Friday, April 18, 2014. Chaos and violence continue, Nouri's War Crimes continue (and are called out by a Sheikh), Tehran officials are told a third term for Nouri is unacceptable, Robert Beecroft is also informed of that, election campaigning heats up, KRB gets some bad news, Nouri's baby thug gets some media attention, and much more.
We're not campaign central. We will look at Hillary Clinton's run in terms of Iraq. The former Secretary of State, Senator and First Lady is a press favorite for a 2016 presidential run. She herself hasn't made up her mind yet and protests and thrown shoes may be indicating a level of hostility to her again running for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination. I've already stated I have no intention of voting for her, I'm not campaigning for her. But let's look at her record.
Ann McFeatters (Gulf Today) explores it and offers:
Hillary says she still has to figure out why she’d run. She has said
nothing yet about what a Hillary Clinton presidency would mean for the
country. Being first woman president would be cool but probably isn’t
reason enough to elect her.
She ran in 2008 defending the war in
Iraq, a war that just about everyone except Donald Rumsfeld and Dick
Cheney agrees was a bad mistake. There’s a general consensus that
capturing Saddam Hussein was not worth thousands of lives and hundreds
of billions of dollars.
That's the real surprise that no one wants to talk about. She ran in 2008, she failed to stake out ground on Iraq that would carry her to the nomination. Even if you believe the nomination was stolen from her (I do believe that, that's part of the reason Nancy Pelosi stopped the floor vote -- it would have revealed how close Hillary and Barack were in delegates). But she was part of a divisive primary season.
How does that go away now? Or are people at various left websites now confessing that their endless smears of Hillary as racist or wanting Barack Obama dead were lies -- lies they knew they were telling in real time?
The reality is, it was a bitter primary. How do you, eight years later, pretend that didn't happen?
I have no idea but I have no idea why Hillary couldn't get over her pride and admit her Iraq War vote was wrong. It was a 2008 mistake and it's six years after that run and she's still associated with the Iraq War. The only thing to her credit as a senator was opposing the surge but, as we now know from former US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and his
Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War, Hillary only opposed it for political reasons/posturing. (The same is true of Barack, read Gates' book, but we're not talking about Barack running in 2016.) (The 'surge' was when Bully Boy Bush sent more US troops into Iraq in 2007 to secure the country -- primarily Baghdad -- to allow Nouri to work on the White House benchmarks that he promised to implement but never, ever did. Excuses were made in 2007 and outlets rushed to give him partial grades and pretend that in 2008 he'd achieve -- he didn't 2008, he didn't since. It was more broken promises from Nouri.)
While Hillary attempts to figure out whether or not to run and what her big achievement as Secretary of State was,
Roger Aranoff (Western Journalism) notes Hillary travels with a bit more than carry-on luggage:
But
the legacy of Hillary Clinton is turning out to be one of incompetence,
bungled efforts, chicanery, and outright scandal. Her most famous words
have become, “What difference at this point does it make?” referring to
how the four brave Americans died in Benghazi in September of 2012. And
a number of other scandals have followed her, both from before and during her tenure as Secretary of State. The latest is about $6 billion in contract dollars that the State Department lost track of over the last six years.
According to the Inspector General report:
- There was a lack of paperwork: of 115 contracts sampled from the U.S. Mission in Iraq, 33 could not be produced.
- There was missing documentation: the Bureau of African Affairs couldn’t provide complete files for any of the eight contracts requested.
- There were conflicts of interest: a $52 million contract was
awarded to a “company owned by the spouse of a contractor employee
performing as a Contract Specialist for the contract.”
- Payments were sent when they weren’t supposed to be: $792,782 was
sent to a contractor, “even though the contract file did not contain
documents to support the payment.”
- Contracts were even hidden: “The related contract file was
not properly maintained and for a period of time was hidden…This
contract was valued at $100 million.”
All in all, this creates “conditions conducive to fraud, as corrupt
individuals may attempt to conceal evidence of illicit behavior by
omitting key documents from the contract file,” according to the IG
report.
In 12 days, parliamentary elections are supposed to take place in Iraq.
Where's the State Dept?
They would say they are working (feedback they're receiving from the public says otherwise). Whatever they're doing, they're not communicating with their ultimate boss: the US public.
Iraq last held parliamentary elections in 2010, when Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State. February 17, 2010, then-US Ambassador to Iraq Chris Hill delivered "
Briefing On Upcoming Iraqi Elections and U.S.-Iraqi Relations" -- a bad briefing, Hill's an idiot, but it was a briefing. It took place in DC. It took place 18 days before the elections. This go round, nothing from the State Dept and yet the elections are only 12 days away.
