Saturday, October 10, 2009

Protests in Baghdad and Basra

In Iraq today, people took to the streets in the hundreds. Sameer N. Yacoub (AP) says it was for open elections and to demand better government services while adding this is "a growing discontent . . . that is overshadowing concerns" regarding can Iraq secure its own borders and country side once US troops leave (are they leaving? not this year, not next . . ."). Yacoub insists that the low price per barrel of oil has just hurt the Iraqi government. Left out is that the summer of 2008 sent the world reeling as oil prices soared and where's that money? Huh? Nothing got done either. It's past time news outlets stopped playing so damn dumb. Every one knows that the thugs in charge are going beyond skimming of the money. Every one knows it's being salted away. If you don't have the guts to say so at least don't insult people's intelligence by pretending that a 'low' in oil prices (it's not low, there's been lower) is the reason for the poor infrastructure.

Yacoub quotes chanters in Baghdad exclaiming, "No water, no electricity in the country of oil and the two rivers!" Yes, and that was true in 2008, in 2007 and in 2006. It goes back further but Nouri al-Maliki was installed -- he was not the choice of the Iraqi people or even of Iraqi politicians -- while making the claim that he would improve services. He would restore them. And he never did. In the January 2009 provincial elections (14 of Iraq's 18 provinces), he went around making similar claims and also (briefly) providing (shipped in) potable water.

Iran's Press TV tells you that the people took to the streets to support "a call by top Shia cleric Grand Ayatollah Ali Husseinie al-Sistani" for people to elect candidates and not political parties.
Funniest sign? "Closed Lists Strengthen Sectarianism and Racism." Not only has al-Sistani driven and benefitted from secteranism, he's also the Grand Homophobe. That sign was clearly intended to sway foreign eyes.

An estimated 200 in Baghdad and 500 in Basra.

AP's Qassim Abdul-Zahra and Brian Murphy have an article we're not going to quote. Prisoners interviewed under the watchful eyes of the 'law' -- which provided them to begin with -- aren't generally reliable. The reporters are upfront about how the interview came to be and about the limitations of the story (it can't be verified) so we will provide a link to it but, again, no quotes from it. The outlet's Sharon Cohen and Lisa Orkin Emmanuel offer an in-depth look at Iraqi refugees who make it to the US:

Many Iraqis have discovered that advanced degrees and gold-plated resumes have opened few doors in a nation reeling from its worst economic decline since the Depression. Stories abound of Iraqi professionals doing menial jobs -- a doctor flipping burgers, a pharmacist washing dishes.
Iraqis also have struggled to navigate a confusing bureaucracy and an overburdened social service system that has sometimes run of out money to help provide refugees' basic needs.


There's little reporting coming out of Iraq. No one, for example, has filed on Saturday's violence.

In the US, Sherwood Ross offers "Obama’s Fictional Nobel Prize Statement " (Grant Lawrence):

Can President Obama be serious when he says he accepts the Nobel Peace Prize as "an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people of all nations"?
Among "all nations" does he include the people of Iraq? Polls show Iraqis overwhelmingly want the U.S. to get out. Apparently, they didn't enjoy their dose of "American leadership." Does Obama's "all nations" include Okinawa, which the U.S. has occupied for 64 years and refuses to leave?
Does "all nations" include Diego Garcia, whose inhabitants the U.S. forced from their island homes in the Indian Ocean, (as Time magazine has reported,) and whose dogs we gassed for good measure? (President Bush later used that base to attack Afghanistan, the better to dominate the oil-rich Middle East.)
Since he's been in office only a short time, when Obama speaks of "an affirmation of American leadership" is he referring to the eight years of warmongering by his predecessor George W. Bush, who tore up every international treaty he could lay his hands on? In fact, global public opinion polls identified Bush as one of the most feared public figures on the planet. What kind of "leadership" is it when one UN member invades another based on lies and kills a million of its people, steals it blind, and shatters its economy? Calling that "leadership" is a bit wide of the mark.


