went into Iranian territory, I mean in these situations you inevitably have a new card to play if you're the Iranian government when it comes to negotiations. It just puts one added step on the road to negotiations between the Iranian government and the US government instead of cutting straight to the chase and talking about pressure regarding the nuclear issue, now the US government has this extra hurdle of the three hikers to actually clear before they can talk about any other substance.
 
Diane Rehm: And speaking of hurdles a new wave of violence in Iraq this week, Warren Strobel?
 
Warren P. Strobel: Yes, indeed.  I think yesterday there was two suicide bombings in the Mosul area targeted against an ethnic minority -- religious minority called the Yazzidis, 21 people killed. That's the latest on a string of these ever since US combat troops left the cities June 30th.
 
Diane Rehm: So since last Friday, we've had 150 people killed.  
 
Warren P. Strobel: It's, it's a lot.  And it's -- though actually, you talk to American commanders they think -- they predicted even worse once -- in other words, it's terrible, I'm not trying to minimize it in any sense of the word but there was a concern that there would be an even larger wave of violence.
 
Diane Rehm: So how is the Iraqi security handling this?
 
Warren P. Strobel: You know they -- they're doing better.  You had this memo from the American colonel (Timothy Reese) that was published in the New York Times a couple of weeks ago saying the Iraqi security forces were just barely good enough and it's time for us to leave.  Iraq is still very unstable and the big concern now is the fault line between the Kurdish areas and the Arab areas and the concern about a full scale ethnic conflict there which we have not seen yet, thank God, but it's a possibility.
 
Elise Labott: And also there-there, as Warren said, there really trying to fuel an already existing tension between the Arab and the Kurdish government in the north but also up until recently when we've seen these bombings in the north the bombing campaign has really been directed at the Shia and to -- and the bombings have just been horrific, they've been on food lines, you know, school buses, hospitals, funerals, really aimed at the Shia and trying to drag them back into a sectarian war. And the Shia by and large have been very patient.  Their spiritual leaders like Grand Ayatollah Sistani have uh told them listen 'No retaliation, renounce violence' and this -- by and large they've been patient but I think people are waiting to see how long that patience will last and whether we'll see the militias come again.
 
It's really interesting how the media continues to congratulate the Shi'ite dominant population on not publicly going on a violence tear.  I don't recall, do you, when the Iraqi Christians have been under attack -- pick any time, it never ends -- any congratulations to them for not responding with violence.  What a sad media which repeatedly strokes the Shi'ites as so wonderful for not breaking the law.  The same media, it should be noted, which treated the genocide as a civil war.  One group controlled the Iraqi government, the Shias.  One group had all the power, the Shias.  But back then, 2007, it was a civil war -- they covered up for what the dominant group was doing to eradicate a minority.  Now they praise that same group for 'restraint.'  And what's so amazing is that Elise got close to reality for a moment and then decided to walk it back, "And also there-there, as Warren said, there really trying to fuel an already existing tension between the Arab and the Kurdish government in the north but also up until recently when we've seen these bombings in the north the bombing campaign has really been directed at the Shia".  As everyone has yet again rushed to stroke and fawn over the dominant population in Iraq, no one's considered what's going on.  Disputed areas erupt in violence?  Disputed areas under Kurdish control? 
 
This could very well be a Shi'ite effort to destabalize the area in order to weaken any claim the Kurds may have on the territory.  We saw that before.  Repeatedly.  We saw it with the attacks on Iraqi Christians from the summer of 2008 through November 2008.  And we saw, if we paid attention, that the ones blamed originally were the Kurdish peshmerga.  The Shi'ites started a whisper campaign that the always-eager-to-please press ran with.  But the peshmerga wasn't responsible for the attacks nor would it ever make sense for them to be responsible for the attacks on Iraqi Christians.  It was the Shi'ites in that region with indicators that they were being fed/fueled from elsewhere in Iraq.
 