Maybe if John Kerry stopped bullying other countries, the State Dept would have addressed the elections by now?
And the day of the election and after the elections, Hillary issued multiple statements so someone better inform John Kerry that he needs to up his game because with regards to keeping Americans informed on key points with regards to the State Dept's mission in Iraq, Hillary did a better job than Kerry's doing.
On the elections,
Fareed Zakaria (Global Public Square, CNN) offers a list of readings, including Ned Parker's latest:
“On the surface, the speed with which Iraq’s new political order has
fallen apart is a puzzle. Although bombings never stopped, there had
been relative stability since the spring of 2008, when Maliki,
emboldened by the successful U.S.-backed Sunni revolt against al Qaeda,
known as the Awakening, set out to disband the Shiite militias
endangering law and order in Basra and Baghdad,” argues Ned Parker in the New York Review of Books.
“The campaign, supported by the Americans, produced a surge of
patriotism among both Shiites and Sunnis. By 2010, when the country was
preparing to stage its second national elections for a four-year
government, Iraq seemed poised to cast off its divisions. Maliki,
running for reelection, had learned to present himself as both staunchly
Shiite and a leader for all Iraqis. Resisting pressure from other
Shiite religious parties and Iran, he ran his own list of candidates,
including Sunni tribesmen and secular politicians…Yet Maliki and his
Shiite Islamist supporters were unable to shed their deep mistrust of
those they believed had fought them in the past. Rather than being
integrated into the political system, several dozen leaders of the
Awakening ended up dead or in jail, or forced into exile.”
Alice Fordham has a report for NPR's Morning Edition (link is text and audio) that wants to insist Nouri's trying to bring the Sahwa into the military -- while ignoring what Ned Parker's outlined above and what's taken place for the entire second term of Nouri al-Maliki until right before these elections.
She's providing a wrong impression to listeners.
She's also wrong in the following, "But fighting still rages and it's been announced that national elections
planned to the end of the month will not happen in Anbar. Alice
Fordham, NPR News." She got her name right. You can dispute the "NPR News" label -- NPR doesn't really do much news anymore, it's all feature stories. But she's wrong about an announcement regarding Anbar.
How did that make it on air?
Well, like I said, NPR really doesn't do news anymore so there's no one to fact check.
April 8th, the IHEC declared not all areas of Anbar would have polling stations. Today
Tasnim News Agency reports:
“In Anbar Province, all necessary arrangements have been made to ensure
the security of the election, which is to be held on April 30,” Faleh
Al-Eisawi, the head of the council of the province said in an interview
with the Tasnim News Agency.
[. . .]
He also emphasized that the police forces in cooperation with Anbar
Operations Command are to implement an extensive security plan to
provide the security of the elections.
Again, Alice Fordham's claim (""But fighting still rages and it's been announced that national elections planned to the end of the month will not happen in Anbar.") does not hold up.
Iraq last held
parliamentary elections in March of 2010. In those elections, Nouri al-Maliki's
State of Law lost to Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya. Though Allawi should have
been named prime minister-designate, loser Nouri threw an eight month
long tantrum and the White House indulged him. They did more than that,
they also worked to find a way to let the loser have a second term as
prime minister. Since he lost the vote, they went to the leaders of the
political blocs and pointed out Nouri could hold out for 8 more months
(Parliament wasn't able to meet during Nouri's tantrum, he brought
government to a standstill) and got them to sign a contract (The Erbil
Agreement) which Nouri used to grab a second term.
As Anthony H. Cordesman and Sam Khazai pointed out earlier this year in [PDF format warning] "
Iraq in Crisis:"
US officials applauded the 2010 Erbil agreement, and said they were hopeful that such cooperative
arrangement would provide a political breakthrough among Iraq’s leadership, and allow them to
address the country’s problems. They pointed to the influence the US had in pushing for the
outcome, including the adoption of an American suggestion that Allawi head a new, “National
Council for Security Policy”.
And let's note
Karen DeYoung (Washington Post) reported in real time:
Vice
President Biden made numerous calls to senior Iraqi leaders over the
past several months and U.S. officials directly participated in
top-level negotiating sessions that lasted until just moments before
the Iraqi parliament finally convened to approve a new power-sharing
government Thursday, a senior Obama administration official said
Friday.
The contract didn't just have the leaders say, "Second term for Nouri!"