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










sherwood ross

The betrayal of Iraqi women

When I was speaking to some of the officers in charge of training in the presence of "the friendly side," as the Iraqi security officials refer to the U.S. military, they were all for developing the military to include the "female element," in a subdued way. But when I had a chance of talking to them alone -- it was a different story.
"You understand that the 'friendly side' wants to give us the benefit of all its years of experience -- in all avenues. Maybe after they're gone, this issue will be put to the vote. And who knows, it may be revoked," said an Iraqi colonel at the center.
Talking to the women, around whom this story revolves, Rasha Ahmed, 27, said that after working in the military for three years, she would transfer to a civilian job even with less pay if she could. "The problem is not the women themselves. Many are capable and willing. It's the men. They don't take us seriously as professionals. They don't even train us as they do other men -- 'What a waste, where will you practice fighting? In your homes? Ha ha ha.'" That's their attitude," she complained.


The above is from Sahar Issa's "The 'Female Element' in the Iraqi military" (Inside Iraq, McClatchy Newspapers) and it's probably the only article that's bothered to note what realities are for Iraqi women and what they most likely will be as soon as the US leaves and the thugs the US put in charge no longer feel they have to respond.

Life was better for Iraqi women before the start of the Iraq War. Their lives have been destroyed, their rights have been taken from them and you don't hear about it and no one wants to talk about it. It doesn't fit with the lies of 'noble' war and 'success' that the press is so vested in selling.

For one article in 2009, for a brief second, you get how much Iraqi women have lost and how much they're going to lose. Years from now, when concern for Iraqi women is suddenly discovered grasp that it wasn't covered in real time. There was no interest in it. Not a busy news days, not on slow ones.

It's not as if the New York Times instructed their reporters to begin a piece on the status of Iraqi women and that it would run on slow news days. There was never any interest in Iraqi women. In the early days of the New York Times' 'coverage,' there was such a lack of interest that Iraqi women weren't even quoted in the paper -- not even in those people-on-the-street stories. You could read anything by John F. Burns or Dexter Filkins and never come across one woman. As though no women lived in Iraq, as though the entire population sprung fully grown from the head of Zeus. And don't pretend for one damn minute that the portrayal didn't involve a lot of sexism on the part of reporters 'telling' the story.

The following community sites have updated since yesterday morning:

Cedric's Big Mix
Maxine's singing "Lead Me On" in the background
53 minutes ago

The Daily Jot
THIS JUST IN! HE LIES THEY CHEER!
53 minutes ago

Mikey Likes It!
Medhi Hasan, Simon Assaf
1 day ago

Thomas Friedman is a Great Man
2009 Biggest Joke in the World
1 day ago

Oh Boy It Never Ends
The real stuff
1 day ago

Like Maria Said Paz
Jennifer Loven told too much truth
1 day ago

Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude
haiti
1 day ago

SICKOFITRADLZ
He'll take our money
1 day ago

Trina's Kitchen
Cheese Sandwiches in the Kitchen
1 day ago

Ruth's Report
He was born before Selma
1 day ago

Ann's Mega Dub
Ardi on Discovery Sunday
1 day ago

Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills)
Domestic abuse awareness month, Holly Near
1 day ago

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

iraq
mcclatchy newspapers
sahar issa




thomas friedman is a great man






oh boy it never ends

Friday, October 09, 2009

Iraq snapshot

Friday, October 9, 2009.  Chaos and violence continue, news of the US continuing the Iraq War on into 2012, the war against women continues and Sahar Issa documents it, where is the 'progress,' the US fails to meet the admission numbers for Iraqi refugees predicted in August by the State Dept, the US Army releases suicide data, and more.
 
Let's deal with realities and the first that the Iraq War has no end-date at present.  Despite spin and lies and assertions, there is no end-date.  In fact, if the SOFA truly eneded the Iraq War -- as the popular narrative and press fools claim -- then Bush couldn't have skipped the Congress.  There would be no debating that it was a treaty if ended a war.  That's what treaties historically have done.  But let's deal in what is known.
 
