Saturday, October 09, 2010

Military coup?

Iraqi political and security sources in Baghdad have spoken of their fears of either a military coup taking place in Iraq or a militant Shiite militia overthrowing the government.
An Iraqi official, speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat from Baghdad, revealed that "important Iraqi political leaders have strengthened the security of their headquarters, offices, and homes" adding that they have also "restricted their movements both inside and outside of Baghdad." The source claimed that this came "following advice or warnings from Iraqi security and US [military] commanders in Iraq."
The Iraqi official, who spoke to Asharq Al-Awsat on the condition of anonymity, said that "we are not ruling out a military coup taking place especially as the political history of Iraq is full of military coups, and in light of the decision of the commander-in-chief of the Iraqi armed forces, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, to surround Baghdad with military forces…and to exclude other leaders from positions of direct responsibility of the movements of the army, as well as the arrest of senior officers in Baghdad, Mosul, Diyali, Tikrit. This gives rise to fears of a military coup in the event of al-Maliki not being able to remain as prime minister."

The above is from Maad Fayad's "Fears of Military Coup Surface in Iraq" (Asharq Alawsat Newspaper) and India Daily adds, "An Iraqi security source has revealed that U.S. forces have given orders for U.S. officers to join key military units in Baghdad as advisers due to fears of an attempt to overthrow the government." Earlier this week, Mark Schlachtenhaufen (Edmond Sun) reported, "Iraq is entering a crucial period, which could include a coup triggered by disenchantment and frustation with the political class, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist [Anthony Shadid] said Monday." Shadid heads the New York Times' Baghdad Bureau and he spoke earlier this week at the University of Central Oklahoma. Meanwhile Ahmed Chalabi was in DC recently. As Steven Lee Myers (New York Times) observes, Iraqi politicians have become the Iraq Globetrotters:

A leading Shiite cleric, Ammar al-Hakim, was in Damascus, Syria, on Wednesday, while the Sunni vice president, Tariq al-Hashimi, flew to Istanbul. And Ayad Allawi, the champion of secular politics across the Shiite-Sunni divide who is losing ground in his campaign to be recognized as the rightful prime minister, went to Damascus and Cairo seeking Arab backing for his quest.
The Kurdish region’s president, Massoud Barzani, who emerged from the election a political kingmaker, was in Vienna, while Moktada al-Sadr, the radical cleric whose followers now wield more political influence than ever, worked the phones from his exile in Qom, Iran.

Everyone scrambles to shore up support and the political stalemate continues.

March 7th, Iraq concluded Parliamentary elections. The Guardian's editorial board noted last month, "These elections were hailed prematurely by Mr Obama as a success, but everything that has happened since has surely doused that optimism in a cold shower of reality." 163 seats are needed to form the executive government (prime minister and council of ministers). When no single slate wins 163 seats (or possibly higher -- 163 is the number today but the Parliament added seats this election and, in four more years, they may add more which could increase the number of seats needed to form the executive government), power-sharing coalitions must be formed with other slates, parties and/or individual candidates. (Eight Parliament seats were awarded, for example, to minority candidates who represent various religious minorities in Iraq.) Ayad Allawi is the head of Iraqiya which won 91 seats in the Parliament making it the biggest seat holder. Second place went to State Of Law which Nouri al-Maliki, the current prime minister, heads. They won 89 seats. Nouri made a big show of lodging complaints and issuing allegations to distract and delay the certification of the initial results while he formed a power-sharing coalition with third place winner Iraqi National Alliance -- this coalition still does not give them 163 seats. They are claiming they have the right to form the government. In 2005, Iraq took four months and seven days to pick a prime minister. It's seven months and two days and counting.

Waleed Ibrahim (Reuters) quotes
an Iraqiya official stating today, "Iraqiya's decision not to take part in a government headed by Maliki is final and irreversible." Tariq Alhomayed (Asharq Alawsat Newspaper) agues:

The ordeal of forming the next Iraqi government, with its inconsistencies, concessions, deals, and Iranian influence, means one important thing: The next Iraqi Prime Minister, whether it is Nuri al-Maliki, or otherwise, will be a restricted one, with limited powers, a man sitting on a chair with four weak legs. This is because any alliance will not be based on mutual interests, but instead on pressure and overseas influence, namely from Iran. This is what Moqtada al-Sadr confirmed in his statement when he announced his acceptance of al-Maliki's nomination for a second term in office, acknowledging that pressure is normal in politics and that everybody is "trying to move their bread closer to the fire" [Iraqi proverb meaning everybody is acting in their own interests].
Therefore, the Iraqi Prime Minister will be a lame duck, as politicians say. The Iraqi Prime Minister will not assume his position until he has exhausted all of his bargaining chips, offering one concession after another. This means that the Prime Minister will be weakened, both in the short and long term. There is now way of knowing the full repercussions of course, because a weak Iraqi Prime Minister in Iraq is just as dangerous as an authoritarian Prime Minister.

Danger?

Bombings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing wounded four people, a Baghad sticky bombing injured four people and a Diyala Province bombing of police officer Ali Muhammed's home -- no one known to be hurt or killed in the bombing.

Shootings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports an Abu Ghraib home invasion in which 1 family members was killed and four more wounded, a Baghdad drive-by that killed 2 people and left a third injured, 2 Falluja home invasions in which 3 brothers were killed and a fourth was wounded -- all four were employed of the Ministry of Higher Education and, dropping back to Friday, an assault on a Baghdad checkpoint in which six people were wounded. Reuters adds a Garma assault in which 3 people were killed -- the three were brothers who worked for the Ministry of Culture.

Today John Lennon would have turned 70-years-old. David Edwards (Daily Mirror) reports:


Yoko Ono
wells up when she recalls the moment John Lennon's spirit returned to their home days after he was murdered in 1980.
She says: "John's presence is very much around me and in our apartment. I felt it right around the time he died.
"We had three cats - Sasha, Misha and Charo. When he was alive they would go to him whenever the kitchen door opened.
"One night right after he died, the door opened - and there was no wind - and the cats immediately went to the door to wait for him. They were never the same afterwards. They'd hide in corners or behind the chairs.
"When John's songs came on the radio I'd go to switch it off because I couldn't stand it. But all the cats would jump on the radio, remembering his voice. It was so painful."