In exchange for that second term, the contract outlined actions Nouri
would have to take. But then he refused to honor his promises. It's among the
reasons he's so loathed today.
We've note many press whores over the years. When there's a member of the press that tells the truth, we also try to note that. On The Erbil Agreement, we're going to drop back to November 13, 2010 when one reporter had the guts to tell the truth.
Michael Jansen (Gulf Today) stated the obvious, "The deal making that produced last Thursday’s session of
parliament is nothing to boast about." She then continued:
It
is not clear why Iraqiya thought Maliki -- a sectarian Shiite whose
Dawa party was a bitter enemy of the Baath -- would implement this
pledge. Maliki has also failed to carry out solemn promises to recruit
into the security forces or find civil service jobs for fighters of the
Sunni Awakening Councils -- or Sons of Iraq movement -- who helped US
and government forces curb Al Qaeda in 2007-08. Maliki has shown himself
to have absolutely no intention of sharing power with Sunnis and
certainly not with secular politicians like Allawi who represents the
"old Iraq" where politics was non-sectarian.
In
spite of Obama's declaration that an "inclusive" government formula had
been found after months of wrangling, Maliki is not interested in
including Sunnis, secularists, former Baathists and others who do not
subscribe to the ethno-sectarian system imposed on Iraq by the previous
Bush administration.
She said that days after The Erbil Agreement was signed. She had been proven correct by the events that followed. Credit to Michael Jansen for offering reality and perspective when few others were able or willing to.
Salah Nasrawi (Al-Ahram Weekly) reports:
With the vote only days away, Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki’s
prospects for re-election look dim, and the country’s Shia parties,
which together are poised to win the most seats in parliament, have
started looking for a challenger to the incumbent leader.
Al-Maliki, who is seeking a third term in office, is in trouble as Iraq
is teeming with problems. Many blame him for the country’s sectarian
violence, political turmoil and economic deadlock and are eager to see a
new prime minister in place.
For the time being, there is no frontrunner in Iraq’s elections,
scheduled for 30 April, as several Shia politicians have been vying for
the powerful position which also includes the key post of
commander-in-chief of the armed forces.
Iraq Times reports the Independent High Electoral Commission announced Thursday that they have fined 61 political bodies and candidates so far for campaign violations. The IHEC is a ruling body but the Iraqi people are the ultimate ruling body (unless the White House steps in as it did in 2006 when it installed Nouri al-Maliki as prime minister and as it did in 2010 when it demanded he be given a second term). And the people are defining their own issues right now. For example,
Rekar Aziz and Alexander Whitcomb (Rudaw) report that, in the Kurdistan Region, where campaign posters, leaflets and other printed materials are made is becoming an issue with voters and local businesses since much of the campaign material is coming "from Turkey, Lebanon and as far away as China" harming the KRG's local economy.
Let's stay with the Kurds for a moment,
Ilnur Cevik (Daily Sabah) reports:
Iraqi Kurdish leaders feel that if the current impasse in relations
with
the Iraqi central government continues after the April 30 elections
they will have no other option but to gradually weaken their ties with
Baghdad and eventually declare a separate state. Kurdish Regional
Government (KRG) Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani was in Ankara to meet
with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan Wednesday night to feel the
pulse of Ankara if the Kurds eventually move away from Baghdad. A source
close to Barzani told Daily Sabah on Thursday that Barzani returned
home late Wednesday night "satisfied."
The central government of Iraq led by Nouri el-Maliki has been at odds
with the Kurds over an array of issues stemming from an oil and gas
dispute. Baghdad has thus been slow in sending the KRG's share of Iraqi
oil revenues and therefore pushed the Kurds into a financial bottleneck
with serious delays in even the payment of civil servant salaries in the
KRG.
And Nouri continues to alienate the Kurds.
Adnan Jassem (Anadolu Agency) notes, "Iraq's main Shiite bloc led by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki will
endorse a 'moderate Sunni Arab' candidate to succeed incumbent President
Jalal Talabani, who is Kurdish, a leading bloc member has said."
On the election,
All Iraq News reports:
Ahrar bloc of Sadr Trend described granting a 3rd term for the Premier, Nouri al-Maliki, as "Dreams."
MP, Hussien al-Shireifi, of Ahrar bloc stated to AIN "The majority of the political blocs object renewing a 3rd term for Maliki due to his policies that caused crises and problems for the country."
In addition,
Iraq Times quotes another Sadr bloc MP, Bahaa al-Araji stating that Nouri will not receive a third term as prime minister. In another report,
the outlet quotes al-Araji stating Nouri has no achievements to speak of, not when security has deteriorated and the economy is not improved and . . .
