Saturday, September 01, 2012

Violence claimed 393 lives in Iraq in August

It's the first day of a new month.  Who failed?


Raheem Salman, Barry Malone and Alison Williams 'report' that Iraqi ministries say 164 people died in August compared to 325 in July.

That's reporting?

This would have passed in J-school?  One side says is reporting?

Iraq Body Count reports the death toll for August was 393.

164 say the ministries.  Reuters not only too lazy to keep their own count, they can't even use an independent count -- IBC -- by which to gauge the government's claim.

Who ever told them that was journalism?

Did anyone practice journalism?

AFP did.  They note the numbers are what the "government claimed," they kept their own count   (278 killed, 51 injured) and they note that their figures for June, July and August demonstrate "the death toll nationwide has been almost unchanged."  Also practicing journalism is Mohammed Tafeeq (CNN) who notes CNN's count is 270 dead last month.

Violence continued today.  Alsumaria notes that a Diyala Province roadside bombing left two soldiers injured, an attack outside of Baquba injured one security force, a Basra home invasion killed 1 judge and left his wife injured, and a Baghdad car bombing left six injured.  Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reports that the Baghdad car bombing has claimed 2 lives and the number injured has increased to eleven.  Dropping back to Friday night, Xinhua notes that Sheikh Arif Abdul Razak and another Shi'ite cleric were shot dead while the two were leaving a mosque.  Meanwhile Dar Addustour reports police are investigating the outbreak of 46 fires in Baghdad and surrounding provinces during the last 96 hours.

The week saw Iraq execute 26 people, bringing the total the government's put to death this year to nearly a hundred.  Amnesty, Human Rights Watch and the UN called out the continued executions.  It is alleged that Nouri is forcing through executions for sectarian reasons, that the proposed amnesty law may be passed shortly and Nouri's attempting to put to death people whom the law might allow to live.   The Kuwait Times reports that about twenty people protested outside Iraq's Embassy in Kuwait "against 'sectarian-based executions'" today denouncing the targeting of Sunni prisoners.

This week also saw War Criminal Tony Blair bank more blood money as he spoke Thursday in South Africa.  Besides facing protesters, the former UK prime minister also saw Archbishop Desmond Tutu bow out of the speaking engagement with his office stating the Archbishop could not share the stage with Blair due to his Iraq War actions.  Tutu has written a column on the matter which the Observer has published:

If leaders may lie, then who should tell the truth? Days before George W Bush and Tony Blair ordered the invasion of Iraq, I called the White House and spoke to Condoleezza Rice, who was then national security adviser, to urge that United Nations weapons inspectors be given more time to confirm or deny the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Should they be able to confirm finding such weapons, I argued, dismantling the threat would have the support of virtually the entire world. Ms Rice demurred, saying there was too much risk and the president would not postpone any longer.
On what grounds do we decide that Robert Mugabe should go the International Criminal Court, Tony Blair should join the international speakers' circuit, bin Laden should be assassinated, but Iraq should be invaded, not because it possesses weapons of mass destruction, as Mr Bush's chief supporter, Mr Blair, confessed last week, but in order to get rid of Saddam Hussein?
The cost of the decision to rid Iraq of its by-all-accounts despotic and murderous leader has been staggering, beginning in Iraq itself. Last year, an average of 6.5 people died there each day in suicide attacks and vehicle bombs, according to the Iraqi Body Count project. More than 110,000 Iraqis have died in the conflict since 2003 and millions have been displaced. By the end of last year, nearly 4,500 American soldiers had been killed and more than 32,000 wounded.
On these grounds alone, in a consistent world, those responsible for this suffering and loss of life should be treading the same path as some of their African and Asian peers who have been made to answer for their actions in the Hague.

 The political crisis continues with the latest development being reported by Al Mada: Moqtada al-Sadr's bloc has publicly stated that Nouri and his State of Law coalition are not serious about reforms.  A spokesperson for the Sadr bloc states that Nouri has had two months of talking about this reform commission with various meetings taking place and nothing has been accomplished in all that time.

Moqtada's bloc is most likely correct and this does fit with Nouri's long established pattern of promising something different than what is asked for (a national conference, in this case, and a return to the Erbil Agreement), swearing it will do the same thing and then, after a few months of distraction, it becomes clear that nothing was accomplished because Nouri never intended for it to be.

The following community sites -- plus On The Wilder Side -- updated last night and today:

Hal David has passed away today.    He was 91-years-old and famous for the songs he wrote with Burt Bacharach.  The two began writing together in 1957.   In Joe Smith's Off The Record: An Oral History of Popular Music (Warner Books, 1988), Burt reflected on starting out as a songwriter:

When I began writing, it seemed everyone was bouncing around.  It was almost incestuous.  I'd write with Hal David three times a week, and then I'd switch off and write with Bob Hilliard in the morning, and then in the afternoon Bob would write with same composer Hal had just finished with.  And on and on like that.
[. . .]
With Hal, of course, it became quite successful.  And fun, both of us sitting in a room staring at each other.  I'm a very slow writer.  I've always been very slow.  I can really labor over something.  And Hal wasn't exteremly fast either, so we were a good match. 
But I must say, that first year it was very hard.  A lot of rejections.  Playing a song and somebody stopping you after eight bars! I remember going to see Connie Francis, and she lifted the needle of the demo.

At his website, Davis wrote, "I am fortunate to have enjoyed a long-time collaboration with Burt Bacharach. Burt is a man of many talents - a masterful arranger, an outstanding conductor, but first and foremost a brilliant composer. Among songwriters there are many tune writers but just a handful of composers. He is one of the few. "

Their first hit was Marty Robbins' "The Story of My Life" in 1957.  Other hits followed but it was in the sixties and early seventies that they really made their mark.

In the US, Dionne Warwick quickly became the premiere interpreter of their songs and first hit with their "Don't Make Me Over" and followed that with countless hits including "Anyone Who Had A Heart," "Walk On By," "I Say a Little Prayer" (which Aretha would take back onto the charts in the 70s), "I'll Never Fall In Love Again," "Do You Know The Way To San Jose," and many more.  While Dionne was charting in the US, girl singers in England were hitting with the Bacharach & Davis songs.  Cillia Black would turn "Anyone Who Had A Heart" into a major hit in England and Sandy Shaw would do the same with "Always Something There To Remind Me."  After Dionne had recorded it as a B-side, Dusty Springfield would take "Wishin' and Hopin'" and it became a worldwide hit (top ten in the US).   Dusty would have another huge, worldwide hit when she recorded "The Look Of Love" for the soundtrack of 1967's Casino Royale.