Briefly, three people e-mailed wanting to know about the Iraqi pipelines and why we aren't covering them? Iraq is announcing one pipeline after another . . . empty words unless they get investments. They can't afford them. They're seeking foreign investment on them and must have that investment to actually build pipelines -- as opposed to just announcing them -- which is a detail that's repeatedly left out of news stories on this topic and that's why we've ignored it.

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





the edmond sun
mark schlachtenhaufen
anthony shadid





















The Fool Card reversed

He has declared an end to the war in Iraq by redefining the mission of the 50,000 troops who remain there. Yet the war continues, our soldiers fight and die, and Iraq still lacks a functioning government.
We’ve seen much the same thing with ObamaCare. As with the Iraq War, Obama has merely redefined the mission. Far from being the universal health-care system that the country needs, Obama’s health program is best understood as a bailout of the private health industry that seeks to guarantee some 30 million additional customers for insurance companies and continued obscene profits for large drug manufacturers. The paradox here is that in a system aiming at universal coverage, the actuarial role of insurance companies, which is to determine the precise odds of paying unprofitable claims on a given class of customers, has become obsolete.

That's Roger D. Hodge speaking in an interview at Harper's and if you think that Harper's has suddenly rediscovered the Iraq War, think again. Hodge makes those comments on his own -- the question from the Barry fluffer at Harper's was about health care. Hodge, latest book is The Mendacity of Hope: Barack Obama and the Betrayal of American Liberalism, is the one who remembered the Iraq War not the dopey professor who used to bill himself as a "Constituational law expert" until news of that billing got back to his university which did not think he was fit to teach Constitutional law and wasn't too happy that he was billing himself as an expert. The only time Fat And Tubby remembers the Iraq War is when he gets booked as a guest on Antiwar Radio.

It's a tough life for Fat And Tubby. Many MSM outlets backed away from him in light of the 'credential' issue yet, once upon a time, he was supposedly going to become a leading light in legal circles. Whoring for Barack has consequences. Even Fat And Tubby grasps that now. And he now busies himself wondering if he can manage a double gainer off the diving board and reposition himself as an Obama critic? Myself, I see him doing a belly flop. Which doesn't mean he shouldn't attempt the move, we could all use a good laugh.

Fat And Tubby is The Fool in the Tarot Cards, The Fool reversed -- which would explain rash decisions and does take us to the latest nonsense from Nouri al-Maliki. AFP reports that Nouri made a little speech today in Baghdad insisting that, "We must . . . turn a new page with all those who have gone too far and made mistakes. [. . .] We forgive and turn the page because the country cannot be built on the basis of hatred and rancour." AFP rightly interprets the remarks to be aimed as Sunni exiles, Nouri's political opponents.

The ones he always lashes out at, remember? A bomb goes off in Baghdad and Nouri's insisting it is former Ba'athists in Syria. And then he's demanding that Syria force out all the Sunnis in the country. ('Forgetting' that when he was an exile, he sought and was provided refuge in Syria.) As Rickie Lee Jones once asked, "What could make a boy behave this way?"

Let's see, St. Bernadette visited him in a dream? No. There's been no Nouri transformation. This is the man who actively used star-crossed lovers Ali al Lami and Ahmed Chalabi and their so-called Justice and Accountability Commission to purge Sunnis before the March 7th elections, during the March 7th elections and after the March 7th elections. But the world's supposed to believe Nouri's had a sudden change of heart?

Nouri was unable to force Syria to expell the exiles. Now he seems to be banking on the belief that he's smarter than the exiles and can trick them into returning which would allow him to seek the retribution his blood lust demands.

As Nouri's opponents have been repeatedly targeted with assassination in the months since the elections, as Nouri has expelled Sahwa (largely Sunni fighters, also known as "Sons Of Iraq" and "Awakenings") from Iraq's security forces despite pledges to incorporate them into the security forces and the government, he now wants to show up claiming that Sunni exiles are welcomed in Iraq and he really expects to be believed?

That's how dumb Nouri is and, let's face it, the US government has a long record of installing the weak minded and stupid as puppets throughout the world.


The following community sites updated last night and this morning:


David Bacon's latest book is Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press) which won the CLR James Award. Bacon can be heard on KPFA's The Morning Show (over the airwaves in the Bay Area, streaming online) each Wednesday morning (begins airing at 7:00 am PST). And we'll close with this from Bacon's "Union Busting, Iraqi Style" which you can read at The Nation or at Agence Global -- links go to the article at each outlet:


The political deadlock in Baghdad, which has prevented the formation of an Iraqi government more than six months after the parliamentary elections of last March, has not prevented the lame-duck administration of Nuri Kamal al-Maliki from opening its southern oilfields to the world's giant corporations. Nor has it stopped the US Embassy and Commerce Department from reinvigorating the Bush-era program of selling the country's public assets to corporate buyers. And because Iraqi unions have organized public opposition to privatization since the start of the occupation, the Maliki administration is enforcing with a vengeance Saddam Hussein's prohibition on public-sector unions.

The United States may have withdrawn its combat brigades, but it is not leaving Iraq. And while Washington may have scaled back earlier dreams of "nation building," it has not given up on a key aspect of the economic agenda behind that project: sacrificing the rights of Iraqi workers and unions to encourage corporate investment.

Unions have been locked in conflict with the Iraqi government since the occupation began, but in the last year, that conflict has grown much more intense. In March, after oil workers protested low pay and their union's illegal status, worksite leaders were transferred hundreds of miles from home. The oil ministry banned travel outside Iraq for Hassan Juma'a and Falih Abood, respectively president and general secretary of the Federation of Oil Employees of Iraq. Both were hauled into court and threatened with arrest.

"It is our duty as Iraqi workers to protect the oil installations, since they are the property of the Iraqi people," Juma'a explained in early 2005, when the U.S. was still directly governing Iraq. "We are sure that the US and the international companies came here to put their hands on the country's oil reserves." Juma'a's union chased Halliburton's subsidiary KBR from southern Iraq in the first year of the occupation.




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












thomas friedman is a great man






oh boy it never ends



















Friday, October 08, 2010

Iraq snapshot

Friday, October 8, 2010.  Chaos and violence continue in Iraq, Nouri announces who he says will be president of Iraq, the prime minister position is still up for grabs (though Nouri acts as if it's his), Baghdad learns to utilize phantom stockers in grocery stores, Cindy Sheehan explores the US government attack on peace activists, and more.
 