The Yazidis are not Shi'ite. If they were Shi'ite, they'd be part of the dominant culture and not a minority.  More importantly, as per usual, the press can only see the big attacks.  There have been attacks for the last two weeks.  And those attacks have included attacks, again, on Iraqi Christians in that region.  It's interesting how the press only seems to give a damn when the victims are Shia.  It's interesting that they then pretend they give a damn because of the violence when the reality appears to be that Shia thugs controlling the government get press appeasement.  Out of fear?  I have no idea.  I only know that Shia thugs have conducted genocide and not been called out by our allegedly free press and now when violence is being conducted in nothern Iraq against Yazidis, Iraqi Christians, Kurds and a host of others, the press can only see Shi'ite victims.  It's very strange and very telling.  Notice how Mayada Al Askari (Gulf News) covers the hundreds of deaths: "Kurdish villages, with mixed populations of Sunnis and Shiites, were targeted heavily.  Nearly 3,000 kilogrammes of explosives went off near a small coffee shop in the forgotten village of Khazna, where poor labourers were killed."  And the Shia are not monolythic.  Frequently here we refer to the Shi'ite thugs (or the Sunni ones).  We're referring to the government and militias. (Which are often the same thing for the Shi'ites.)  And within the Shi'ite thug grouping, you have various divisions that can and do go to war with one another.  A point that the Western media forgets as it renders the division it's helped to create (Shia v. Sunni) as a hard line that easily divides and which finds only one of two groupings.
 
Last Friday, Abderrahim Foukara hosted a discussion on the United States exiting Iraq on Aljazeera's Inside Iraq (link is video). The panelists were Thomas E. Ricks, Rend al-Rahim and Scott Carpenter.  Rahim is an Iraqi and an American and she was the US ambassador to Iraq immediately after the Iraq War.  Rahim was a very loyal supporter of George W. Bush and she got in some attacks on Joe Biden.  Not a surprise.  Rahim was among the exiles agitating for the illegal war.  Long gone are the days when she could sit with Laura Bush at State of the Union addresses.  Carpenter is with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
 
Abderrahim Foukara: Tom, is President Obama in a pickle now having promised that -- during his campaign -- that he would end the war and withdraw US military forces from that country at a time when, on the ground, the situation seems to be somewhat deteriorating?
 
Thomas E. Ricks: I think it is deteriorating.  I think security will worsen throughout this year and probably into next year.  The fewer American troops you have, the less influence you have. The American troops have been pulled out of the easier parts first. Later, when the troop numbers start coming down -- they really haven't come down much at all, we're really at the same level the Bush administration had for most of the last six years -- when you start pulling troops out of the difficult areas that are less secure or where Iraqi forces are considered less reliable, I think you're going to see even more violence, more of an unraveling of the security situation.
 
Ricks went on to note that Barack "threw out a major campaign promise," noting that Barack promised to take a brigade of troops out a month from the time he took office and "if that were the case, he would have taken out 40,000 troops already.  He hasn't.  So he's thrown away a major promise and he's paid no political cost for that."  Of Barack's alleged 'withdrawal' plan (it's not withdrawal and it's George W. Bush's plan), Ricks it wasn't the first one he'd covered, it was "the sixth one."
 
What will happen in the near future in Iraq?  Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) notes one development, "The 1920 Revolution Brigades issued a statement on Thursday in response to a Babylon and Beyond blog item last month about two meetings in Istanbul, Turkey, last spring between U.S. officials and a coalition of Sunni insurgent groups in Istanbul.  In the group's statement Thursday, the 1920 Revolution Brigades said that it had not participated in the Political Council for the Iraqi Resistance's talks with the Americans and described the previous blog post as 'mistaken'."  They feel their goal is to expell the foreign forces (US) from Iraq.
 
Today on Aljazeera's Inside Iraq devotes the program to the status of Iraqi women.  The program misidentifies Zainab Salbi's organization.  She is not with Women to Women (a health organization for women).  She is with Women for Women
 
Zainab Salbi: I would say when it comes to the marginalized population -- and it is a huge percentage of the population -- this can be generalized.  I was in other provinces, for example.  Interviewing women in Karbala and Najaf and Hilla, the gist of it is what they're saying.  They're saying, "America gave us freedom but took away from us security.  And if we have to choose between freedom and security, we would choose security."  But then the question became when I asked them about the freedom they're-they're talking about. Can you criticize Moqtada al-Sadr? Can you criticize [Abdul Aziz] al-Hakim?  No.  Can you criticize militia so-and-so?  No. And so eventually that -- even that freedom shrank back into the old patterns of behavior. We're afraid of saying anything.  So that's very much actually and not only with the marginalized population.  I would say  still  very much among the whole population.  There is still a level of fear. Both from the backgrounnd, the history of the country.  Remember this is only seven years ago people were very scared of Saddam Hussein's regime but also because this is a real fact: Militias as well as governments are taking revenge and this is a fact that people are afraid of expressing their political opinions because they don't know what's going to happen to them.
 