Matthew D. LaPlante (Salt Lake Tribune), reporting on new deployments to Iraq for Utah units and, almost as a whispered aside, drops this explosive word-bomb: "And some Utah units have been told to anticipate deployments to Iraq as far off as 2012."  As far off as 2012?
 
B-b-b-but my TV told me the Iraq War ends most certainly as 2011 draws to a close!  My TV said so!!!  Imagine that.  A press that lied a nation into war might also lull a nation into a false belief that the Iraq War was ending.  For the record, the press tried that during Vietnam as well.  You can't learn about it in Norman Solomon's books because he always misses that point and fails to grasp the conflict between stateside editors and reporters stationed in Vietnam.  It would be shocking that Norman might not know that . . . unless you grasped he's lied that the Iraq War ends in 2011 along with so many other gas bags.  The pledged delegate for Barack Obama gave it up for his crush and was left with nothing but a wet spot and sullied reputation.  Norman you kind of picture right about now peeing on a stick and waiting to see what color it turns.
 
The Dept of Defense released a statement on October 8th. AC W (Gather) examines the release, "The first thing to note is that all four elements mentioned in the press release are COMBAT forces. The three brigade combat teams (the 4th Infantry Brigade Combat Team from the 3rd Infantry Division, the 2nd Brigade Combat Team from the 25th Infantry Division, and the 4th Brigade Combat Team from the 1st Cavalry Division) are just what their names say they are: brigade COMBAT teams. They are made up of COMBAT troops with weapons designed for COMBAT. The armored cavalry regiment, the 3rd ACR, is a combat unit with tanks and infantry troops. How will all COMBAT troops be out of Iraq by mid-next year if we are sending COMBAT troops to Iraq in mid-next year?"
 
Today, filing a rare report from Iraq,  Marc Santora (New York Times) opens with, "There is no more visible sing that America is putting the Iraq war behind it . . ." 
 
Is America putting Iraq behind it? That's not only factually incorrect, it's also highly insulting. Did we not hear yesterday from Russell Powell, an Iraq War veteran, explaining to the Senate about how exposure to Sodium Dichromate in Iraq has seriously destroyed his health? Is Russell Powell "putting the Iraq war behind" him?

No, the New York Times wants to put the war behind it.

Why? Because they sold the illegal war. Little liars -- and it went far beyond Judith Miller who, for the record, was woefully misguided but did not lie because she honestly thought there were WMDs in Iraq and that's why she commandeered that squadron while in Iraq to 'discover' the non-existent WMDs -- sold that illegal war. And it wasn't just the Times but it was the Times which never got accountable for their actions. There was the mini-culpa, the meaningless tiny item that might as well have been a blind item for all the weight it carried. And the promise of a later investigation into their errors. Where's that later coverage? Oh, right, they never did it.

The New York Times would love to put the Iraq War behind it. First of all, it damanged their reputation in ways Jayson Blair can only dream of. Second of all, they can't sell a new war -- and, make no mistake, the New York Times always sells wars -- effectively while the Iraq War is still on people's minds. Look at the pushback the current administration is experiencing on their desire for war with Iran. What keeps getting brought up? Iraq. The lies that led to that war. So, yeah, the paper wants to put the Iraq War behind it. And the media at large does.

But shame on all of them for pimping that when you have people suffering (including Iraqis but as John F-ing Burns explained so long ago, the paper's only concerned with Americans) and so many dead. Shame on them. It's not just that they lied to sell an illegal war, it's that they never owned the consequences of their decision to do so, let alone taken accountability.

Marc Santora and the New York Times want to put the Iraq War behind them. How sweet for them. In the real world? William Cole (Honolulu Advertiser) notes that an estimated 4,300 members of the 2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team at Schofield Barracks has received orders to deploy to Iraq "in the summer of 2010." Gregg K. Kakesako (Honolulu Star-Bulletin) adds, "They are part of the three brigades and one armored cavalry regiment with 15,000 soldiers that the Pentagon said will be sent to Iraq next year." But don't worry, Marc Santora and the New York Times have put Iraq 'behind' them.