 
Administrations love to and live to demonize those who don't agree.  For the Bully Boy Bush administration, one of their biggest targets was former US Ambassador Joe Wilson who had been sent, in 2002, on a fact-finding mission to Niger to determine whether there was any evidence supporting rumors (from Iraq's thug community then in exile but soon to be ruling and ruining Iraq) that Saddam Hussein had attempted to acquire yellow cake uranium (as opposed to Betty Crocker's yellow cake mix) from Niger.  Wilson investigated and found nothing to back up the baseless claim.  He reported those facts back and was debriefed.  It should have ben the end of it.  But as much as administrations love to demonize, they also love to lie.  So January 28, 2003, Bully Boy Bush gave his Constitutionally-mandated State of the Union speech and declared, "The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." Wilson thought at first that Bush was speaking of another African country but, when he found out it was Niger, he began speaking to reporters (including New York Times' columnist Nicholas Kristof) on background.  And he wrote a column for the New York Times which they published July 6, 2003 entitled "What I Didn't Find in Africa."
 
The White House reaction was swift.  They began shopping around to reporters that Joe Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, worked for the CIA.  They weren't lying.  She was a CIA agent and they blew her cover and all the overseas operations she'd worked on.  Robert Novak was the first reporter to run with it.  (Matt Cooper and Judith Miller were among those who also had the story shopped to them.)  Plame's cover was blown, the cover of everyone she'd worked with was blown.  And you might want to remember that Robert Gates never fretted over that.  (A reference to his high drama over WikiLeaks.)  What Novak did wasn't a crime.  What the White House did was.  (And Bully Boy Bush can thank his own father for that. Jake Tapper covered this in 2003, George H.W. Bush's Intelligence Identity Protection Act.)  Naomi Watts plays Valerie Plame and Sean Penn plays Joe Wilson in the film Fair Game which was screened Wednesday at the MoMA in New York.
 
The New York Daily News quotes Wilson stating at the screening, "I just came back from Baghdad. And it's a mess.  And I would really like to see us talk about why the f--- we're in there. We have 50,000 kids there. What are they doing?"  Joe Wilson is -- yet again -- correct.  We do need to be asking that question.  Instead, we're silent or else repeating the lie that the Iraq War ended.   WRAL reports that yesterday came the news Fort Bragg would be deploying troops to Iraq. John Ramsey (Fayetteville Observer) reports over 750 members of the 18th Airborne Corps will deploy in January. News 14 Carolina (link has text and video) adds that this will be the third eployment for the XVIII Airbone Corps. WTVD (link has text and video) notes of the new phase christened "Operation Iraq Freedom," "The new name reflects a change in mission but the danger remains the same."
 
Yesterday we quoted from a soldier's e-mail that Thomas E. Ricks posted. I hadn't read the post itself (and the quote was read to me over the phone) but we should note that Ricks writes in his post (before the quote) that the Army itself is saying that combat has not ended. There's an interesting comment by Jim Gourley on the post and we're going to excerpt a section of it:
I don't think Obama's statement declaring the end of the war was any less transparent to the initiated than Bush's was. Though the similarity in their specific verbiage of "combat actions" is eerie, I didn't see any articles in the major news sources making remarks to that effect. The greater public should have picked up on the sound of those words coming from Obama's lips like a fire bell in the night, though.
We paid a heavy strategic and operational toll for assuring ourselves things were all wrapped up in 2003. We risk paying a societal toll today. 
Others discuss the way media coverage has fallen off regarding Iraq since Obama's proclamation and the footage of units rolling out of the country. That's just the symptom on the surface. The real malady lies beneath, and it's deeply disturbing to me. 
By its own admissions, today's network news media chases the audience. Their news content and presentation format is specifically designed to ensure ratings. We can draw an unsettling conclusion from that nature-- the truth about combat activities in Iraq isn't getting covered in the media because the American public doesn't want to hear about it anymore. Perhaps, as Tom notes, the emperor doesn't have any clothes in this case, but the people are more than ready to see the resplendent attire he's put on, and so they do. It seems we only have the capacity to fight one "real" war at a time. If we're going to focus on Afghanistan, then Iraq must become the "forgotten one."
 
A media critique/dialogue is taking place in the comment thread (absent Keller or "Keller") and one poster (Cow Cookie) is insisting that the media is calling out the White House spin of combat being over. No, it's really not. AP called it out. Some individual journalists for print publications have called it out . . . in interviews they've given (including interviews to NPR -- and also during the international roundtable on The Diane Rehm Show). But it's not called out by most outlets and not repeatedly called out.
 
Like Bush's 9/11 and Iraq linkage, the spin and the lie is repeated. Barack repeats it himself. Just last week, we were calling out his claim that he has ended the Iraq War. I don't believe anyone's called him out for that lie in the MSM. The publication was Rolling Stone, where Barack insisted, "When I was campaigning, I was very specific. I said, 'We are going to end the war in Iraq, that was a mistake,' and I have done that." That interview was covered by every major news outlet but not one of them covered his lie on Iraq. The Iraq War didn't end. 7 US soldiers have died since he gave that stupid August 31st speech.
 
More examples? Earlier this week ("It's all a joke to Jamie Elizabeth Stiehm"), we were calling out the idiot at US News & World Reports who 'shared' that the Iraq War was over. Now we could do those entries every day because every day some idiot is penning a column or report claiming the Iraq War is over. We did that entry because a woman e-mailed the public account very upset by Steihm's b.s. (The woman's brother died in the Iraq War and this war that's 'over'? The woman's cousin is serving in the Iraq War right now.)
 
These false claims are repeated over and over. We usually note most stories on the wounded service members. We ignored the crap the Tennessean served up this week. A two-parter. Do you know how Brandon Gee and Chris Echergaray opened their little story? Here's what two idiots can serve up if they try really hard to whore: "The Iraq war is officially over, but it continues in the heart of Patricia Shaw, who lost her only son."
 