Dar Addustour reports that both cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr and Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq's Ammar al-Hakim went to Tehran to make clear that a third term for Nouri is unacceptable and that this follows KRG President Massoud Barzani told officials in Tehran that a third term for Nouri would cause the Kurds to secede. As
Ann noted last night,
Ayad Allawi declared this week that Nouri shouldn't have a third term as prime minister.
Iraq Times reports the State Dept's Brett McGurk is advocating for a third term for Nouri and that Ahmed Chalabi is speaking with the White House about why this is not a good idea and spoke to US Ambassador to Iraq Robert Beecroft about this on Monday.
Not all Iraqis who vote will be voting in Iraq. There are many Iraqis who have had to flee the country due to violence.
NINA reports, "A leading member of Rafidain parliamentary bloc MP, Imad Youkhana
called on Iraqi communities abroad to broad participation in the
upcoming parliamentary elections."
All Iraq News reports:
The member of the Parliamentary Foreign Relations Committee, Imad
Yokhana, called the Iraqis abroad for wide participation in the upcoming
parliamentary elections.
He stated to AIN "The Iraqis
abroad can determine the future of Iraq for the next 4 years via their
participation in the elections."
Two days before the election, Iraq's security forces will take part in early voting.
Mustafa Habib (Niqash) explores the military vote and we'll note this section:
It is also possible that the situation they are facing in Anbar may be turning the Iraqi military against al-Maliki. When problems
first started in Anbar, al-Maliki seemed to be very popular with the
military, observers say. However over recent months this has changed.
“Al-Maliki’s popularity is decreasing,” says one senior
member of the military in Basra province, who did not want to be named
for fear of repercussions. “Because the army is having huge difficulties
in Anbar.”
According to this soldier, the Iraqi government has
allegedly played down the number of military casualties it’s had in the
fight against insurgents in Anbar. Videos being posted on YouTube and
other social media indicate many more are being captured and killed.
“Previously regiments in the south of the country were
fairly safe on their bases,” the military source says. “Then al-Maliki
decided to bring them to Anbar and it’s led to many deaths. This has
increased ill will towards the government.”
“The government has forced the Iraqi military into a
battle it cannot win,” says Yassin al-Rubaie, a former member of the
Iraqi army’s Seventh Division, which is currently deployed in Anbar. “We
don’t have any experience fighting a guerrilla war on the streets and
we don’t know the area at all. The militias fighting us know the area
very well, they’re better coordinated than the army and they have had
this kind of combat experience before,” he says.
Nouri al-Maliki continues killing civilians in Anbar.
Alsumaria reports a military shelling of a residential neighborhood in Ramadi left 3 people dead "including a child."
Iraqi Spring MC notes Nouri's three murders here.
Iraqi Spring MC also notes
people demonstrated in Ramadi calling on Nouri to pulls his forces out
of the city and the military 'responded' by firing randomly. Meanwhile
Nouri's forces continued their bombing of Falluja's residential
neighborhoods.
Alsumaria reports 1 civilian was killed and ten more were injured in the latest assault from Nouri's military.
Suleiman al-Qubeisi (Anadolu Agency) also reports on the Falluja assault.
NINA quotes Sheikh Mohammed Fayyad stating, "Friday sermons in Fallujah focused on demands to stop the
indiscriminate shelling of the city if the government rely want to
develop a solution to the crisis , the abolition of the provincial
government and members of the board because of their frustrated stands
as they escaped to the northern provinces or out of Iraq and stealing by
some of them aid, food and funds allocated by many local and
international agencies for the displaced people of Anbar moreover of
exploited the stolen funds and material to serve them in the propaganda
of electoral campaign."
Kitabat notes the Sheikh called out the "genocide" taking place as Nouri attacks the civilians of Falluja and Ramadi.
In other violence,
National Iraqi News Agency reports
security sources state they killed 3 suspects to the northeast of Baquba an
attack on a Ramadi checkpoint left 3 Sahwa dead and four more inured,
2 Tuz Khurmatu bombings left eight people injured, and a
corpse was discovered in South al-Hay (the man had been "kidnapped a few days ago"). Alsumaria reports
1 person was shot dead in Kirkuk,
west of Mosul a former Iraqi soldier was shot dead, and a
southern Baghdad bombing left a police member and 2 of his kids dead.