Abderrahim Foukara: Well obviously a lot of people were afraid of expressing their opinions even after Saddam Hussein, to what extent do they feel marginalized today post-2003 and how does that compare with this situation prior to 2003?
 
Zainab Salbi: So let me ask -- answer it this way, Saddam Hussein's regime, or Saddam Hussein's time, gave and took away from Iraqi women, gave them massive campaign of illiteracy [C.I. note, she means a literacy campaign] for example, education access was very much promoted among women, promotion in the public sector as working women very much was promoted particularly in the seventies and the eighties.  Took away from them the sense of security in a government controlled way in other words any woman was vulnerable to government torture or rape or whatever but it was what I call a vertical violence by the government against the population.  Took away from them many other issues for example multiple marriages were encouraged by Saddam particularly the nineties.  Took away from them mobility to travel the country without a companion.  So it gave and it took away.
 
Asked what most surprised her in her visits and interviews with Iraqi women,  Zainab Salbi responded,  "They are very strong."
 
Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .
 
Bombings?
 
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a bombing outside Falluja which claimed 1 life, a bombing outside Baquba which left three Iraqi soldiers wounded and a Mosul mortar attack which injured three police officers.
 
Shootings?
 
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 merchant shot dead in Mosul (had "received threats by phone few days ago").
 
From the physical violence to attacks on the Iraqi press.  Yesterday, Billie noted a story written up in the Dallas Morning News' "Update: War report" which is an AP item about the $87,000 judgment against Al-Sharqiya by Iraqi 'courts' which, the item says, was "falsely reporting that orders had been issued to arrest ex-detainees released by the United States." I haven't read the verdict -- has anyone? I know AP hasn't. And I know that's not AP's understanding of the verdict or wasn't yesterday. I think, in squashing things into news briefs, something got lost. The case was over an Iraqi official speaking on the record to the TV station for their report. They quoted him. In addition, they spoke with other officials who did not go on the record. One such official's statements were wrongly -- according to the TV station -- credited to the one who went on the record. The lawsuit was over that issue: Who made the statement with the official who went on the record stating he had not done so (the TV station admitted that) and stating his name had been defamed by the broadcast. The court was not being aske to rule on the report itself. Nor was the court in the position to. The verdict is yet another assault on journalistic freedom in Iraq. And the sum is outrageous for a country that repeatedly tries to scrap their meager rations programs for citizens and thinks a few hundred dollars given to the (small number) of returnees should be enough to tide them over for a full year.  Today the International Press Institute released the following:
 

Just days after the Iraqi government published a draft law that appears to pave the way for government interference in the media, a 100 million Iraqi dinar (€60,000) fine levied on Wednesday against Iraqi satellite broadcaster Al-Sharqiya for "misquoting" a top military spokesperson is another ominous signal that press freedom in Iraq is deteriorating, the International Press Institute (IPI) warned on Friday.            
An Iraqi court ordered the fine against Al-Sharqiya for slander, according to media reports, following a complaint filed in April by Major-General Qassim al-Moussawi, the Iraqi military's main spokesperson in Baghdad.             
Al-Moussawi claimed that the broadcaster misrepresented him by quoting him as stating that ex-detainees released by the United States would be rearrested by Iraqi authorities.  
The major-general claims to have said only that ex-detainee files would be reviewed as part of an investigation into complicity in recent bombings.            
The court decision comes amid growing fears of an increase in state pressure on the media in Iraq.            
On 31 July, the Iraqi government presented a draft law ostensibly aimed at protecting journalists, but containing as well worrying provisions that could have a negative impact on media freedom.            
Vague wording in the draft prohibiting journalists from "compromising the security and stability of the country" could be used to stifle criticism, and the right to protect sources is annulled if "the law requires the source to be revealed."               
The bill also stipulates that freedom of the press can be suspended if a publication threatens citizens or makes "provocative or aggressive statements."
Local Iraqi media freedom organisations, such as the Journalistic Freedoms Observatory (JFO), have expressed concern over the draft law, which they see as "the beginning of the imposition of restrictions on journalists, as well as the government's reorganising control over information."                      
"Whatever this law gives in the left hand it seizes back with the right," Ziad al Ajili, JFO manager, told IPI. "Best for us as journalists is to have the right of access to information, and laws guaranteeing freedom of expression, not laws surrounding us with any kind of restriction."                         
IPI Deputy Director Michael Kudlak warned Iraq against taking a step backwards by restricting media freedoms.                     