Many Iraqi and American families don't have luxury of putting that (ongoing) illegal war behind them; however, the Times has never been known for having a sense of perspective. Among the many who won't be 'putting it behind them' so quickly will be Iraqi refugees.  This week Human Rights Action and the Human Rights Institute at Georgetown Law Center issued [PDF format warning] a new report entitled "Refugee Crisis in America: Iraqis And Their Resettlement Experience." Behind them?  "Across the United States, many resettled Iraqi refugees are wondering how, after fleeing persecution at home to seek refuge in a country that barely tolerated them, they have found themselves in 'the land of opportunity' with little hope of achieving a secure and decent life." Iraq is the MidEast refugee crisis with an estimated total of 4.7 million external and internal refugees (figure from the March 31st snapshot covering the Senate subcommittee hearing Senator Bob Casey Jr. chaired where the issue of the numbers was addressed at length).  The report notes:
 
Under pressure from advocacy groups and increased reporting on the plight of Iraqi refugees, the United States ultimately began resettling more Iraqis.  In the fall of 2007, Congress passed the Refugee Crisis in Iraq Act, providing admission for Iraqis that worked for the United States or its contractors in Iraq, and allowing in-country processing for at-risk Iraqis. In 2008, the United States appointed two Senior Coordinators for Iraqi Refugees, one at the Department of State and one at the DHS, to strengthen the American humanitarian commitment to refugees with a particular emphasis on resettlement.  In FY [Fiscal Year] 2008, the United States resettled 13,822 Iraqi refugees.  As of August 31, 2009, the United States has resettled 16,965 Iraqi refugees in FY 2009, totaling over 33,000 since the 2003 war.
 
Fiscal Year 2009 is over.  It ended with the month of September.  So the study tells us that by August 31st, only 16,965 Iraqi refugees were granted resettlement into the US?  Let's drop back to the August 19th snapshot and Eric Schwartz (Asst Sect of Population, Refugees and Migration) State Dept press conference. He asserted in that press conference, regarding Iraqi refugees being accepted by the US, "The numbers -- let me -- I think I may answer your next question.  The numbers for fiscal year 2008, I think are on the order of about 13,000. I'm looking to my team here.  And the numbers for fiscal year 2009 will get us -- will probably be up to about 20,000."  Click here for transcript and video of the press conference. About 20,000?  August 19th, he claimed that.  In the last month of Fiscal Year 2009 (which would be September), did the US manage to resettle over 3,000 Iraqi refugees?  Great . . . if they did.  But it's highly unlikely. Following the November 2008 election, Sheri Fink (ProPublica) reported on the issue and noted, "A State Department official contacted by ProPublica said, 'We really do recognize a special responsibility.' The official said that resettling 17,000 Iraqi refugees in fiscal 2009 was a minimum target. 'We hope to bring in many more.' The U.S. will also be accepting Iraqis who worked for the US through special immigrant visas, a program [7] that resulted from legislation introduced by Senator Ted Kennedy (discussed [8] recently by Ambassador James Foley, the State Department's senior coordinator on Iraqi refugee issues)."  They 'hope'd to bring in any more.  2009, when Americans learned the definition of "false hopes."  So they most likely met the minimum target.  What a proud, proud moment . . . for an under achiever.
 
The Georgetown study notes that the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees created "11 resettlement elegibility criteria for Iraqi refugees" and that the US government signed off on them:
 
(1) Survivors of torture and violence, including sexual and gender based violence;
(2) Members of minority groups and persons targeted due to their ethnicity or sect;
(3) Women at risk in country of asylum;
(4) Unaccompanied or separate children;
(5) Dependents of refugees living in resettlement countries;
(6) Elderly refugees;
(7) Refugees with medical needs;
(8) High profile cases;
(9) Iraqis who fled due to their associations with U.S. or other foreign institutions;
(10) Stateless persons;
(11) Iraqis at risk of refoulement.
 