In England, Cillia Black would give the songwriters their first number one with her cover of "Anyone Who Had A Heart"in 1964; however, they wouldn't reach number one in the US until Herb Alpert's first vocal hit (Alpert mainly did instrumentals) "This Guy's In Love With You."  That held the number one spot for four weeks begining with the week of June 22, 1968.   In 1970, they'd get another song at the top of the charts, again for four weeks, with "Raindrops Keep Fallin' On My Head."  B.J. Thomas recorded the song, the theme to Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid and the composition went on to win an Academy Award -- only the second number one hit in the rock era to win an Academy Award (the first was "Love Is A Many Splendored Thing").

At his website, Hal David wrote:

I have heard it said that we have a style of our own. If we do, it is never consciously contrived. Certainly "What the World Needs Now Is Love" and "What's New, Pussycat?" are as far apart as the North Pole and the South Pole. The same thing can be said of "Alfie" and "Wives and Lovers." They are poles apart. The main thing we try to do is find an original approach to whatever song we are writing. Being different just to be different is plain foolishness. We never do that. Anything that takes away from the emotion we are trying to express, we discard. If the song isn't honest you may fool yourself, but you will never fool the public-at least, not for long. If we in truth do have a style it is because, in our search for originality, we have not written to a particular formula. When we achieve the freshness we are looking for, it's a wonderful feeling. Here is one of our more timeless songs, writen in 1965.

 And he went on to quote the lyrics to their huge hit "What The World Needs Now Is Love."

Burt told Joe Smith:

People don't always hear the same thing in the same song.  A perfect example is the song, "What the World Needs Now Is Love." I didn't believe in that song very much.  I wrote it, I guess I must have liked it a little, so I finished it and played it for Dionne -- who didn't love it either.  And when she said she didn't love it, then I really didn't love it.
Well, when we were getting ready to cut Jackie DeShannon, Hal said, "Play that song, 'What the World Needs Now Is Love'." Hal's really good like that. He believes in the song.
And then I heard Jackie sing it, and the rest, as they say, is history.

The e-mail address for this site is

I Hate The War

Tone?  I don't care about tone at a website.  I've stated that repeatedly.  This isn't The Atlantic.  Were it, I would have to strive for better tone.  Nor have I presented myself as the caring and wonderful.  Check the archives, I've stated I'm not a nice person, I've self-confessed to being an ass and a bitch.

If you're confusing my criticism of the nastiness with "I would never do that," you're missing a great deal before you including, in yesterday's snapshot, " I'm all for taking stands, I'm all for calling out and I can be bitchier than anyone but when you accuse someone of wanting to kill, you've crossed a line and what's really sad is you are so far gone into a world of hatred that you can't even see that."

Ellen Barkin's the one who accused Clint Eastwood of wanting to kill someone but Jason Biggs has gone too far as well.  He may lose his job as a result.  When you've got no movie roles, when you've got not TV roles and you need to pay bills, you don't piss on your voice work for basic cable.  Jason Biggs wrote inexcusable Tweets.  They were sexist and vulgar.  His dreams/fantasies/fear of women's bodies is on him and he can certainly explore that but he can't lash out at women's bodies and savage women and pretend that he's offered something the world either needed or wanted.

Does he also not remember Barack in 2008 agreeing candidate's families were off limits?

How does Jason Biggs attacking the wives of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, writing about how he pictures their anuses, etc., help Barack?

It doesn't.  He already is seen as too close too celebrities by a segment of the public and along comes Jason Biggs feeding into every negative stereotype of the free floating notion of "Hollywood."

Now the campaign is tainted by Jason's Tweets.  How did that help Barack?

The hate didn't help anyone and the only people agreeing with Jason were already (a) hateful and (b) going to vote for Barack.

There's another section of people who would like to vote for Barack though.  And Jason's little stunt can be off putting to them.  Jason's little stunt can be seen as so vulgar that they either don't vote or they vote for another candidate.

Ann Romney is not a valid target. There are journalists writing for allegedly respected publications (the Seattle Times to name one sewer) that can't seem to grasp that.   Janna Ryan is not a valid target either.  If you have a problem with Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan who are running for public office, that's your target.  When you get vulgar and sexist about two women who's only 'crime' is being married to a politician, a certain partisan crazy will cheer you on but the greater part of America will recoil in horror.

That's due in part to the fact that the partners of politicians do not make policy and it's also due to the fact that most of us are smart enough to realize a married couple is not gene splicing.  A married couple is two people.  They may agree in part on some issues, they may agree fully on some issues, they may agree on everything and to the same extent or they may agree on very little.  You have to be really stupid and small minded to assume that because two people love each other, they march in lock-step on every issue.

Maybe people who can't get that have never had real relationships?  They've either not been involved or when involved have never been able to see the person before them as anything but an extension of themselves?

I have no idea.  But Jason Biggs is hurting his already troubled career and is hurting Barack's election  chances.  He needs to issue an apology.

Then there's Ellen Barkin.

I like Ellen, I know Ellen.  I don't like what she's been Tweeting for several weeks now.

And I really don't like whining.

I have many friends who are talented and would love to be working but can't book a job.  Ellen's had trouble with that herself in the past but right now she's on the verge of her biggest success ever with her new sitcom.  So why is she trying to ensure that it flops?

That's what her Tweets are doing.  She's running off potential viewers every day.  And if this show tanks, NBC's going to put the word out on Ellen and she will be unemployable at which point it will be whining because Ellen didn't have the brains to realize that when you have a new show, your goal is to talk it up and get as many people interested in it as possible, not to run around spewing hate and making people not want to tune in.

It will be whining on Ellen's part if the show tanks because she brought it on herself.  I'm not in the mood.  Mike wrote about Biggs and Ellen last night and included this:

C.I. can tell you all about an actress who made similar moves and destroyed her own career.  She went on Letterman and insulted her own show which was getting great ratings.  The network never forgave the actress and blacklisted her.  As a result, she's never appeared on the major networks again really.  She would audition for lead roles, supporting roles and guest roles.  She'd get called back over and over but when the network brass got involved, she'd always be passed over.   12 years after she killed her own show, the same network allowed her to be a bit player guest on an episode of a popular show when the producer demanded she be cast.  Even that didn't result in a career re-birth.  Now her career's over and everyone but her seems to know it.

Yes, I can talk about that.  The woman starred in three huge hits in the 1970s.  She also starred in a classic film that's probably what she'll be best remembered for (the film was directed by a good friend of mine).  By the 80s, the years and the coke and other things had been hard.  And it was TV time for her.  As Mike notes, she went on TV when she finally had a hit and trashed the show.  Made rude remarks about it, about the scripts, about the production, about what a turkey it was, etc.  The network was furious.  She did not work again for years.  Even now, she can't book a US job, not a good one, nothing respectable.  She destroyed her career.  Her network put the word out on her and ensured that no one else wanted her crazy.