"We again urge Iraq's judiciary and legislature to be mindful of the vital role played by media freedom while nurturing democracy," he said. "Legislation that pushes journalists into self-censorship is a step backwards, not forwards. At this stage, it appears as though the Iraq government is taking a step backwards."                        
IPI's latest warning came as Iraqis including journalists, writers and booksellers demonstrated in Baghdad on Friday against what they allege is state censorship.

 
Today in Baghdad, thousands of demonstrators marched through the streets carrying banners and protesting.  BBC has video hereAljazeera explains they were protesting "against government censorship and intimidation" and notes a threatened law suit, "Jalal Eddin Saghir, a leader of the SIIC, has threatened to sue Ahmed Abdul-Hussein, a journalist with the state-run Al-Sabah newspaper, for suggesting that the party could have staged the robbery to raise money for national elections in January 2010."  The SIIC, returning to our earlier conversation, would be "thugs."  AFP notes journalist Emad al-Khafaji speaking at the demonstration, "Journalists and media workers have lost 247 of their colleagues over the past six years because of attacks and violations.  The participants in this demonstration have confirmed they will not back down in the face of intimidation and threats."
 
 
British citizen Danny Fitzsimons is facing a trial in Iraq and could be sentenced to death. He served in the British military for eight years and was stationed in Afghanistan and Kosovo. He is accused of being the shooter in a Sunday Green Zone incident in which 1 British contractor, Paul McGuigan, and 1 Australian contractor, Darren Hoare, died and one Iraqi, Arkhan Madhi, was injured. Eric and Liz Fitzsimons spoke to the BBC (link has video) and noted that they are not asking for Danny to 'walk.' They stated that he has to take responsibility. But they want a fair trial and do not believe that is possible in Iraq. His legal defense team doesn't believe he can get a fair trial either stating today that the British military's presence in Iraq during the war means that Fitzsimons will be used as scapegoat.  Haroon Siddique (Guardian) spoke with the family and reports on Danny's PTSD and reports, "His borther Michael said Fitzsimons would cray as he told of finding a child's head in Kosovo, picking up bits of his friend's brain in Iraq, and the faces of enemies he had killed in combat."  Terri Judd (Independent of London) quotes Danny's father Eric stating that his son is a victim in the shooting as well, "We do feel very, very sorry for these two men and their families.  But Daniel is also a victim."  Liz Fitzsimons, Danny's step-mother, has made similar remarks and noted the pain those two families are going through is immense and natural and their own efforts, the Fitzsimons' efforts, are not about preventing accountability for Danny but about getting him to stand trial in a country (England) that has a working legal system as opposed to Iraq which does not. 
In the US Zachary Abrahamson and Eamon Javers (Politico) report: "He may be presiding over two wars and facing a terror threat at home and abroad, but you'd hardly know it from listening to President Barack Obama speak.Obama has uttered more than a half-million words in public since taking office Jan. 20 -- and a POLITICO analysis of nearly every word in this vast public record shows that domestic topics dominate, so much so that Obama sounds more like a peacetime president than a commander in chief with more than 100,000 troops in the field." Yes, Barack has avoided Iraq in his speeches, the reporters are correct. Guess what though? The press has avoided it too. Following a March press conference, Steve Padilla (Los Angeles Times) pointed out that 13 reporters asked Barack questions and Iraq "Never came up.  Isn't there a war going on?"  The the New York Times' live blogged that press conference:
 
Helene Cooper | 9:01 p.m. I'm still slackjawed over the shocking lack of national security issues raised. This is a new world we're living in, after seven years of Al Qaeda, Iraq and Afghanistan. Hard to imagine a Bush press conference focusing so singularly on the economy, but then, these are clearly different times.

Jeff Zeleny | 9:00 p.m. The second prime-time press conference for Mr. Obama is in the books. Thirteen questions, but not one about Iraq or Afghanistan. That would have been impossible to imagine during his presidential campaign. So what's the headline? "Hang on Americans, We'll Get Through This."

The Washington Post live blogged
as well (Ben Pershing, Alec MacGillis, Glenn Kessler, Frank Ahrens and Michael Fletcher live blogged for the Post).
 