Despite the US government agreeing to these criteria, the study notes that "the USRAP [US Refugee Admissions Program] expects the most vulnerable refugees will find employment and become self-sufficient almost immediately. Thus, the United States offers resettlement to those refugees with particular vulnerabilities that can inhibit their ability to achieve self-sufficiency while expecting them to quickly become self-sufficient."
 
Today Avi Selk (Dallas Morning News) reports on the approximately 865 Iraqi refugees who are now in the Dallas-Fort Worth area of Texas.  Selk notes a study on Iraqis who have experienced torture and how they "and their family members" are very likely to have "suffered post-traumatic stress disorder".  They're not seeking treatment for PTSD in part because they don't know what resources are out there for them.  That's really a shameful comment on the government process for Iraqi refugees.
 
Chris Hill, US Ambassador to Iraq, thinks he's Ann Wilson's lover talking to the refugees: "'Come on home, girl,' he said with a smile, 'You don't have to love me yet, Let's get high awhile'" ("Magic Man" written by Ann Wilson and Nancy Wilson and recorded by the Wilson sisters' band Heart). But Chris Hill is apparently the one who needs to try to understand, try to understand, try, try, try to understand. On the subject of repatriation, the report notes that "international humanitarian groups agree that Iraq is still not safe enough to allow return.  And though some are returning, there is 'still no big flow back into Iraq.' The International Commission of the Red Cross informally estimates the flow at close to one percent of the total refugee propulation and believes that 'most come in to look and see if it's safe, if their property is still there, [and so], then quickly [go] back [to countries of asylum].' There are no credible reports of Iraqi refugees returning home in significant numbers."

Twenty families -- a small number -- were in the news this week for returning to Iraq.  But they're not the refugees the report is talking about (or that were sold as part of the Myth of the Great Return).  Chelsea J. Carter (AP) reported this week that the approximately 250 people were exiles . . . during Saddam Hussein's reign.  They returned from Iran.
 
The external refugees of the current conflict settle in countries such as Jordan, Syria and Lebanon.  The majority of the refugees in Jordan interviewed for Jordan's study want to move to the United States but "[w]hile the situation in Jordan is quite bad for many Iraqi refugees, the news of struggling friends and family in the United States is causing more and more Iraqi refugees to wonder whether choosing resettlement is really worth the risk."
 
Along with a lack of coordination among the government agencies helping refugees who arrive in the US, other issues include lack of vehicles and poor or no public transportation in the areas they are resettled in, difficulties with the maze of the DMV in order to get a driver's license and cash assistance being far too small.  The study notes, "As it exists now, the totalk package of assistance to refugees amounts to between just seventeen to forty precent of the federal pvoerty line. Although a family of six may receive up to $2,500 in R&P assistance to cover living costs for the first ninety days, a single adult receives only $425, or less than $5 a day."
 
Those are only some of the problems facing Iraqi refugees resettling to the US.  We'll go over more next week but we'll note the study's recommendations:
 
Refugee resettlement should be decoupled from U.S. anti-poverty programs and
tailored to the unique needs and experiences of refugees. Refugee assistance should be increased from eight to eighteen months, and programs designed to promote the long-term self-sufficiency and integration of refugees should be better funded. A stronger emphasis should be placed on the core barriers to self-sufficiency and integration, including lack of English language skills, lack of transportation, and lack of opportunities for education and recertification.      
 
• Funding for employment and social services should be tailored to estimates of
incoming refugee arrivals and secondary migration, as well as the unique needs of these particular groups. Funding should not be based on the number of past refugee arrivals.                  

• All actors within the USRAP must improve planning and information sharing
capabilities. Planning should anticipate and prepare for the unique needs of each
refugee group prior to arrival. In order to tailor services for refugees, actors must
take into account important information on refugees collected in the resettlement
process, such as health status and professional background.                  
 
On today's NPR's The Diane Rehm Show, the last two minutes raised the issue of Iraq.  Had it been a longer segment, Paul Richter's assertions might have been explored by the panel. Along with the Los Angeles Times' Richter, panelists includes Karen DeYoung (Washington Post) and Hisham Melhem (Al-Arabiya TV and An-Nahar) with Susan Page guest hosting.
 