Why hire ____ when you could hire a Faye Dunaway or someone else who would go out there and promote the show?  Why hire someone who's going to alienate the audience?  Make fun of the people who watch the show?

Ellen's in that position right now.  I hope the show's a hit.  It's funny.  But if it flops, the network is not going to blame the producers.  The rest of the cast is not going to be blamed.  It's Ellen who's spewed hate on Twitter for weeks now and who has given interviews resulting in headlines that instruct people not to watch the show,.  Who will be in trouble?   Ellen and only Ellen.

I'm sorry that no one seems have to any brains these days but let me repeat that if you want a career in the performing arts, you cannot piss off the public.  Who do you think you will performing before?

That's why I think Jackson Browne, Ann and Nancy Wilson and others are so stupid when they whine that some Republican used their song.  Oh, boo, hoo.  Get over it.  Bruce Springsteen's always had the good grace to just note that he wouldn't vote for whatever candidate and then leave it alone.  That's because you don't want to piss off half the country.  Heart's got an album coming out.  I've heard three tracks and it's solid.  But they've lost some listeners by whining about "Barracuda."  Just grow up, people. Because someone decided "Rock Me On The Water" spoke to them did not mean that they agreed to vote the way you do or eat what you do or dress like you or anything else.

But liking "Rock Me On The Water" did mean they'd be interested in seeing you in concert, did mean they'd be interested when you released a new album.

Did mean that.

Doesn't to some now.  Because, surprise, surprise, conservatives like music too.  Why do you think Rush uses the Pretenders as bumper music?  (Or did in the 90s.)  And when you have your little temper tantrum and get your 'yeah, yeah!' from a partisan freak show, it doesn't mean a damn thing.

The idiots logging on to some page to say you were great to pull your song from whatever campaign?  They're blogging for political reasons.  Those don't translate into sales.

But those Heart fans who are Republicans?  They did buy your records.  They did buy tickets to your shows.  And now you've just pissed on them and you think you can put out an album and tour and expect them to support you?

That's not how it works.

I'm for taking brave stands, offline I'm known for being against war, I'm seen as flaky and a hundred other things depending upon the reporter writing the story.  But I have never made a point to piss off people who like my offline work.  I've never said, "Oh, I'm a Democrat so you Republicans have to find something else to do."

For artists having a fit when a political candidate uses their song at a rally, they need to realize the recording industry is in an awful state and you really can't afford to piss off your fans.  Now is not the time to be shedding fans.

Somewhere along the way, and we'll try to tackle this at Third, a lot of hate's been thrown around.  And it makes no sense at all.  It does not help elect people and it doesn't help anyone's career.  But it does ensure that there are new walls built up dividing people across the country.  Thursday's snapshot opened with Mitt Romney's plan re: veterans in college getting in-state tuition rate.  We noted that in Wednesday's snapshot as well.  That's a great idea.

I will not be voting for Mitt Romney.  My plan is not to vote (if that changed or changes, I'd be voting for Jill Stein).  The fact that I'm not voting for Mitt doesn't mean I ignore a great proposal.

That would be so easy to do -- in-state tuition -- and would have such an impact on veterans lives.  But we're so busy flinging crap at one another that we can't even talk about the ideas that were presented, good ones that would help people.  If this idea had gotten the traction it needed, Barack would probably be saying it was a good idea and signing on as well.  That's what should be happening.  But it can't because instead of looking at an idea for its own merits, we're collectively playing a game of destroy-the-other-side.  It's ugly and it helps no one.

And when someone as bitchy as me notices that, it means it has really gotten out of control.

It's over, I'm done writing songs about love
There's a war going on
So I'm holding my gun with a strap and a glove
And I'm writing a song about war
And it goes
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Oh oh oh oh
-- "I Hate The War" (written by Greg Goldberg, on The Ballet's Mattachine!)

The number of US service members the Dept of Defense states died in the Iraq War is [PDF format warning] 4488.

The e-mail address for this site is

Friday, August 31, 2012

Iraq snapshot

Friday, August 31, 2012.  Chaos and violence continue, war resister Kimberly Rivera appeals publicly to remain in Canada, Barack lies that the war is over, the US press whores whatever's left of their name to lie for him, the Telegraph of London (however) reports that British and US forces have killed over 3,000 Iraqis in the last two years alone (no, the war hasn't ended), Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani calls for the security forces to stop the increase in assassinations across Iraq, the UN and Human Rights Watch call out the executions the Iraqi government is carrying out, Jill Stein focuses on real issues in her campaign for the presidency, and more.
"My biggest fear is being separated from my children and having to -- having to sit in a prison for politically being against the war in Iraq," declared Kimberly Rivera in Canada this afternoon.  Yesterday, Kim Rivera was informed that the Canadian government planned to deport her by September 20th.  Today, Kim took part in a press conference with War Resisters Support Campaign's Michelle Robidoux.  Here's a transcript of the video the Toronoto Star has posted.
Michelle Robidoux: We are calling on the government not to deport this family.  We think it's unfortunate that this government and, in particular, the Minister of Immigration [Jason Kenney] has seen fit to intervene in a process that should that should be fair and impartial by putting forward Operation Bulletin 202 which directs immigration officers to red flag the cases of US soldiers like Kim Rivera who are applying for status in this country and to label them criminally inadmissable.
Kim Rivera: If you want to know my biggest fear is being separated from my children and having to -- having to sit in a prison for politically being against the war in Iraq which I had experience in.  Without that experience, I know that I would not have come to the decision I had made to leave and also be here in Canada for people to know that experience which I had spoken many of.  So the only thing that I guess I can really ask is that all of my legal applications that I applied be considered and my agency application also get a decision.   That's pretty much all I have.
Michelle Robidoux: It's a matter of public record that Canada did not participate in the Iraq War, that two motions were passed in Parliament calling on the government to allow war resisters to stay in Canada and that also there have been a number of federal court and federal court of appeal decisions which are upholding the arguments that war resisters have made that they face differential punishment if they're returned to the United States, that they are punished more harshly for having spoken up against the war.
Kim took a great personal risk and did so for what she believed in.  Once in Canada, she spoke out when the issue needed her.  She didn't try to turn herself into a celebrity.  If you ever read her blog on Liveblog (I can't find it there anymore), you know she was focused on her family and on her kids and she was trying to teach them ethics and how to lead a solid life.
Kim's someone I would be friends with.  She's someone I would make a point to go up and hug when I saw her in church on Sundays.    She's a regular person like you or me and that came out in her blog where, like me, she'd write about food or about her kids.
And now this woman who was so glad and so grateful to be in Canada and so wanting to become a Canadian citizen may be forced out of the country.
Kim is not a person who tried to grab the spotlight.  She's just a mother who couldn't live with returning to what she saw in Iraq, couldn't live with herself if she returned.  And she also had to make sure that whatever did happen, it kept her family together.  Canada was the best possible answer and I just can't believe that Canada's going to force her to leave.
Casey Irvin (Torontoist) explains, "While on leave in 2007, Rivera came to Canada to avoid a second tour of duty in Iraq, a war with which she had become disillusioned. Rivera lives here with her husband and their four children (the two youngest were born in Canada). The family and their lawyers are looking into their options, but Rivera probably faces jail time if she goes back. "  Jeanette Torres (ABC News Radio) notes that "Robin Long and Clifford Cornell, two American war resisters deported to the U.S., wound up facing year-long jail sentences because they refused deployment to Iraq."  Patty Winsa (Toronoto Star) reports:
On Friday, the quiet Texan spoke out for the first time after learning this week from the Canada Border Services Agency that she had been given a negative pre-removal risk assessment and must leave the country by Sept. 20.
"I'm just a bit overwhelmed. I don't want to face reality. I respect Canada's law. I'm going to take it one step at a time so I don't have a meltdown," said Rivera, who was surrounded by supporters and peace activists. "But it's is very difficult."
Rivera said quietly that she hoped her application for permanent residency status on humanitarian and compassionate grounds, which she made in 2009, would still be considered.
Charmaine Noronha (AP) adds that Kim "stepped away during a press conference Friday when she became visibly upset" and quotes Kim's attorney Alyssa Manning stating, "The 6 percent of (war) deserters who are punished through incarceration include service personnel who have been publicly outspoken about their criticisms of the Iraq war while AWOL.  The government has failed to assess that risk that Kim faces and that needs to be considered."  Alexandra Posadzki (Canadian Press) continues, "Manning said federal officials failed to consider the fact that Rivera has been outspoken about her opposition to the Iraq war when they evaluated her assessment."
Kim and the man now trying to force her out of Canada, Minister Kenney, have met.  Here's a trasncript of the video.
Minister Kenney at the University of Toronto
March 18, 2009
Michelle Robidoux:  Hello my name is Michelle Robidoux.  This is Kim Rivera.
Kim Rivera: (Shaking his hand)  Hi.
Jason Kenney:  Hello.