 
TV notes. NOW on PBS rebroadcasts a show from March of this year on what happens to your health care if you lose your job? You can go on COBRA . . . if you can afford it. (A community member writes in today's gina & krista round-robin about paying approximately $250 a month and now, to get COBRA, she'll have to pay over $750 a month -- and you have to decide in the very brief window of time.) The program examines Las Vegas where "the only public hospital" closed the doors on "cancer patients and pregnant women". On Washington Week, Gwen sits around the table with Michael Duffy (Time magazine), Janet Hook (Los Angeles Times), James Kitfield (National Journal) and Janine Zacharia (Bloomberg News). Bonnie Erbe and her guestsEleanor Holmes Norton, Melinda Henneberger, Leslie Sanchez and Sabrina Schaeffer explore population growth on this week's edition of PBS' To The Contrary. Check local listings, all four PBS shows begin airing tonight on many PBS stations. And turning to broadcast TV, Sunday CBS' 60 Minutes offers:

  • Coming Up On 60 Minutes

Michael Vick
The former pro quarterback speaks in his first interview since he admitted to participating in the illegal dogfighting that resulted in a prison sentence and his suspension from the NFL. James Brown is the correspondent. |
Watch Video

America's New Air Force
Increasingly, the U.S. military is relying on un-manned, often armed aircraft to track and destroy the enemy - sometimes controlled from bases thousands of miles away from the battlefront. Lara Logan reports. |
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, Aug. 16, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.
 

21 dead in the bombings, NYT wants the oil

Yesterday, twin suicide bombings struck Sinjar, a village just outside of Mosul, in resulted in multiple deaths and numerous injuries. Jamal al-Badrani, Yara Bayoumy and Michael Roddy (Reuters) count 21 dead. Ernesto Londono and Dlovan Brwari (Washington Post) explain, "The double bombing occurred about 5 p.m. in the Ayoub coffeehouse in Sinjar, a town about 240 miles northwest of Baghdad. Most of the victims were Yazidis, a Kurdish-speaking religious minority. At least 30 people were wounded." Marc Santora (New York Times) quotes eye witness Salem Dakhou stating, "I went outside, then I heard the explosion. I could not see anything, it was so white. It smelled like gunpowder and burned flesh. [Then came the second bombing.] I was bleeding. Then I saw a man on fire, running. I tried to help him, but I couldn't get up. Then he died." Deborah Lutterbeck (Reuters -- link has video) notes 175 Iraqis have died in bombings in the last two weeks.

The New York Times editorializes today in a pompous and uninformed manner. Sunnis, they tell you, are responsible for the latest waves of attacks in Iraq. Really? That's cute. Especially if you've followed military press briefings in the last three weeks and especially if you grasp that northern Iraq is not the sole location of violence. But the paper wasn't all that concerned with a recent shelling, now were they? The rush to blame the Sunni's isn't all that different from what happened following the end of July bankrobbery. It was Sunnis!!!! Except . . . it turned out it wasn't. It was Shi'ites. Bodyguards for Iraq's Shi'ite vice president, in fact. Instead of pretending to be able to peer into hearts and minds or playing Miss Marple, the paper would be better served addressing what is -- addressing what is in the illegal war they helped sell -- the same illegal war they are reselling. The paper pretends to be concerned about the average Iraqi:

There is still no law guaranteeing that Iraq's oil revenue will be shared equitably among Shiites, Sunnis (whose areas have the least oil) and Kurds. Washington seems reconciled to more delay. That is a dangerous course. It must press Mr. Maliki and the Parliament to complete action on this legislation this year.
There is a law letting former Baath Party members reclaim jobs or pensions they lost after the American invasion. But it has not been carried out. This affects the Sunni professional class, since party membership was required for professional advancement. Mr. Maliki should order all government institutions -- Iraq's main employer by far -- to end this discriminatory treatment.
Many of the nearly 100,000 members of the Sunni Awakening Councils -- the former insurgents who decided with American encouragement and support to come in from the cold -- still have not gotten the pay and jobs in the security forces or civil service they were promised. Wooing the Awakening members helped choke off an incipient civil war. Not delivering on these promises could restart one.


Where do they start? With the oil. They're not concerned with the distribution, they want the other part of the oil law pushed through, the guarantee of the theft of Iraqi oil. It's cute the way they reveal themselves, isn't it? As for the Ba'athist law. Under Paul Bremer, Ba'athist were driven out and demonized in a process dubbed "de-Ba'athification." So de-de-Ba'athification has been needed for some time. Nouri was supposed to have addressed this. Addressed it and implemented it. That's part of the 2007 White House benchmarks -- benchmarks that Nouri signed off on. The law the paper trumpets today? It hasn't been implemented. But guess what? As anyone's who has paid a damn bit of attention the benchmarks damn well knows, it doesn't matter if it is implemented. As it exists now, it's a bunch of words with no measuring device to determine whether or not it actually is bringing Ba'athist back into the process via job hires, etc. The law is empty words. If the paper hadn't been so worried about pushing the theft of Iraqi oil, they might have grasped that.