This is exactly like the 9-11 and Iraq lie. The media would periodically express puzzlement that so many Americans believed this lie -- that the media spat back out over and over. The media was scared -- as a whole -- to correct Bush and they just quoted him. It's the same thing with Barack. And he's giving speeches as these fundraisers right now claiming he's ended the Iraq War. But find the outlets which are correcting him. You can't pick up a paper, turn on a cable chair, without getting a 'report' on Barack's latest fundraiser. But they never find the time to call out the claim. Though some of them are quoting him directly and repeating it.
 
Though the illegal war has obviously not created a functioning government -- or the desire for one -- it has created the largest refugee crisis in the world. "UNHCR does not consider the security situation in Iraq adequate to facilitate or promote returns. We nonetheless continue to assist refugees who voluntarily express their wish to return, in close coordination with the Iraqi authorities," declared UNHCR spokesperson Melissa Fleming today in Geneva. Flemming noted that a survey of Iraqi refugees had been taken in Syria -- utilizing over 2,000 respondents -- and the majority are not talking return to Iraq. She noted, "A similar survey on the Iraq-Jordan border among some 364 families (representing approximately 1450 individuals) found that none were returning to Iraq permanently." SwissInfo interviews Happy Talker and Low Information Official Walter Kerns of the United Nations.
 
swissinfo.ch: Before your visit, you called on the Iraqi authorities to end the displacement of people within the country. What specifically is the problem?
 
 
W.K.: It was not so much the displacement. After people were forced to flee the violence between religious communities in 2006, the government failed to organise any sort of assembly points – no camps, no collective accommodation. That means that many poorer people squatted on land or in buildings that are publicly-owned. At least there they were slightly protected, but a moratorium on evicting them has been lifted. I appealed for these people not to be thrown out onto the street – that would only make the humanitarian and social problems worse. Instead, let them remain where they are until the government has come up with a solid plan for finding solutions – whether it's allowing them to return or to settle where they are.
 
swissinfo.ch: Did your appeal work?
W.K.: It didn't fall on totally deaf ears. I had a very long discussion with Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, who was very open to the idea that the relevant ministries should work out a strategy for dealing with these displaced people, including the allocation of land on which they could build houses. From that point of view, I think it was good. There was no assurance that another moratorium on evictions would be announced, but the suggestion wasn't rejected. We'll see.
 
Walter -- and the outlet -- seem unaware that 50,000 US troops remain in Iraq and that Europe is forcibly evicting Iraqi refugees. Or maybe that's an example of something not falling "on totally deaf ears"?
 
Yesterday's snapshot noted accusations about the US military coming out of Iraq:
 
Press TV reports today that the central government or 'government' out of Baghdad is complaining about the American military "moving around the city without being escorted by Iraqi forces, while using Iraqi army uniforms and vehicles as a disguise." Nouri al-Maliki's spokesperson Ali al-Dabbagh is quoted stating, "We Iraqi people cannot accept the presence of foreign troops on our land soldiers, it is crushing the national feeling and that is why we have been happy that the troops are leaving and the balance of the troops is going to diminish next summer."
 
Last night, Press TV interviewed US journalist Wayne Madsen about the charges and he stated, "The fact that Americans are found to be wearing Iraqi uniforms in Iraqi military vehicles looks like it's a complete, blatant switch tactic where it was announced with much fanfare that the US was ending its combat mission in Iraq, and now we find US troops still engaged in combat missions in Iraqi uniforms." And, as the US government and the Iranian government vie for most influential in Iraq, you better believe Press TV is going to run with this story. Meanwhile, today on Morning Edition (NPR), Peter Kenyon offers an analysis of several factors at play in Iraq including Kurdish MP Mahmoud Othman who states, "They tried very hard -- they had Jesh al-Mahdi, but Jesh al-Mahdi didn't behave well, they were not as clever as Hezbollah. But now still they have such a possibility -- that's exactly what they are aiming at. Iran is aiming at making the Sadrists a sort of Hezbollah in Iraq." As Kenyon's report notes, the political stalemate continues.
 
March 7th, Iraq concluded Parliamentary elections. The Guardian's editorial board noted last month, "These elections were hailed prematurely by Mr Obama as a success, but everything that has happened since has surely doused that optimism in a cold shower of reality." 163 seats are needed to form the executive government (prime minister and council of ministers). When no single slate wins 163 seats (or possibly higher -- 163 is the number today but the Parliament added seats this election and, in four more years, they may add more which could increase the number of seats needed to form the executive government), power-sharing coalitions must be formed with other slates, parties and/or individual candidates. (Eight Parliament seats were awarded, for example, to minority candidates who represent various religious minorities in Iraq.) Ayad Allawi is the head of Iraqiya which won 91 seats in the Parliament making it the biggest seat holder. Second place went to State Of Law which Nouri al-Maliki, the current prime minister, heads. They won 89 seats. Nouri made a big show of lodging complaints and issuing allegations to distract and delay the certification of the initial results while he formed a power-sharing coalition with third place winner Iraqi National Alliance -- this coalition still does not give them 163 seats. They are claiming they have the right to form the government. In 2005, Iraq took four months and seven days to pick a prime minister. It's seven months and one day and counting.
 
Last Friday, Moqtada al-Sadr's bloc was announcing their support for Nouri al-Maliki as prime minister and some wrongly thought it meant end of stalemate. It didn't even mean end of discussion. As the editorial board of the Japan Times observes, "That move could break the deadlock, but it does not mean that a deal is imminent. Considerable horse-trading is still required to form a government. Ultimately, however, there needs to be power-sharing with Mr. Maliki's chief rival, former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi. Failure to do so could result in another outbreak of sectarian violence." This morning,
Sam Dagher (Wall St. Journal) reports, "In Mr. Allawi's first interview since the Maliki-Sadr tie-up, the former prime minister said he had agreed to restart power-sharing talks with Mr. Maliki that were broken off last month -- but only if all top posts, including who serves as prime minister, are on the table for discussion." Alsumaria TV reports that tribal Sheik Sabah Al Shumari is calling for all parties to speed up the process.
 
Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) quotes Nouri al-Maliki stating today that Allawi will not be president, "Take it from me in full confidence -- the Kurds will not forgo the position of president and the president will be Jalal Talabani." Earlier, Namo Abdulla (Rudaw) quoted International Crisis Group's Joost Hiltermann stating, "This may be an issue that is non-negotiable, as long as we're talking about a government made up the State of Law, of Nuri Maliki, and the Kurds and the Sadrists and some other smaller groups." Arraf also notes that Nouri is stating -- oooh!!!! -- that he might -- finally? -- be able to form a coalition next week.  At Foreign Policy, Kori Schake offers an analysis which includes:
 
Which is where the Obama administration's inattention to Iraq, accelerated drawdown of U.S. troops, and appointment of Christopher Hill -- an ambassador without expertise on Iraq -- comes in. These factors combined to reduce U.S. influence at this crucial juncture of Iraq's democratization. U.S. military leaders backed up the administration for far too long, claiming the drawdown would have no effect on Iraq's political landscape. The spike in violence and the withering of political compromise in Iraq these seven months are the result of our declining engagement and the Iraqis' declining confidence in us.  

Into this void has now stepped Moqtada al-Sadr, dilettante son of a revered Shi'ia cleric and leader of sustained insurgent activity against U.S. forces. Since the surge pulled the rug out from under his legitimacy through violence approach, he has been in Iran burnishing his religious credentials, garnering support from the Iranian government, and mobilizing his political forces.
 
Kori Schake is a reserach fellow with the right-wing Hoover Institution. Pay close attention to that critique because it is going to be the Republican critique on Iraq.  We noted this in real time back before Hill was confirmed. (For example, see April 5, 2009's "And the war drags on . . .")  We noted that the Republicans were lodging their objections on the record and doing so because they couldn't blame the military, that's not what they do.  They needed a civilian to blame.  And Barack Obama was too stupid to grasp that you don't hand your opponents Chris Hill.  Hill was the utlimate stooge, completely unqualified.  And the narrative will be that Bush 'won' the Iraq War (false) and Barack screwed it up by appointing Chris Hill (true on the second point). Back then, Republicans in Congress were bragging about how it was setting them up for 2010.  Events in Iraq and their own perceived luck in the midterms mean they're now prepping it for the 2012 election. Appointing Chris Hill was a stupid, stupid thing to do.  Barack never should have nominated and the Committee shouldn't have passed his nomination onto the full floor. He was completely unqualified, he broke his first promise (on how quickly he'd depart once confirmed) before he even made it to Baghdad, and his 'low energy levels' (people should have read those personnel files) ensured that Iraq -- not a success by any means when he arrived -- would only further unravel.   Why is their stalemate?  In part because Chris Hill was the US Ambassador to Iraq.
 
Turning to safety.  For this paragraph, dropping back to yesterday's snapshot: A con artist offers you what sounds like a really good deal but there's a qualifier to it, usually something along the lines of, "there's a limited window of time" as they attempt to hurry you into making a risky move. Remember that as you read Leila Fadel's report (Washington Post) about US officials such as the Commerce Dept's Francisco Sanchez leading an Iraq tour and telling business execs, "If you want to really play a role here, you have to be here now." As Fadel points out, "Iraq is ranked fifth from the bottom on Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index - tied with Sudan and ahead of only Burma, Afghanistan and Somalia. Iraq's ranking has dropped drastically since 2003." Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) quotes Sanchez insisting, "I'm not trying to sugar-coat this but what I am trying to say is, the Iraqi government is sorting through some of these challenges as the physical security increasingly improves. You can't wait for everything to be perfect." Serena Chaudhry (Reuters) notes, "Companies on the mission included Boeing, Bell Helicopter Textron, ICON Global Architectural Engineering and Wamar International." One wonders Sanchez will promise to attend any and all funerals? Probably not. He'll pitch to get American business into Iraq but he'll be busy if and when the funerals roll around. Like most con artists, he'll have moved on to his next mark.
 
There's our context.  There's the US government insisting that US companies need to get started in Iraq because it's good business and safe, and it's safe,  and it's safe.  (Nod to Bob Hope in My Favorite Brunette.)  Today Yasmine Mousa (New York Times' At War) reports on a new Baghdad super market (multi-story supermarket) which is doing big business. There are a few . . . what Sanchez might call 'bugs' to be worked out:
 
Food and loading trucks are nowhere to be seen, yet the aisles are stocked with kitchen utensils, brands of shower gels and clothing. 
"Because of the security situation we have to work like thieves; right before dusk or soon after dawn we hastily carry our merchandise into the store in batches, in saloon cars," said Fareed Sadoun Salih, an employee. 
Mr. Rifai added: "We cannot rely on remote suppliers. We purchase from nearby vendors."
Business is good, but the staff members maintain a low profile because their biggest fear is "getting kidnapped." Such is life for anyone with money in Iraq.
 
And that's the environment that the US Commerce Dept is attempting to send business into.  Meanwhile Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses were discovered in Baghdad (one shot dead, the other "with signs of torture"). Reuters adds 1 police officer was shot dead in Baghdad "by a sniper" and there was an attack on a river in Basra in which seven security guards were left wounded.  The boats were by a prison and, inside the prison, a riot reportedly broke out.
 
 
Friday, September 24th FBI raids took place on at least seven homes of peace activists -- the FBI admits to raiding seven homes -- and the FBI raided the offices of Anti-War Committee. Just as that news was breaking, the National Lawyers Guild issued a new report, Heidi Boghosian's [PDF format warning] "The Policing of Political Speech: Constraints on Mass Dissent in the US." Heidi co-hosts WBAI's Law and Disorder Radio (9:00 a.m. EST Mondays -- also plays on other stations around the country throughout the week) with fellow attorneys Michael Ratner and Michael Smith and Monday the program explores the raids with guest Jim Fennerty.  You can stream the broadcast at  Law and Disorder Radio  online and, for the next 85 or so days only, at the WBAI archives. Peace Mom Cindy Sheehan interviewed activist Jess Sundan for Cindy Sheehan's Soapbox last Sunday.
 
 
Jess Sundan: On Friday, September 24th, I awoke to the sound of pounding at my door around seven in the morning. By the time I got downstairs, there were six or seven federal agents already in my house.
 
Cindy Sheehan: How many?

Jess Sundan: Six or seven.
 
Cindy Sheehan: [Laughing] Oh, I'm sorry.  I thought you said 57.  Six or seven, that's bad enough.
 