Michelle Robidoux:  We're just absolutely desperate and we're just sort of pleading with you.  If there's anything you can do to stop the petition.  The family has been here for almost two years. 
Jason Kenney:  Okay.
Michelle Robidoux:  She's an Iraq War resister who has refused to fight in Iraq, who has refused to continue to fight in Iraq.  And we know that you have the ability to do something to hopefully help this family in distress. They are in considerable distress.  We know there's an arrest warrant for her for deporation.  She will be arrested when she crosses the border when she's forced out next week.  So we're just asking for your intervention.  Some compassion for this family --
Pleae call Peter Van Loan, Minister of Public Safety: 1-877-738-3748 or 613-996-7752.
Jason Kenney:  Okay.  Well, actually, it's-it's the Minister of Public Safety that deals with removals, not me.  If you want to send me the particulars on the case . . .
Michelle Robidoux:  Absolutely.  But the -- the humanitarian situation she's in, she did apply for humanitarian compassionate consideration and we're just desperate trying to --
Jason Kenney: Okay.  I'm sorry ma'am because I'm not aware of your particular case because we receive thousands of applications for agency and they're generally dealt with by department officials but --
Michelle Robidoux:  She faces deporation next Wednesday.
Jason Kenney:  But if you send me the particulars, I will have my office look into it. I'm afraid I'm late for my next thing.  Thank you.
Canada's Parliament has adopted two motions calling on the federal government to allow war resisters to stay in Canada. But Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Jason Kenney has publicly labelled Iraq War resisters as "bogus refugee claimants". In July 2010, he issued a bulletin to all Immigration Officers requiring them to red-flag applications that involve US war resisters, labeling them as 'criminally inadmissible'.
Amnesty International Canada and former Immigration and Refugee Board Chair Peter Showler have called for Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) Operational Bulletin 202 to be rescinded because it "fails to recognize that military desertion for reasons of conscience is in fact clearly recognized as a legitimate ground for refugee protection" and it "misstates the law and seeks to intrude on the independence of both IRB members and Immigration Officers."
He told them it wasn't his department in March of 2009.  Then he issued orders in 2010 and now he's trying to force Kim out of Canada.  Is it his department or not?  Is any grown up in the Canadian government or is Kenney just allowed to make up whatever rules he wants?
An upcoming event, next week, in Toronto is planned:
Please attend an emergency community meeting to support U.S. war resister Kimberly Rivera and her family!

WHEN: Wednesday, September 5, 7:00 PM

WHERE: Parkdale United Church, 171 Dunn Avenue, Toronto


When Kimberly Rivera saw with her own eyes the devastation of war, and the trauma it inflicts on children and families, she followed her conscience and refused to go back. Instead, she and her husband and their (then) two children came to Canada.

Since that day in 2007, the Riveras have been fighting to live their lives in peace. But despite the widespread support of the Canadian people for U.S. war resisters, and despite two votes in Parliament calling on the government to let war resisters stay, the Harper Government continues to target war resisters for deportation.

Kim and her family - which now includes two children born in Canada - now face deportation on September 20. In the U.S., Kim faces court martial, jail time, and a felony conviction that will follow her for life. All for the "crime" of refusing to participate in the invasion, destruction, and occupation of Iraq.

Kim stood up for peace at great risk to herself. Now we must stand up for Kim, and for other war resisters who face the same struggle. Please join the War Resisters Support Campaign for an emergency community meeting to support the Riveras, and to call on Immigration Minister Jason Kenney to stop the deportation.