Staying with opinion writing, Douglas Cohn and Eleanor Clift offer "We won. Now let's just leave" (Pocono Record):

It may be a career-ender for Col. Timothy R. Reese, whose memo saying it's time to withdraw from Iraq was leaked to The New York Times. Reese is a senior adviser to the Baghdad command, and he argues that American troops have done all they can in Iraq, that it's time to declare victory and leave. He says the Iraqi army isn't getting any better by having U.S. troops there, and all that lies ahead are diminishing returns.
Reese has been assailed as a troublemaker with critics noting that his views appeared on the Internet before they made it to the vaunted Times. Setting aside his methodology and whether he violated military protocol, he is correct in advocating the withdrawal of all U.S. military troops by August of 2010, more than a year earlier than the administration's goal.

Clift will be on NPR this morning and we'll note that at the end of the entry. Jason Ditz (Antiwar.com) reports that Brig Gen Peter Bayer Jr. has "condemned Reese as 'uninformed' and insisted the memo just amounted to 'one officer's view, written fairly early after June 30, who has a limited viewpoint'." Meanwhile Susanne M. Schafer (AP) reports on "irregular warfare" -- where airplanes will "buzz" targets and then bomb and they quote Air Force Lt. Gen. Gilmary Hostage (who is charge of the Air Force operations in both Iraq and Afghanistan) stating, "The first thing we do is fly over head, and the bad guys know airpower is in place and oftentimes that's enough. That ends the fight, they vamoose. The A-10 has a very distinct sound. The cannon on an A-10 is horrifically capable and our adversaries know it. When they hear the sound of an A-10, they scatter."

Turning to Iraq's border issues. October 26, 2008, the US made the border issues more difficult. That's when US forces crossed into Syria and conducted a raid. US helicopters dropped the US service members into Syria and at least 8 Syrian civilians were killed in the assault.

The fallout was not pretty.

US State Dept press release

Then-White House spokesperson Dana Perino was tasked with saying nothing repeatedly and here are some of the her remarks the Monday after the assault:

"The United States government has not commented on reports about that and I'm not able to here either."

*"I can't comment on it at all, no."

*"I'm not going to comment in any way on this; I'm not able to comment on that."

*"I'm not going to comment on the reports about this, no, I'm not. Anybody else?"

*"I'm not going to comment on it at all. This could be a really short briefing."

*"I don't know. I don't know."

*"Jim, all I can tell you is that I am not able to comment on reports about this reported incident and I'm not going to do so. You can come up here and try to beat it out of me, but I will not be commenting on this in any way, shape or form today."

*"I don't believe anybody is commenting on this at all."

*"To give you an answer to that would be commenting in some way on it and I'm not going to it."

*"Nothing."

"*I understand the reports are serious but it's not something I'm going to comment on in any way."


Yesterday, George Baghdadi (CBS News) reported on an attempted thaw in relations as Maj Gen Michael Moeller led a US delegation to Damascus for talks. We didn't note that yesterday although a CBS friend asked that we do. We didn't have room and I wasn't going to make it for a piece that refers to "Syria's state-run media" but fails to note the recent complicated history between the US and Syria. Translation, no mention of the well covered raid in October 2008? No need for me to rush to hand out a link. State-run media? Well self-censorsing US media really has no right to finger point, now does it? See the Telegraph of London, Tony Perry (Babylon and Beyond, Los Angeles Times), Ellen Knickmeyer and Ernesto Londono (Washington Post), CNN, and Borzou Daragahi and Julian E. Barnes (Los Angeles Times), and Martin Sieff (UPI) for some real time reporting on the raid. When one country raids another, it's news.

Adam Kokesh is running for the US Congress, from the third Congressional district in New Mexico. Here he offers (video link) his objections to **the Federal Reserve **. [C.I. note, corrected to Federal Reserve from ObamaCare.] (Francisco noted that and notes "this is not a left view but people need to pay attention to these objections, they are geunine and not trumped up." Francisco is in the third district and is planning to vote for Adam. He'll be writing about the topic this Sunday in El Spirito.) Adam also notes (link has text and video):


While I am inclined to thank Keith Olbermann (it happens on rare occasions!) for his recent segment on Countdown exposing the crimes of Erik Prince's Xe (formerly Blackwater) and all of the ways in which they are making things difficult for the troops in Iraq, I am much more inclined to point out his glaring hypocrisy. He has always been keen to hold accountable the proponents of an unconstitutional foreign policy and spared no breath to underscore the personal culpability of "Mr. Bush." Now that it's Obama who is employing people responsible for murder, excessive use of force, illegal drug use, and child prostitution in Iraq, he gets no mention. Obama gets a pass for his crimes. This just goes to show the moral baselessness of the “progressive philosophy,” if you could pin Olbermann down on exactly what that is any easier than you could catch a leprechaun.