Jess Sundan: [Laughing] No, I don't think they would have fit if it was that many.  But my daughter and my partner were already awake and they showed us the search warrant which allowed them to take - to search and seize my house -- seize things in my house -- including -- I don't know how many boxes they carried out filled with papers and books, CDs, checkbooks, computers, cell phones, my passport, photographs.  They spent about four hours here going through everything in our house. And when they left, they not only left a bit of a mess but they left a subpoena for myself and my partner for a grand jury in Chicago.
 
Cindy Sheehan: And what makes you so dangerous or subversive to national security that they would do that to you?
 
Jess Sundan: Well I'm an anti-war activist and myself and all the other people who received subpoenas or had their homes raided that day are people that I've worked with for several years on different anti-war campaigns. We also have in common, all of us have a real perspective of international solidarity. Many of us have traveled to other countries and in our anti-war work tried to give voice to those most affected by US policies abroad. So in their search warrant they were specifically looking for evidence that we had given material support to foreign terrorist organizations -- including naming someone from Palestine and someone from Columbia.  Most of our subpoenas and search warrants were roughly the same.  And they named the Antiwar Committee and we also had our offices searched --
 
Cindy Sheehan: Of Minneapolis, right?
 
Jess Sundan: Yeah, that's right.  So I think, their real concern is that we've been very effective .  And secondly, that we've -- in the anti-war movement -- done good work to break the information blockade, making sure that real stories and pictures come back home to the United States from places where the US is militarily involved.
 
 
And we'll note this from the show when Cindy's asked about the legal issues in terms of the grand jury and appearing before it.
 
Jess Sundan: Well the main things is the grand jury which all of us are very concerned about.  A grand jury meets in secret. If you appear before a grand jury, you can't have an attorney with you. There's no one to object if you're mistreated. And if you don't testify, there's a risk of jail time and so we're very concerned. It's a very undemocratic court., you know.  Except it's not really a court.  None of us have been charged with any crime. A purpose of the grand jury is to investigate possible crimes and see if they can generate enough evidence to make a case against someone. We haven't been told who is the target of the grand jury -- like who they think may have committed a crime or what crimes may have been committed but obviously there whole search warrant was around this material support to foreign terrorist organizations. Any of us that were served on any of these subpoenas, and also some people were named on a search warrant at the Antiwar Committee office in addition to those of us that got subpoenas -- any of us realize that at any time there could be indictments brought against us.  We don't know, we don't really know what our legal standing is.  So we're working with our attorneys.  I know that I myself intend to plead the Fifth [Amendment] which means that I will not testify.
 
Stephanie Weiner and Joe Ioskaber's home was among the ones raided. Wednesday, Andy Grim (Chicago Tribune) reported that they say "they will refuse to answer questions before a grand jury".  Democracy Now! featured the news in headlines and showed Stephanie Weiner stating:
 
We believe we have been targeted because of what we believe, what we say, who we know. The grand jury process is an intent to violate the inalienable rights under the Constitution and international law to freedom of political speech, association and the right to advocate for change. Those with grand jury dates for October 5th and those whose subpoenas are pending have declared that we intend to exercise our right not to participate in this fishing expedition.
 
The statement was from a press conference Tuesday. Fight Back! News reports Pastor Dan Dale spoke at the conference noting an interfaith statement people were signing on to: "We are people of faigh and conscience who condemn the recent FBI raids in Chicago as a violation of the constitional rights of the people organizations raided. They are a dangerous step to further criminalize dissent.  The FBI raids chisel away and byprass fundamental constitutional rights by hauling activists before grand juries under the guise of national security."
 
Grand juries were discussed on   Law and Disorder Radio this week:
 
Michael Ratner: Yeah. Jim Fennerty, what people in Chicago are you personally representing and what's their political story? Why do you think they're targets? 
 
Jim Fennerty: Well this is the thing.  I was just at the US Attorneys office.  I had another case in federal court this morning and the US attorney afterwards -- turns out it's the same attorney on these cases -- and he wanted to talk to me.  Basically, so far he has not told me anybody who is actually a target, so we're concerned what that means.  Now I've been lied to before when I went down to Florida in the Sami al-Arian case with somebody else who was involved with that. And they said, they couldn't tell me, they couldn't tell me. I get down there, we take the Fifth Amendment and they say, "We're not offering your guy immunity, go home."  And then I, you know, a month or two later, he gets an indictment. Under their manual, tecnically, they're not supposed to send out a subpeona in a grand jury for a target unless they get higher authority to do that.
 
Michael Ratner: Heidi and I were talking about that.
 
Heidi Boghosian: So let's just explain for our listeners about grand juries a bit.  When you talk about a target, you mean an individual who is under suspicion for violating the law.               
 
Jim Fennerty: That is correct.            
 
Heidi Boghosian: But what's happening now is that individuals are being given subpeonas in what we call a fishing expedition to try to get information about other people?           
 
Jim Fennerty: That's what it sounds like now but I -- like I said, that's what they told me but it's happened before where somebody told me something and it didn't actually work out true but that's what I've been told today. Basically, a grand jury in its inception historically, you know, hundreds of years ago, was supposed to be citiznes coming together and determining if charges should be filed criminally against somebody.  But what it's become, it's become almost, to me, almost like a rubber stamp for the government because basically what happens is the government, US attorneys, can be inside the grand jury.  There's usually around 23 people who are called, citizens, to be at the grand jury and what happens is that the US attorney can be inside, they can ask you questions, you can refuse to answer those questions, but your side never gets told to these 23 people.  In other words, your lawyer can't come in there and argue for you and give your side of it.  That's why it's, like I said, it's pretty much a rubber stamp for what the prosecutors want and people should be very, very concerned about going there because what you say could be twisted around and  you've just got to be very vigilant about what you do.  You know, most cases, people can say they don't want to testify at the grand jury, they're going to exercise their Fifth Amendment rights against incrimination.  What they could do at a grand jury, they could offer you immunity which is use immunity, it's not total immunity, but what that means is they offer you immunity and then you refuse to testify, you can be taken to a judge, they'll read the question to the judge and then they'll ask you the answer to that question.  If you continue to refuse to answer that question, then a judge can hold you in civil contempt and you could be incarcerated for the remaining time of the grand jury.            
 
Heidi Boghosian: And that can be a long time.        
 