Please share this information with your friends and neighbours. We hope to see you there!
In peace and solidarity, the War Resisters Support Campaign
While Kim fights for her family, US President Barack Obama fights for re-election.  If only Kim Rivera had a pack of Devin Dwyer's to lie and whore for her.  ABC News' Devy, still so excited about sprouting pubes, can't be bothered with things like reporting.  When not rubbing his fingers in the tangle of his new downy growth and then sniffing his fingers, Devy assumes reporting is transcribing what Barack said and transcribing what Barack's "top aides" told him.  There's no attempt at facts, there's not an even attempt to get a response from any of the other presidential campaigns.   No, Devy, a response the Romney campaign gave on Wednesday is not what members of the press do when printing new attacks made on Friday.  Less fingers on yourself, more attention on your job.
Devy quotes Barack stating, "I told the American people that all our troops would be out of Iraq by the end of" and Devy adds" [2011]."  Don't general studies majors learn math?
You'd think since Devy's always got his fingers next to his nose, he could also use them to count.  Barack promised -- in those tent revivals that gave the Cult of St. Barack such tingles -- that all troops would be out of Iraq sixteen months after he was sworn in.  He was sworn in January 2009.  How many months does Devy think is in a year?  It's 12, Devy, twelve.  So what he promised was 2010.  By the first fourth of 2010.  Not the end of 2011. 
What you did was not reporting, Little Devy, and sorry to drop this in the midst of your horny frenzy, but ALL the US service members have not returned home nor are they all out of Iraq.  Earlier this month, when US General Martin Dempsey, Chair of the Joint-Chiefs of Staff, visited IraqRTT reported, "More than 225 U.S. troops, seven Defense Department civilians, 530 security assistance team members and more than 4,000 contracted personnel are currently in the office at the Iraqi government's invitation."
225 still in Iraq.  Over 15,000 moved into nearby Kuwait -- and the Senate Foreign Relations Democratic half issued a report stating those troops needed to stay for several more years to ensure that Iraq is 'stable' --  in fairness, the report  [PDF format warning] "The Gulf Security Architecture: Partnership With The Gulf Co-Operation Council" did advocate dropping the number down to 13,000.   (Refer to the June 19th snapshot.)
is it really that hard for Devin Dwyer to stop self-pleasuring and start reporting? Devy quotes White House spokesperson Jay Carney declaring his "surprise" that GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney did not includ "the 70,000 men and women who are serving in Afghanistan" in his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention yesterday. 
I'm more shocked that a sitting president stood in front of service members today and lied that all US troops were out of Iraq.  I'm also appalled that this fact is vanished from the press. 
Kathleen Hennessey (Los Angeles Times) at least offers some perspective, "Two years ago, as he declared the end to a long and divisive war, President Obama promised troops he would not be taking a 'victory lap.' On Friday, the president allowed himself something of a brief victory dance."  But perspective would also include that after Barack gave his August 31, 2010 speech, when the Iraq War 'combat operations' 'ended' and it was rechristened Operation New Dawn ("now he's soaking in it," as Isaiah noted),  66 American service members died in Iraq, 38 of whom even the Pentagon classifies as dead from hostilities.
Those deaths are perspective as well and how very sad and telling about the whore class trying to pass itself off as a press corps that they don't have the decency or common sense to even acknowledge those deaths.
The Iraq War has not ended.  But when you keep head in the sand (and Devin keeps his hand in his pants), you may miss that.  Remember this from Monday's snapshot: "Dar Addustour reports 5 British citizens were arrested in Baghdad yesterday -- they did not have passports or i.d. on them."
Golly gee, why would any British people be in Iraq?  The war 'ended,' right?
More than 3,500 insurgents have been "taken off the streets of Baghdad" by the elite British force in a series of audacious "Black Ops" over the past two years.
It is understood that while the majority of the terrorists were captured, several hundred, who were mainly members of the organisation known as "al-Qa'eda in Iraq" have been killed by the SAS.
The SAS is part of a highly secretive unit called "Task Force Black" which also includes Delta Force, the US equivalent of the SAS.
Wow.  The war's 'over' but Iraqis are being killed by Brits and by the US Delta Force.  Killed and captured.
In 'sovereign' Iraq this takes place.  The war's not over and only a dishonest whore would ever claim otherwise.  Barack has ended nothing. 
David Swanson went into the belly of the beast, a Barack rally, to call out the continued War Crimes and assaults on liberty.  David Swanson (War Is A Crime) reports:
Three of us went into the event. I had tickets, which were free and which the campaign could barely give away, while back in 2007 Obama had sold out the same venue. We didn't go in so as to spend hours in the hot sun just to hear an Obama speech like the one he'd given the day before in another town which we could have watched on Youtube. Thousands of people did that. We went in to disturb the war.
We wanted to shout. But what could we shout? We were only three. We were not near the front. (I recommend taking 10 to the front of one of these events if you can. You'll own the place.) We would have to be loud and clear. We couldn't mention the kill list which would be like mentioning UFOs to these people. We couldn't mention Social Security because they pretend Obama's not threatening it. We couldn't mention peace because people would think it was a pro-Obama chant. We decided to say this: Get out of Afghanistan! End the sanctions on Iran!
Here's how the Washington Post's blog reported on that:
"Protesters drown out Obama
"Posted by Amy Gardner on August 29, 2012 at 3:58 pm
"CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. — An outdoor political rally erupted into a moment of chaos as protesters drowned out President Obama's speech at a downtown amphitheater here — and then the rest of the crowd drowned out the protesters. It was unclear what the protesters were saying, but several members of the crowd said a few minutes later that they heard 'Get out of Afghanistan!' The shouts prompted a flurry of Secret Service activity, and they also prompted an enthusiastic crowd of more than 7,000 to shut down the protesters with two cacophonous chants: 'Four more years!' and 'O-ba-ma!' Obama couldn't continue for a long moment, but when the noise finally died down, he said: 'I couldn't hear what those young people had to say, but that's good that they got involved.' To the rest of the crowd, he said: 'Don't just chant! Vote!'"
Obama was pretending the crowd was all young people. He'd tried to speak at the University of Virginia which had turned him down, but he gave his speech as if he were there. The crowd didn't shout us down till we'd run out of breath. They were not nearly as fast as Republicans are with their "U-S-A! U-S-A!" In fact, they seemed tremendously proud of themselves when they managed to discover that they could yell "O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA!" Voting, in the pretense of those in power, constitutes more activism than chanting or any other activity. Don't just hold teach-ins, vote! Don't just occupy the square, vote! Don't just risk your life to expose injustice, vote! If Bradley Manning had just voted, that would have been the last full measure of devotion.
As to the flurry of Secret Service activity, an Obama campaign guy started standing next to us, and a mean possibly drunk guy started shoving and threatening us. After various additional disruptions of the war (not the peace) by us, the Obama guy called the local police over who asked us to leave, and asked for our names, etc., to tell them to the Secret Service. The police had earlier refused numerous requests by the Obama staff and volunteers to evict our poster demonstration. The police had mentioned freedom of speech. The local media, as well as the police, were surprisingly decent. The Obama campaigners, on the other hand, would have exiled us all to Gitmo if they'd been able, and if they weren't suffering under the misconception that it's been closed.
WMC Live with Robin Morgan is the new radio talk show that airs live on DC's WPWS (1480 AM) on Sundays from three to four p.m. -- and streams live online -- audio and video.
Sunday is the second show and her guests will include US House Rep "Eleanor Holmes Norton on the election, Jodie Evans (CODEPINK) from the conventions; El Diario's Erica Gonzalez on Latina politics; author Ariel Levy on books and vaginas."  If you missed the first episode of the radio show from the Women's Media Center, you can stream it at the link and, because WMC understands the need for being inclusive, the transcript is here.  Realizing that a stream doesn't reach every computer user -- due to platform or connection issues or due to hearing issues -- WMC plans to transcribe each broadcast -- which will also allow for a very strong archive.
Who listened live on Sunday?  As Robin noted at the top of her broadcast, "And a special welcome to the international family online from (that I know of) Brazil, Egypt, Germany, India, Italy, Kenya, the Philippines, South Africa, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the pioneering feminists in Kurdistan." 
In the KRG, women have achieved a lot in the last few years by fighting for what is needed.  As Human Rights Watch noted earlier this week, there are still things to be done:
The practice of female genital mutilation continues in the Kurdistan region of Iraq a year after a landmark law banning it went into effect because the Kurdistan Regional Government has not taken steps to implement the law. The Family Violence Law, which went into effect on August 11, 2011, includes several provisions to eradicate female genital mutilation (FGM), recognized internationally as a form of violence against women.
The regional government has begun to run awareness campaigns, train judges, and issue orders to police on the articles of the law dealing with domestic violence. But it apparently has not taken similar steps to implement the FGM ban, Human Rights Watch found. Between late May and mid-August, 2012, Human Rights Watch spoke with over 60 villagers, policemen, government officials, lawyers, and human rights workers in the districts of Chamachamal, Choman, Erbil, Penjwin, Pishdar, Rania, Soran, Shaqlawa, and Sulaimaniya about the problem.
"The KRG parliament took a huge step forward when it passed the Family Violence Law," said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. "Authorities now need to begin the difficult process of putting a comprehensive plan in place to implement the law, including informing the public, police, and health professionals about the ban on FGM."
In June 2010, Human Rights Watch issued an 81-page report, "They Took Me and Told Me Nothing: Female Genital Mutilation in Iraqi Kurdistan," which urged the Kurdistan Regional Government, parliament, civil society, and donors to take steps to end the practice. The report described the experiences of young girls and women who undergo FGM and the terrible toll it takes on their physical and mental health. The KRG parliament passed the Family Violence Law in June 2011.
In the recent interviews, Human Rights Watch spoke with more than 20 villagers who had daughters in the age range when FGM is traditionally performed – between ages 4 and 12. Some said they were no longer intending to have the procedure performed on their daughters, as a result of awareness campaigns conducted by representatives of nongovernmental organizations who had visited their villages, but a few said they planned to have the procedure done. None had seen any action or awareness efforts by the government.
"Okay, so there's a law now, so people don't talk about it as much now, but if people in my village or another village want to have it done to their girls, they can easily still do it secretly," said a woman from Rania.
This week, Iraq has executed at least 26 people.  Today Human Rights Watch noted:
Human Rights Watch has previously documented the prevalence of unfair trials and torture in detention, particularly in national security and terrorism-related cases.
"There is no doubt that Iraq still has a serious terrorism problem, but it also has a huge problem with torture and unfair trials," said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. "The lack of transparency around these convictions and executions, in a country where confessions that may have been coerced are often the only evidence against a person, makes it crucial for Iraq to declare an immediate moratorium on all executions."
Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty in all circumstances because it is unique in its cruelty and finality, and is plagued with arbitrariness, prejudice, and error.
Iraqi authorities rarely announce executions beforehandand have not made public the total number of executions in a given year, Human Rights Watch said.
An August 30 statement released by Iraq's parliament said that members of the Human Rights Committee had met on the previous day to discuss "a mechanism for slowing down executions." Members told Iraqi media that they had contacted Justice Minister Hassan al-Shimmari to inquire about concerns expressed this week by politicians and nongovernmental organizations that executions of about 200 prisoners now on death-row were being accelerated in anticipation of the passage of an amnesty law currently before parliament. Al-Shimmari denied these claims.
On August 29, Human Rights Watch spoke with two Justice Ministry officials as well as a guard in a prison run by the ministry and an inmate currently in another facility. All said that hundreds of inmates had begun hunger strikes on August 28 in Baghdad's Taji and Rusafa prisons to protest the recent executions and concern about the alleged plan to accelerate other executions. According to the inmate, guards had told prisoners about such a plan in the days preceding the latest executions. Human Rights Watch could not confirm the existence of such a plan.
Carol J. Williams (Los Angeles Times) notes, "Iraq has long featured in the dubious ranks of the Top Five countries carrying out the most executions each year. In 2011, China led Amnesty's list with executions estimated at more than 1,000, but it also eliminated the death penalty for 13 crimes that previously could draw the ultimate punishment. Iran acknowledged executing at least 360 people, followed by Saudi Arabia with 82 reported executions, Iraq with 68 and the United States 43."  The UN News Centre adds:
The United Nations agency tasked with defending human rights voiced renewed concern today over the sudden spate of executions in countries around the world following the recent use of capital punishment in Gambia, Iraq, and South Sudan.
"We urge all States, who have not yet done so, to introduce – or reintroduce – an official moratorium on the use of the death penalty aiming to abolish it," Rupert Colville, spokesperson for the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), declared in a briefing to the press in Geneva.
Violence continued today in Iraq.  Alsumaria reports that there was an armed Baghdad attack in which 1 person was shot dead and one person was kidnapped in Kirkuk (the police managed to rescue the victim after seven hours)All Iraq News notes an assassination attempt on a cleric in Baghdad -- the cleric survived, the driver was shot dead and one person was shot dead outside a Baghdad mosqueKitabat notes that Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani called in his sermon today for the security forces to stop the escalating assassinations taking place in Iraq.
In terms of the US presidential election, we're interested in the two presidential campaigns made up of four women.  The four: Jill Stein has the Green Party's presidential nomination and her running mate is Cheri Honkala and Roseanne Barr has the nomination of the Peace and Freedom Party and her running mate is Cindy Sheehan. Click here to sign a petition calling on Ms. magazine and Women's Media Center to cover her campaign and the other female candidate for president Roseanne Barr's campaignOver 250 people have signed onto the petition so far.  Some sign and leave comments and we noted some of the comments in Sunday's "Women Win When Women Run: The conversation Roseanne and Jill are inspiring" at Third -- and "women win when women run" is a theme that repeats in the comments with several people signing noting that theme or expanding on it.
While Jill Stein continues to focus on issues, Roseanne's campaign can't find any.  Part of coverage is analysis and the analysis I'm offering for Roseanne's campaign right now is not positive.
Roseanne's on a one-woman public hatred tour.  I'm deeply disappointed in a number of people including one friend who was going to get a rave review for her new show from Ava and I but  now we're on the fence about whether or not we're even going to cover it.  You do not accuse people of wanting to kill other people, Ellen Barkin.  That is disgusting and it is appalling.  And you're ensuring that your career in TV will be as dead as your film carreer was when the 90s started.  Somewhere, somehow, you and a bunch of other actors forgot the first rule: To have a career, you need an audience.  It's fine and dandy to take a polticial stand for something.  It's antoher thing to pour on hate and distortions.  Clint Eastwood, who I know and do not care for, does not want to kill anyone, certainly not a politician.  Ellen Barkin crossed a line. 
(And Clint gave a great speech.  I would have preferred not to have seen it but I said "Hold on" and stopped dictating to go and stream it since I was stating that Clint would not threaten to kill anyone.  Clint gave a great speech.  He stumbled once that might not have been intentional.  But the speech was great.  He wasn't dottering and only the dumb and foolish would say that.  What Clint did was steal a page from Jane Fonda.  Something we all should do.  She is the most effective speaker and one of her standard tricks is to start off nervous, hesitant and, as she speaks, grow more sure in her delivery.  That allows the audience to witness a transformation and have it be due to beliefs.  In other words, the effective speech sells the beliefs as strength.  Clint didn't do as well as Jane -- again, she's the best speaker alive.  But he's obviously borrowed a page for her book and, yes, his speech was effective.  You can stream it at the Washington Post.)  (And on Jane, this week she's blogged about her latest film role.)
Roseanne is doing the same as well.  And NBC's not backing her new show.  They're making that decision right now.  NBC won't back it, none of the networks will.  Because she's going beyond political into hateful.  To have a career in the performing arts, you're going to need an audience.  When you go around trashing people, making up disgusting claims about your peer group (as Ellen did to Clint), you destroy everything.  I'm all for taking stands, I'm all for calling out and I can be bitchier than anyone but when you accuse someone of wanting to kill, you've crossed a line and what's really sad is you are so far gone into a world of hatred that you can't even see that.  And if you are trying to help Barack Obama, you're hatred Tweeted is of no help to him.  It saddles him down with an ugly hatred that his campaign is not engaging in.  You desire to pollute the world with hate is harming you, harming your career and harming Barack's chances at re-election.  You really need to rethink your actions.
And the hatred of women needs to stop right damn now.  This is inexcusable:

I'd totes dip a pinky or two in Paul Ryan's wife's bleached asshole (she obvs bleaches her asshole). #RNC
Jason Biggs (@JasonBiggs)
August 30, 2012

As is this:
@JasonBiggs "@GODisSanta420: @JasonBiggs How dare you ignore Ann Romney's asshole. Ur un-American." Sorry ur right. I bet hers is un-bleached and hairy.
Those are only two of the Tweets that are unacceptable.  They do not help Barack Obama.  They do not help anyone.  They are why the basic cable network is now considering dropping Jason Biggs.  His film career is over.  As a sitcom star, he struck out.  (Though he wasn't the problem in that sitcom and was actually funny and appealing.)  Now all he has is voice work.  When you are on thin ice, Jason, you do not jump and down.  Those statements were repugnant and offensive.  That you can't grasp that says there is something seriously wrong with you.  Maybe it's temporary and you need to get out in the world.  Maybe it's something more serious and you need therapy.  But there is no excuse for what you have Tweeted -- and it's more than just those two Tweets.  You need to stop and you need to stop now.  Not only does it hurt Barack, your hero, but Barack will be called upon to apologize for your actions.  He may or may not take that step to distance himself.  But you are distracting from the campaign.  If for no other reason, that should cause you to cease and desist.  But, repeating, your comments are offensive and they are sexist.  There is not an excuse for them.  They need to stop.
Roseanne needs to find her way back to focusing on issues.  If she can't, she's accomplishing nothing and hurting the Peace and Freedom Party.  She said she was running to raise issues.  So, Roseanne, when is your big mouth going to be used to tackle an issue other than smoking pot?  Is that all you have?  If that is all you have, the Peace and Freedom Party will distance itself from you -- there were already efforts underway to make that happen.  How would it feel to be the first presidential candidate whose own party publicly rebukes them?
I noted months ago here that I would not vote for Roseanne because she's governed by fear.  I know Roseanne and I like her as a person and as an artist.  But I don't back putting fear into the White House or our election cycles.  I could end up voting for Jill Stein who continues to run a campaign based on issues.  (At this point, my plan is still not to vote for that office.)
Jill Stein took her campaign to Maine.  Deidre Fulton (Portland Phoenix) reports:
After her public speech, I asked her what it's been like trying to convince people that we're at a tipping point in terms of breaking the endless (and fruitless) back-and-forth between the two establishment political parties. She likened her experience to being a "political therapist, helping people get out of an abusive political relationship." There will always be excuses as to why people should continue voting for status quo candidates, why they should stay within the confines of a system that isn't helping them, and in fact may be hurting them. 
"The politics of fear has delivered all the things we were afraid of" Stein said. 
What's that adage about being insane? Doing the same thing over and over but expecting a different result every time?
Perhaps its time to try something new, before we all lose our minds. 
During a series of campaign stops in Maine, Stein gave the keynote address during a Green Party rally in Monument Square. Local Green Party candidates for the state legislature and school board.
Stein said it's time to take back people's jobs, their health care and their educations. She said people want to take back their democracy.
"It needs fixing at every level," she said. "It won't get fixed ... unless it's challenged."
Stein, who lives in Lexington, Mass., has a long history of activism and political involvement outside her work as a doctor.
It was during the discussion on the debt ceiling last year that Stein became more involved with the Green Party. She said both political parties made proposals to cut the debt that dismantled programs like Medicare and Medicaid and removed the social safety net.
Attached to the Stein ticket as vice president is Cheri Honkala -- a renowned anti-poverty activist based in Philadelphia.
While Roseanne continues to wallow in hatred, Jill's talking about issues including how her own outlook was transformed and about ballot access.  Scott Bernarde (Patch) speaks with Dr. Stein and reports:
As a mother of young kids and a doctor in a clinic, she saw the epidemic of chronic diseases descend on this generation's children.
"It took becoming a mother to feel the incredible vulnerability of our future, and to take it personally," said Stein.
Diabetes, obesity, ADHD and others were among her biggest concern. Some even hit close to home.
"To learn that we have effectively poisoned our own nest," she said, "not only the air, but the food that we're eating, and that it has fundamentally contaminated the womb, drives home the imperative to protect it all."
It was that realization that became the catalyst for her political career. While she is on target to be on 45 separate state ballots, she recently learned that she will not appear on the Georgia ballot. Georgia has "the most antidemocratic ballot in the country," according to Stein. Instead, she is encouraging a grassroots write-in campaign
While Roseanne spews hatred and loses focus and wastes time, Jill's campaign is focused on reality.  Craig Lyons (Portland Daily Sun) reports:
Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein said she recognizes that it's unlikely that a third party can take the White House but at least another presence in the election can turn attention to the voters who are fed up with the current policies of the two major parties.
"We're in at a unique breaking point moment right now," said Stein, during an interview with the Daily Sun. "People are ready to turn that breaking point into a tipping point."
Jill Stein has to work for coverage and is getting it.  Roseanne's a household name and the press has a natural interest in her as such but the only press she's getting is about how hateful she's being.  It's not highlighting any issues, it's not helping anyone -- including Roseanne.  November's not that far away, has she already tossed in the towel and lost interest in her own campaign?  Those are tough words.  I'd really prefer not to have to write them.  But I don't whore for anyone.  And Roseanne needs to get her act together.  (Cindy Sheehan is not top of the ticket.  She is the running mate.  But, yes, Cindy is focusing on issues.  Roseanne is the distraction.  The plan for today was actually to highlight the Roseanne-Cindy ticket with an interview Cindy did but Roseanne's appalling behavior is the story of the day for the Roseanne-Cindy ticket. And it will remain the story of the day until she stops this nonsense and starts talking about issues.)