For more information on Adam Kokesh's campaign, click here.

NOW on PBS rebroadcasts a show from March of this year on what happens to your health care if you lose your job? You can go on COBRA . . . if you can afford it. (A community member writes in today's gina & krista round-robin about paying approximately $250 a month and now, to get COBRA, she'll have to pay over $750 a month -- and you have to decide in the very brief window of time.) The program examines Las Vegas where "the only public hospital" closed the doors on "cancer patients and pregnant women". On Washington Week, Gwen sits around the table with Michael Duffy (Time magazine), Janet Hook (Los Angeles Times), James Kitfield (National Journal) and Janine Zacharia (Bloomberg News). Bonnie Erbe and her guestsEleanor Holmes Norton, Melinda Henneberger, Leslie Sanchez and Sabrina Schaeffer explore population growth on this week's edition of PBS' To The Contrary. Check local listings, all four PBS shows begin airing tonight on many PBS stations. And turning to broadcast TV, Sunday CBS' 60 Minutes offers:

  • Coming Up On 60 Minutes

    Michael Vick
    The former pro quarterback speaks in his first interview since he admitted to participating in the illegal dogfighting that resulted in a prison sentence and his suspension from the NFL. James Brown is the correspondent. | Watch Video


    America's New Air Force
    Increasingly, the U.S. military is relying on un-manned, often armed aircraft to track and destroy the enemy - sometimes controlled from bases thousands of miles away from the battlefront. Lara Logan reports. | 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, Aug. 16, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.


NPR's The Diane Rehm Show features their news roundup discussions today, the show begins broadcasting on most NPR stations and streaming live online at 10:00 a.m. EST. The first hour is the domestic hour and joining Diane are Jackie Calmes (New York Times), Eleanor Clift (Newsweek) and Matthew Continetti (Weekly Standard). The second hour is the international hour and joining Diane for that news discussion are Abderrahim Foukara (Aljazeera), Elise Labott (CNN) and Waren P. Strobel (McClatchy Newspapers).


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


















Camp Ashraf and Danny Fitzsimons

July 28th, Nouri al-Maliki broke his word to the United States (big surprise) and ordered an assault on Camp Ashraf -- home to various members of the MEK and their families. The MEK is made up of Iranian dissidents. For years, they were considered a terrorist group by many countries and unions. The European Union and England took them off their terrorist list and there were efforts in the US Congress to call for the same. Nouri promised not only that he would not deport the residents to Iran (where there would be serious human rights concerns for the dissidents' safety) but also that he would not attack them. Prior to early 2009, the MEK had been protected by the US military throughout the Iraq War. Yesterday at the US State Dept, reporters pressed spokesperson Philip J. Crowley. The Los Angeles Times (no individual journalist is credited) notes:


U.S. officials said little about the raid before Wednesday, when the State Department called it "an avoidable tragedy." Elaborating on Thursday, State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said the Iraqi attempt to establish control of the camp "was not executed well."
"We understand what happened was a mistake," Crowley said. "Iraq was trying to extend its sovereignty to Camp Ashraf. We understood what they were trying to do. They did not do it well."

Jake Tapper and Kirit Radia (ABC News) add:

Last September, Gen. David Petraeus told reporters
that the Iraqi government had assured the US that Camp Ashraf's protected status would remain.
But as the Iraqi government has taken control over its country and formed closer ties with the Iranian government, Iraqi government officials have in recent months stated that Camp Ashraf residents need to leave the country.
On July 28, Iraqi forces -- using U.S. weaponry and vehicles -- stormed into the camp and killed nine residents. Brandishing batons, tear gas, and water cannons, the Iraqi forces beat residents, apparently driving purposefully into crowds. Hundreds were injured and 36 were detained and, according to Amnesty International have been "subjected to beatings and torture" in a nearby police station.
"Some are in need of medical treatment due to injuries, including as a result of torture and gunshot wounds," says the human-rights group. "The detainees are reported to have been told to sign documents in Arabic but to have refused. They have been denied access to lawyers of their choice and have launched a hunger strike in protest against their detention and ill-treatment."