Susan Page: We've seen the campaign start in Iraq for the election of a new Parliament.  Any surprises there, Paul?
 
Paul Richter: Well there's an interesting alignment that's taking place there. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who has been the dominant figure in Iraq for a couple of years obviously, he's put together a coalition that is largely Shia but includes some Sunnis, some Kurds and a few other -- a scattering of a few other small ethnic groups.  That's lined up against another Shia coalition which is pretty much solidly Shia and has -- actually has some backing from Iran. And so the question is going to be which of the two coalitions is going to prevail in the elections?  I think from the US standpoint, it would be better to have the Maliki coalition prevail because it is nationalist but it claims not to be sectarian. You know, the US goal obviously is to have power sharing.
 
Susan Page: So we'll see perhaps a debate on how secular the Iraqi government -- the next Iraqi government -- will be?
 
Karen DeYoung: Well, and I think that, so far at leas, from the American point of view, this is not all bad.  You know Maliki was a compromise candidate to start with.  He was nobody's first choice.  He ended up being the choice several years ago that everyone could live with and the census that he's developed into a politician and is trying to gather these disparate groups.
 
So Iraq's holding elections in January. Hmm.  Thing is, the elections were supposed to take place in December.  Thing is, to hold elections at any time, certain things need to be done.  Is everything in order for January elections in Iraq?  Uh, no.  Not at all.  Mike noted Michael Jansen (Irish Times) report this week which explained, "DISAGREEMENT OVER Iraq's election law and a spike in violence threaten dissent and death ahead of the January parliamentary poll."  September 30th, the top US commander in Iraq offered testimony to the US House Armed Services Committee.  During the hearing, he was asked to explain the voting in Iraq.
 
General Ray Odierno: I'll wal -- Congressman, I'll walk you through in general terms.  First, the el - by the [Iraqi] Constitution, the election is supposed to occur no later than the 31st of January. Right now, it's scheduled for the 16th of January. Again, pending the passing of the election law.
 
We'll stop on that point.  "Pending the passing of the election law."  If discussing 'progress' in Iraq on public radio, might be a good idea to know something about the election law.  The same week Paul didn't appear to, his paper runs Saad Khalaf's "Hope survived one Iraq bombing, but not the second:"
 
Every day, I worry that someone will plant a bomb on my car or I will drive into a suicide attack on my way to work.  The other night at a restaurant, a waiter dropped a cutting board and I jumped.  One minute Iraq could be the best country in the world, and in the next minute it could be the worst.  I don't know what to do do.  All my thoughts are about leaving the country.  If I stay here with my parents, there is a possibility that I will face another attack and die.  If I leave Iraq, I will lose my job and my family but I will probably save my life.
 
Doesn't sound safe even with all the spin.  The elections may or may not be held in January.  That uncertainity remains the only consistent in Iraq. Vivienne Walt (Time magazine) notes this uncertainity and this lack of defined progress:
 
Among the key "benchmarks" for progress in Iraq set by President George W. Bush in January of 2007 was the passage of a new Iraqi oil law. But almost three years on, the controversial legislation setting terms for foreign investment in the country's oil sector, and for distributing its revenues, remains stalled in the legislature. And Iraqi politicians admit it's unlikely to pass before the current parliament is replaced following Iraq's general elections next January.
 