Kimberly Rivera and threats to burn Abu Ghraib prison

Yesterday, Iraq War veteran and war resister Kimberly Rivera learned the government of Canada had ordered her to be deported.  She went to Canada in 2007 seeking asylum after deciding she could not return to Iraq.   Alyssa Manning is Kim's attorney.  Krystalline Kraus (Rabble) reports:

“In the humanitarian application they have to consider the best interests of the Rivera children, which is not a consideration in the assessment by the immigration officer,” Manning said. “There are four minor children here, two of which are Canadian. Those interests haven’t been considered yet.”
Manning has argued in federal court that Rivera would likely face a court martial and the possibly up to five years if she is deported back to the United States.
According to Michelle Robidoux, a spokesperson for the War Resisters Support Campaign (WRSC), “(Kim) faces a court martial and jail sentence, which, based on what other people have gotten, is a harsh jail sentence,” Robidoux said. “She will be separated from her family. Her husband suffers from a disability and he’s going to have four kids on his hands.”

The always fact challenged editorial board of the Calgary Herald weighs in with, "Rivera’s situation stands in sharp contrast to those who fled to Canada to avoid U.S. military service during the Vietnam War. Those individuals had been drafted against their will. Rivera chose to enlist in the U.S.’s all-volunteer army."  No, it's not.  It's a shame so many stupid people end up editorial boards.

During Vietnam, Elaine and I gladly helped many men get into Canada.  We raised funds, a few we even drove in.  I damn well know what the mindless idiots of the Calgary Herald don't.  War resisters -- those who went to Canada to avoid being drafted and those who went to Canada after they'd been inducted -- were not asked, "Did you enlist?"  And, sorry mindless zombies of the Calgary Herald, some had enlisted.  It didn't matter than and it shouldn't matter now.

If you are exposed to a war and that awakens something in you, be it horror or spiritual or whatever, you can become a war resister and it doesn't matter if you enlisted or you were drafted.

The Calgary Herald has repeatedly distorted history and has repeatedly attacked war resisters of the current war.  At some point, you'd think they'd be sick of their own lies.  But that's crediting them with a consciousness that their writing has never indicated they possess.

Kimberly Rivera will now be extradited to the US by September 20 following a CIC ruling announced on Thursday, Reuters reported.
The 30-year-old had gone to Canada on leave and later applied for refugee status.
Rivera, who lives in Toronto with her husband and four children, will face imprisonment in the US if deported, said Michelle Robidoux, spokeswoman for the War Resisters Support Campaign, which backs the US military personnel refusing to join the US-led war in Iraq.  

The War Resisters Support Campaign notes:


On Thursday, August 30th the Canadian government ordered U.S. Iraq war resister Kimberly Rivera, her husband Mario and their four young children deported to the United States. Kimberly served in Iraq in 2006, and sought refuge in Canada in 2007 after making the decision that she could no longer participate in the Iraq War.

Kimberly was the first woman US Iraq War resister to come to Canada. She and her family live in Toronto. If deported, she faces harsh punishment. War resisters Robin Long and Clifford Cornell, two Iraq war resisters deported by the Harper government, were court-martialed and sentenced to 15 months and 12 months respectively for speaking out against the Iraq War.
Canada’s Parliament has adopted two motions calling on the federal government to allow war resisters to stay in Canada. But Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Jason Kenney has publicly labelled Iraq War resisters as “bogus refugee claimants”. In July 2010, he issued a bulletin to all Immigration Officers requiring them to red-flag applications that involve US war resisters, labeling them as ‘criminally inadmissible’.
Amnesty International Canada and former Immigration and Refugee Board Chair Peter Showler have called for Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) Operational Bulletin 202 to be rescinded because it “fails to recognize that military desertion for reasons of conscience is in fact clearly recognized as a legitimate ground for refugee protection” and it “misstates the law and seeks to intrude on the independence of both IRB members and Immigration Officers.”

In Iraq, the issue of passing an amnesty law gets a little more heated.  Dropping back to yesterday's snapshot:

On the disappeared, all this time later, there is still no amnesty law.  Currently in Mosul and Baghdad, inmates in two prisons are on hunger-strikes (more prisons may have joined this) calling for the passage of an amnesty law.  Nouri's been accused of rushing through executions to ensure that they take place before any amnesty law might stop them.  Al Rafidayn reports that Nouri's State of Law is insisting that people are wrong when they say State of Law is stalling on the amnesty law.   And possibly State of Law is telling the truth?  This could be just another example of how State of Law lacks the ability to lead on any issue.

Hunger-strikes and sit-ins (the Mosul prison has also staged sit-ins) are no longer the only thing the inmates are doing.  Al Mada reports today that inmates of the Baghdad prison, Abu Ghrab,  have announced their intent to set fire to prison if the bill is not passed by Thursday.

It's really amazing the stories the US press doesn't even bother to cover from Iraq -- while lecturing about who did or did not mention Iraq at a political convention this week.  The prison story has gone from one to two prisons, from hunger-strikes to hunger-strikes and sit-ins and now to the threat of burning down a prison.

I would call the threat to burn down a prison "news."  Maybe we can have a citizens convention after the DNC finishes their own?  And at the citizens convention we can discuss all the ways the press fails us day after day?

That would include the writers who continue to express momentary outrage over Iraq to attack the GOP this week but still can't tell you a thing about what's going on in Iraq today because they just don't give a damn.  They only care about Iraq as a club with which to bludgeon their political opponents.  And you wonder how Nouri gets away with executing almost 100 people so far this year?

The following community sites -- plus Adam Kokesh,, Watching America and On The Wilder Side --  updated last night and this morning:

  • Plus Mike's "Drones and party" which is not showing up.

    The e-mail address for this site is