Mahmoud al-Jabouri (Anadolu Agency) reports, "Twelve people were killed on Friday in clashes between Sunni villagers
and suspected Shiite militants in Iraq's northern Diyala province, a
military official said."
Press TV notes, "A bomb explosion has ripped through a crowded shopping street in the Iraqi capital, Baghdad, leaving three people dead and five others wounded."
For the last few weeks, Nouri's been moving prisoners out of Abu Ghraib prison.
Iraq Times noted Tuesday that Baghdad Operations Command has repeatedly denied this was happening although the Ministry of Justice confirmed it on Tuesday when the prison was shut down. From
Tuesday's snapshot:
World Bulletin notes that "the prison was also used as a torture facility by Saddam Hussein's Baathist regime." AFP adds, "In 2004, then under control by U.S. troops, Abu Ghraib was at the center of a scandal over detainee abuse." AP also offers a brief sentence about the Abu Ghraib War Crimes, "Under U.S. troops, Abu Ghraib was at the center of a 2004 scandal over detainee abuse." The Saudi Gazette elaborates:
From late 2003 to early 2004, during the Iraq War, military police
personnel of the United States Army and the Central Intelligence Agency
committed human rights violations against prisoners held in the Abu
Ghraib prison. They physically and sexually abused, tortured, raped,
sodomized, and killed prisoners. It came to public attention in early
2004, beginning with United States Department of Defense announcements.
As revealed in the Taguba Report (2004), an initial criminal
investigation by the United States Army Criminal Investigation Command
had already been underway, in which soldiers of the 320th Military
Police Battalion had been charged under the Uniform Code of Military
Justice with prisoner abuse.
In April 2004, articles describing the abuse, including pictures showing
military personnel appearing to abuse prisoners, came to wide public
attention when a 60 Minutes II news report (April 28) and an
article by Seymour M. Hersh in The New Yorker magazine (posted online
on April 30 and published days later in the May 10 issue) reported the
story. The
United States Department of Defense removed seventeen soldiers and
officers from duty, and eleven soldiers were charged with dereliction of
duty, maltreatment, aggravated assault and battery.
This morning, only France24 could note, "Fresh abuse claims surfaced in 2013 after the facility became known as Baghdad Central Prison." Ed Adamczyk (UPI) later noted the continuous history of abuse, "The prison has a long history of abuse, under Saddam Hussein, during
the occupation of Iraq by U.S. troops, and, human rights advocates say,
under the present leadership. Critics accuse Prime Minister Nuri Kamal
al-Maliki with filling prisons, including Abu Ghraib, with young Sunni
men -- many, advocates claim, are innocent of insurgency."
Today, on Morning Edition (NPR -- link is text and audio), Kelly McEvers discussed the closure with Reuter's Baghdad bureau chief Ned Parker. Excerpt.
MCEVERS: First, we know what American jailers did to Iraqi prisoners
at Abu Ghraib. But give us an update - what kind of place was Abu Ghraib
after American troops withdrew from Iraq in 2011?
PARKER: For
Sunni Iraqis, Abu Ghraib prison was a symbol of the Shiite-led
government's discriminatory policies. They believed many of their
relatives were being held unjustly inside Abu Ghraib Prison after being
held and sometimes tried - other times not - on terrorism charges in
cases where they felt abuses were committed by the security forces.
So
under the Americans Abu Ghraib was nefarious. Before that under Saddam
it was nefarious and after the Americans it also remained sinister.
Some day, Nouri's son may be sitting in an Iraqi prison, behind bars. Dropping back to
November 1, 2013:
Live Leak posted that video of the new Little Uday Hussein, Nouri's son
Ahmed, zipping around London and the Ferrari. They note:
In this short video, Ahmed, the gangster son of one of the
world's most corrupt leaders Nuri Al-Maliki, drives his Ferrari around
central London, while he was on a �200 million property spending spree
with Iraq's money. Ahmed was of course cleared of all charges in
a huge corruption case involving Iraqi Government procurement of
Russian arms in 2012.
Nuri Al-Maliki is known to own numerous
several properties and a hotel in the UK, and has long been rumoured to
be planning to live here when his time as the chief bribe taker in Iraq
is over.
He also owns the Seyedeh Zainab Ambassador hotel in Damascus.
London
is the natural home of blood soaked African warlords, Russian
gangsters/Oligarchs, and of corrupt Middle Eastern despots, and their
offspring.Iraqi puppet leader Nuri Al-Maliki's gangster son Ahmed is spending the Iraqi people's money very wisely
Iraqi puppet leader Nuri Al-Maliki's gangster son Ahmed is spending the Iraqi people's money very wisely
Iraqi puppet leader Nuri Al-Maliki's gangster son Ahmed is spending the Iraqi people's money very wiselyIraq,Corruption,Bribery,,London,London,City of,United Kingdom (UK/GB)
[. . .]