We noted Fatemeh Kherzie in yesterday's snapshot. She's among the protestors in London who are on a hunger strike as they call for action from the United States. Emma Rowley (This Is London) reports today on Kehrzie and notes she has not been able to contact her sister Farzaneh at Camp Ashraf in weeks. She's quoted stating, "I'm dizzy but I don't want anything until I have some news from Ashraf." Fatemeh Kherzie was hospitalized earlier in her hunger strike and she's now refusing treatment and fluids. Also in England, Soudabeh Heidari is on a hunger strike. Tomasz Johnson (Mill Hill Times) reports the 19-year-old was also hospitalized but, like Fatemeh, has refused medical advice and is continuing her hunger strike. A spokesperson for the strikers, Laila Jazeyeri, tells Johnson, "At any moment she could slip into coma. None of them are responding to us at the moment. They don't want to go to hospital. We're worried sick about them. People are dying in central London and no one knows about it."

British citizen Danny Fitzsimons is facing a trial in Iraq and could be sentenced to death. He served in the British military for eight years and was stationed in Afghanistan and Kosovo. He is accused of being the shooter in a Sunday Green Zone incident in which 1 British contractor, Paul McGuigan, and 1 Australian contractor, Darren Hoare, died and one Iraqi, Arkhan Madhi, was injured. Eric and Liz Fitzsimons spoke to the BBC (link has video) and noted that they are not asking for Danny to 'walk.' They stated that he has to take responsibility. But they want a fair trial and do not believe that is possible in Iraq. His legal defense team doesn't believe he can get a fair trial either stating today that the British military's presence in Iraq during the war means that Fitzsimons will be used as scapegoat.

Haroon Siddique (Guardian) spoke with the family and reports on Danny's PTSD:

The walls of his flat were covered with poems about death and destruction and Fitzsimons would pace the floor at night, they said.
"We feel deeply for the two men who were shot and their families but there is a third victim in this," his stepmother, Liz, a teacher, told the Independent. "He is very, very poorly. He should not have got a paid post working for a private security firm."
His brother Michael said Fitzsimons would cry as he told of finding a child's head in Kosovo, picking up bits of his friend's brain in Iraq, and the faces of enemies he had killed in combat. Michael Fitzsimons said his brother told him: "I won't make it past 30, I will either get shot out there or kill myself."
In 2004, a psychiatric report said that he had combat stress after he drunkenly punched an officer and was held back when his battalion was sent to Iraq.

Also speaking with the family is Terri Judd (Independent of London):

In the interview Mr Fitzsimons's father, Eric, and stepmother, Liz, said their son had been diagnosed with a form of stress disorder when he was discharged from the army five years ago. But this had been exacerbated by repeated tours with security companies in Iraq in which he had been injured and lost countless friends to bombs. A recent assessment had found his condition had worsened.
Mr Fitzsimons said his son should be recognised as another victim of the shooting. "We do feel very, very sorry for these two men and their families. But Daniel is also a victim."
The couple explained the family were terrified that he would be made an example of for a multi-billion dollar industry, whose employees recently lost immunity following a shootout involving US security firm Backwater in which 17 civilians were killed.
"We are worried the trial will be rushed through and he will be made a scapegoat. We can't let that happen."
The family said that Mr Fitzsimons was discharged from the 2nd Battalion, The Parachute Regiment after tours in Bosnia, Kosovo, Northern Ireland and Afghanistan. But they insisted it was the dangerous work that he carried out for private security companies in Iraq that had sent him on a dramatic spiral downwards exacerbated by drink and prescription medication.

Amnesty International has issued the following statement:

Responding to reports that a British employee of a security company working in Iraq may face a death sentence, Amnesty International UK Media Director Mike Blakemore said:
'It's right that private military and security company employees like Danny Fitzsimons are not placed above the law when they're working in places like Iraq and it's right that the Iraqi authorities are set to investigate this very serious incident.
'However, as with all capital cases, Amnesty would strenuously oppose the application of the death penalty if applied to Mr Fitzsimons in this case.
'Iraq has a dreadful record of unfair capital trials and at least 34 people were hanged in the country last year alone.
'The important thing now is that if Danny Fitzsimons is put on trial he is allowed a fair trial process without resort to the cruelty of a death sentence.'

The following community sites updated last night:


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


















thomas friedman is a great man






oh boy it never ends