Jim Fennerty: Well that can be depending how long the grand jury is sits. But your lawyer can go back periodically and say, "Look it, Judge, this person's been there for three months or whatever and they're not going to testify.  They're still not going to testify. So it makes no sense to keep continuing to lock them up."  And hopefully you'll get a sympathetic judge for that.       
 
Heidi Boghosian: Because it is -- it is lawful to hold someone in civil contempt, to incarcerate them as a method of coercion --
 
Jim Fennerty: Correct.                  
 
Heidi Boghosian: -- but not as punishment --                   
 
Jim Fennerty: Correct.                         
 
Heidi Boghosian: -- and that's why we try to argue that it's not doing any good.
 
 
And we'll again note this section from the broadcast because activists are being targeted.
 
Michael S. Smith: Heidi, when the FBI knocks, what do you do?         
 
Heidi Boghosian: It is crucial that if anyone listening to this show is contacted by the FBI or if your friends or family members are, that you do not talk to them. You just say, "I would like to consult with my lawyer. May I have your business card? My lawyer will get back to you."  Never say anything because anything you say, no matter how seemingly mundane --  answering a question: Do you live here?,   Is your name such and such? -- can be used against you in further grand jury proceedings.              
 
Michael S. Smith: Well they can go after you saying that you lied to them. Don't talk to them.  Call your lawyer. Call our hotline. Get out a pencil.  Heidi, give them the hotline.                           
 
Heidi Boghosian: If you're visited by the FBI, you can call the NLG's Hotline. It's 888-NLG-ECOL. Or 888-654-3265.           
 
Michael S. Smith: Heidi, please repeat the hotline.            
 
Heidi Boghosian: The hotline is 888-NLG-ECOL.  And how you can remember that is that originally we started this as a hotline for environmental and animal rights activists so it was for ecology.  It was Eco Law but we shortened it.  
 
And on Heidi Boghosian's [PDF format warning] "The Policing of Political Speech: Constraints on Mass Dissent in the US," two people e-mailed about getting it in book form.  It is available online for free.  Some people don't want to read a screen.  Some people have problems with PDF files.  Some people use public computers -- such as at a library -- where they have limited time to be on them.  For those reasons and more (including maybe you want a book to give as a gift), please note that the report is available in booklet form.  For all NLG publications, click here.  Click on the title you want and they will give you info -- usually it's an e-mail address.  It's below five dollars a copy but I don't know the exact price, sorry -- and the cost is strictly for postage and handling. 
 
 
TV notes. On PBS' Washington Week, Peter Baker (New York Times), Joan Biskupic (USA Today), Michael Duffy (Time) and David Wessel (Wall St. Journal) join Gwen around the table. Gwen now has a weekly column at Washington Week and the current one is "The Risks and Rewards of Party Purity." This week, Bonnie Erbe will sit down with Karen Czarnecki, Avis Jones-DeWeever, Nicole Kurokawa and Irene Natividad on the latest broadcast of PBS' To The Contrary to discuss the week's events. And this week's To The Contrary online is extra is on cyber bullying. Need To Know is PBS' new program covering current events. This week's hour long broadcast airs Fridays on most PBS stations: "A report on the jobs situation profiles an unemployed baby-boomer couple and two Millenials; and details a federally funded, temporary jobs program. Included: ex-labor secretary Robert Reich and Sara Horowitz (Freelancers Union) provide perspective." Turning to broadcast TV, Sunday CBS' 60 Minutes offers:
 

The Speed Traders
Steve Kroft gets a rare look inside the secretive world "high-frequency trading," a controversial technique the SEC is scrutinizing in which computers can make thousands of stock trades in less than a second.


Mandela
A collection of his memoirs, mostly from the 27 years he spent in prison, reveal the innermost thoughts of the international civil rights giant Nelson Mandela, whose movement brought down the apartheid regime of South Africa. Bob Simon reports.


Eminem
CNN's Anderson Cooper profiles the chart-topping rapper from Detroit who overcame addiction to reclaim the winning style that made him the biggest selling artist of the past decade.


60 Minutes, Sunday, Oct. 10, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.

 
 
To get a more complete understanding of our current crisis, we need to look at the history of events that led up to it. We need to peer deeply into the inner workings of the Global Banking Intelligence Complex. Without acknowledging and exposing the covert forces that are aligned against us, we will not be able to effectively overcome them.
In the past I have shied away from going too deeply into the details of the intelligence world out of fear of being written off and dismissed as a conspiracy theorist. If I hadn't spent the majority of the past 20 years investigating global financial intelligence operations, I certainly wouldn't believe half of this myself. Given the severity of our current crisis and the imminent devastating implications, I now realize that I must go deeper into covert activities than I publicly ever have. The information I am about to report is very well-sourced and documented, and needs to be covered before we can proceed to exposing present operations.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Refugees of Iraq, refugees of the 'process'

Yesterday's snapshot noted accusations about the US military coming out of Iraq:

Press TV reports today that the central government or 'government' out of Baghdad is complaining about the American military "moving around the city without being escorted by Iraqi forces, while using Iraqi army uniforms and vehicles as a disguise." Nouri al-Maliki's spokesperson Ali al-Dabbagh is quoted stating, "We Iraqi people cannot accept the presence of foreign troops on our land soldiers, it is crushing the national feeling and that is why we have been happy that the troops are leaving and the balance of the troops is going to diminish next summer."

Last night, Press TV interviewed US journalist Wayne Madsen about the charges and he stated, "The fact that Americans are found to be wearing Iraqi uniforms in Iraqi military vehicles looks like it's a complete, blatant switch tactic where it was announced with much fanfare that the US was ending its combat mission in Iraq, and now we find US troops still engaged in combat missions in Iraqi uniforms." And, as the US government and the Iranian government vie for most influential in Iraq, you better believe Press TV is going to run with this story. Meanwhile, today on Morning Edition (NPR), Peter Kenyon offers an analysis of several factors at play in Iraq including Kurdish MP Mahmoud Othman who states, "They tried very hard -- they had Jesh al-Mahdi, but Jesh al-Mahdi didn't behave well, they were not as clever as Hezbollah. But now still they have such a possibility -- that's exactly what they are aiming at. Iran is aiming at making the Sadrists a sort of Hezbollah in Iraq." As Kenyon's report notes, the political stalemate continues.