Here's a picture of mini-tyrant Ahmed al-Maliki.
As you can see, he gets his ugly from his father. Here he is trying to look cleaned up.
Here's CNN on Ahmed last year:
Iraq’s Kurdistan Democratic Party’s official newspaper, Khebat,
revealed that Nouri Maliki’s son has expensed over $150 million of the
Iraqi people’s assets purchasing castles and hotels in foreign
countries. The newspaper wrote quoting a source: After his father became
Chairman of the Dawa Party, Ahmed Nouri al-Maliki purchased the Marry
Anderson Castle in London for a price of £40 million. In addition, he
purchased the Seyedeh Zainab Ambassador Hotel in Damascus at a price of
$35 million, and is now purchasing the Ajmon Ambassador Hotel at a price
of $75 million.
The source added that Ahmed Nouri
al-Maliki has purchased an 85 thousand square meter land in front of the
Zainab Hotel for $52 million.
Iraq’s Kurdistan
Democratic Party’s official newspaper, Khebat, added: Iraqis who live
with power outages and no public services, and while a day doesn’t go by
that a number of people don’t lose their lives as a result of
explosions, ask the Maliki government: Where does Maliki’s son bring all
this money from?
Today, in "
Is Maliki's son the new Uday?," Paul Crompton and Hind Mustafa explore Ahmed al-Maliki:
Ahmed’s role as security chief enables him to control exactly who goes
in and out of the Green Zone, by controlling the issuing of security
badges needed to access the area.
However, his activities in the Green Zone are a sideshow compared to
Ahmed’s wider business interests in the county, said a former high-level
official, who knew Ahmed personally and had worked with Nouri Al-Maliki
for eight years.
“Two years ahead, he will lead the corruption not only in the [prime
minister’s office],” but in the military, the security, construction and
investment, as well as the investment commission.”
“Hamoudi” is also involved in military activities, including heading up a
new force operating directly under the premier’s orders — separate from
the command of the army or defense minister, the source said.
Moving over to the US,
Fatima Hansia (CorpWatch Blog) notes, "KBR and
Halliburton
– two major U.S. military contractors – can be sued for the health
impacts of trash incineration on U.S. soldiers who served in the war in
Iraq, according to a new court decision that allows a series of
57 lawsuits against the companies to go forward."
In the
April 10th snapshot, I stated the following:
This is it at its most basic. Everyone who can speak on a campus
should. Campuses should be a forum for free expression. Because I
speak on a campus doesn't mean everyone's required to attend. If they
oppose me, they're more than welcome to protest. One of the scariest
protests would be my arriving to find no one (or just a tiny handful) of
people in the room waiting to hear me.
To put this in terms of Condi Rice. She has every right to speak on any
campus. And people have every right to attend or not to attend. They
have every right to protest. They even have the right to heckle.
That's free speech.
The University of Minnesota is an institution that values and utilizes free speech. They proved it by allowing Condi Rice to speak. They proved it by allowing those who take offense at the War Hawk to protest. And students made their case and made it strongly.
Chris Getowicz (Fight Back News) reports:
Hundreds of students and community members gathered outside of
Northrop Auditorium at the University of Minnesota (U of M), on the
evening of April 17, to protest an appearance by Bush White House
National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice. Rice was speaking as an
invited guest of the University’s Humphrey School of Public Affairs.
The crowd of over 250 protesters, led by Students for a Democratic
Society (SDS), heard speakers including professors David Pellow and
August Nimtz, AFSCME 3800 President Cherenne Horazuk, Welfare Rights
Committee member Deb Howze, Anti-War Committee member Sabri Wazwaz and
representatives from other student groups such as Whose Diversity and
Students for Justice in Palestine.
Speakers condemned Rice as a war criminal whose misconduct during the
Bush administration included direct responsibility for the use of
‘enhanced interrogation techniques.’ This torture was systematically
implemented by the CIA and used at Black Sites around the world as well
as prisons like Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib.
iraq
fareed zakaria
alice fordham
npr
morning edition
the london review of books
ned parker
anadolu agency
salah nasrawi
al-ahram weekly
national iraq news agency
the gulf today
michael jansen
the daily sabah
ilnur cevik
all iraq news
kelly mcevers