March 7th, Iraq concluded Parliamentary elections. The Guardian's editorial board noted last month, "These elections were hailed prematurely by Mr Obama as a success, but everything that has happened since has surely doused that optimism in a cold shower of reality." 163 seats are needed to form the executive government (prime minister and council of ministers). When no single slate wins 163 seats (or possibly higher -- 163 is the number today but the Parliament added seats this election and, in four more years, they may add more which could increase the number of seats needed to form the executive government), power-sharing coalitions must be formed with other slates, parties and/or individual candidates. (Eight Parliament seats were awarded, for example, to minority candidates who represent various religious minorities in Iraq.) Ayad Allawi is the head of Iraqiya which won 91 seats in the Parliament making it the biggest seat holder. Second place went to State Of Law which Nouri al-Maliki, the current prime minister, heads. They won 89 seats. Nouri made a big show of lodging complaints and issuing allegations to distract and delay the certification of the initial results while he formed a power-sharing coalition with third place winner Iraqi National Alliance -- this coalition still does not give them 163 seats. They are claiming they have the right to form the government. In 2005, Iraq took four months and seven days to pick a prime minister. It's seven months and one day and counting.

Last Friday, Moqtada al-Sadr's bloc was announcing their support for Nouri al-Maliki as prime minister and some wrongly thought it meant end of stalemate. It didn't even mean end of discussion. As the editorial board of the Japan Times observes, "That move could break the deadlock, but it does not mean that a deal is imminent. Considerable horse-trading is still required to form a government. Ultimately, however, there needs to be power-sharing with Mr. Maliki's chief rival, former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi. Failure to do so could result in another outbreak of sectarian violence." This morning, Sam Dagher (Wall St. Journal) reports, "In Mr. Allawi's first interview since the Maliki-Sadr tie-up, the former prime minister said he had agreed to restart power-sharing talks with Mr. Maliki that were broken off last month—but only if all top posts, including who serves as prime minister, are on the table for discussion." Alsumaria TV reports that tribal Sheik Sabah Al Shumari is calling for all parties to speed up the process.

Though the illegal war has obviously not created a functioning government -- or the desire for one -- it has created the largest refugee crisis in the world. "UNHCR does not consider the security situation in Iraq adequate to facilitate or promote returns. We nonetheless continue to assist refugees who voluntarily express their wish to return, in close coordination with the Iraqi authorities," declared UNHCR spokesperson Melissa Fleming today in Geneva. Flemming noted that a survey of Iraqi refugees had been taken in Syria -- utilizing over 2,000 respondents -- and the majority are not talking return to Iraq. She noted, "A similar survey on the Iraq-Jordan border among some 364 families (representing approximately 1450 individuals) found that none were returning to Iraq permanently." SwissInfo interviews Happy Talker and Low Information Official Walter Kerns.
of the United Nations:

swissinfo.ch: Before your visit, you called on the Iraqi authorities to end the displacement of people within the country. What specifically is the problem?

W.K.: It was not so much the displacement. After people were forced to flee the violence between religious communities in 2006, the government failed to organise any sort of assembly points – no camps, no collective accommodation. That means that many poorer people squatted on land or in buildings that are publicly-owned. At least there they were slightly protected, but a moratorium on evicting them has been lifted. I appealed for these people not to be thrown out onto the street – that would only make the humanitarian and social problems worse. Instead, let them remain where they are until the government has come up with a solid plan for finding solutions – whether it’s allowing them to return or to settle where they are.

swissinfo.ch: Did your appeal work?

W.K.: It didn’t fall on totally deaf ears. I had a very long discussion with Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, who was very open to the idea that the relevant ministries should work out a strategy for dealing with these displaced people, including the allocation of land on which they could build houses. From that point of view, I think it was good. There was no assurance that another moratorium on evictions would be announced, but the suggestion wasn’t rejected. We’ll see.


Walter -- and the outlet -- seem unaware that 50,000 US troops remain in Iraq and that Europe is forcibly evicting Iraqi refugees. Or maybe that's an example of something not falling "on totally deaf ears"?

David DeGraw's need book is The Road Through 2012: Revolution or World War III and he has posted chapter two online. And that's all I can manage this morning on our lurching taxi ride.

TV notes. On PBS' Washington Week, Peter Baker (New York Times), Joan Biskupic (USA Today), Michael Duffy (Time) and David Wessel (Wall St. Journal) join Gwen around the table. Gwen now has a weekly column at Washington Week and the current one is "
The Risks and Rewards of Party Purity." This week, Bonnie Erbe will sit down with Karen Czarnecki, Avis Jones-DeWeever, Nicole Kurokawa and Irene Natividad on the latest broadcast of PBS' To The Contrary to discuss the week's events. And this week's To The Contrary online is extra is on cyber bullying. Need To Know is PBS' new program covering current events. This week's hour long broadcast airs Fridays on most PBS stations: "A report on the jobs situation profiles an unemployed baby-boomer couple and two Millenials; and details a federally funded, temporary jobs program. Included: ex-labor secretary Robert Reich and Sara Horowitz (Freelancers Union) provide perspective." Turning to broadcast TV, Sunday CBS' 60 Minutes offers:

The Speed Traders
Steve Kroft gets a rare look inside the secretive world "high-frequency trading," a controversial technique the SEC is scrutinizing in which computers can make thousands of stock trades in less than a second.


Mandela
A collection of his memoirs, mostly from the 27 years he spent in prison, reveal the innermost thoughts of the international civil rights giant Nelson Mandela, whose movement brought down the apartheid regime of South Africa. Bob Simon reports.


Eminem
CNN's Anderson Cooper profiles the chart-topping rapper from Detroit who overcame addiction to reclaim the winning style that made him the biggest selling artist of the past decade.


60 Minutes, Sunday, Oct. 10, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.






Radio note.
The Diane Rehm Show airs on most NPR stations (and begins streaming online at 10:00 a.m. EST). For the first hour (domestic news), guest host Susan Page is joined by panelists Jackie Calmes (New York Times), Steve Roberts (George Washington University) and disreputable sexist and homophobe (check his book title for the latter) Dana Milbank; for the second hour (international), the panelists are Karen DeYoung (Washington Post), Hisham Melhem (Al-Arabiya TV) and Moises Naim (El Pais).


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