So we've had a serious complaint about NYT, a complaint about a LAT reporter (who's not really knowledgable on Iraq, hate to break it to you) and now we move to McClatchy where a friend this morning passed on an article and lamented it was presented as a blog post.  And now you can find Nancy A. Youssef leaving a comment on the 'blog post' which does, at least, give Sahar Issa a byline.  But someone should have looked at Sahar Issa's writing and said, "This isn't a blog post, this is an article."  And it should have been run as such.
What's Sahar reporting on?  Women in Iraq.  Which is the subject of so few articles.  She went to "The Crossed Swoards" symposium in Baghdad's Green Zone and heard a lot of patronizing comments about women and what they could and couldn't do.  No surprise, Iraqi military women like Rasha Ahmed tell Sahar, "The problem is not the women themselves.  Many are capable and willing.  It's the men.  They don't take us seriously as professionals.  They don't even train us as they do other men -- 'What a waste, where will you practice fighting? In your homes? Ha ha ha.' That's their attitude."  Rasha Ahmed also tells Sahar, "We are pioneers.  We will pave the way for other women who wish to take this path.  We may be a novel spectacle in our society today, but if we prevail, the next generation will not laugh when they see a woman in uniform."  It's really appalling that Iraqi women have been dealt such a huge setback, such an overturning of their rights, due to the US government's desire to get 'stability' in Iraq by installing thugs.  It's a shame that even when the US administration changed, women were still not important.  The symbolic value, for example, of a qualified and capable woman in the post of US Ambassador to Iraq would have gone a long way towards helping Iraqi women.  It's disgusting.  And Rasha Ahmed's comments about the road she has to blaze?  Inspiring.  In the face of all the setbacks, it's women like Rasha who have to do the work and know they have to do the work and, most of all, grasp that it's not going to mean a great deal in their own lifetime but it's going to help the next generation.  As Holly Near sings (and she wrote the song -- she wrote the song women live) in "Somebody's Jail" (from Show Up):
 
And I feel the witch in my veins           
I feel the mother in my shoe                

I feel the scream in my soul               
The blood as I sing the ancient blue                 
They burned by the millions              
I still smell the fire in my grandma's hair                   
The war against women rages on              
Beware of the fairytale                
Somebody's mama, somebody's daughter                      
Somebody's jail           
 
Holly Near has a new album she's done with emma's revolution, We Came to Sing! which Kat praised here. If you will download from iTunes or purchase or oder the CD, it's an amazing album worth having.  (See Kat's review.  This community only recommends those two options due to issues members had attempting to obtain the album.)
 
From the war against women to the daily violence . . .
 
Bombings?
 
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports Baghdad grenade attack left three people wounded, a Mosul roadside bombing wounded three people, a Mosul roadside bombing wounded three people and a Falluja car bombing claimed 3 lives -- an Imam and two of  his bodyguards. Sameer N. Yacoub (AP) adds it was Sunni cleric Jamal Humadi who was "known for denouncing insurgents in Iraq".  Reuters notes a Tikrit car bombing last night which left six people injured.
 
Corpses?
 
Reuters notes 1 corpse discovered in Kirkuk.
 
 
 There were 117 reported active-duty Army suicides from January 2009 through September 2009.  Of those, 81 have been confirmed, and 36 are pending determination of manner of death.  For the same period in 2008, there were 103 suicides among active-duty soldiers.
During September 2009, among reserve component soldiers who were not on active duty, there were seven potential suicides.  Among that same group, from January 2009 through September 2009, there were 35 confirmed suicides.  Twenty-five potential suicides are currently under investigation to determine the manner of death.  For the same period in 2008, there were 40 suicides among reserve soldiers who were not on active duty.              
Over the past year, the Army has engaged in a sustained effort to reduce the rate of suicide within its ranks.  This effort has included an Army-wide suicide prevention stand-down and chain teach for every soldier; the implementation of the Army Campaign Plan for Health Promotion, Risk Reduction and Suicide Prevention; the establishment of both a Suicide Prevention Task Force and Suicide Prevention Council; a long-term partnership with the National Institute of Mental Health to carry out the largest ever study of suicide and behavioral health among military personnel; and more than 160 specific improvements to Army suicide prevention policies, doctrine, training and resources.           
 "Whether it's additional resources, improved training or ensuring those in our Army community can readily identify the warning signs of suicidal behavior, all our efforts often come down to one soldier caring enough about another soldier to step in when they see something wrong, " said Brig. Gen. Colleen McGuire, Director, Army Suicide Prevention Task Force.  "Soldiers will be willing to do that if they know help is available, if they believe there is no stigma attached to asking for that help, and if they are certain that Army leaders remain absolutely committed to the resiliency of our entire Army Family."                            
Soldiers and families in need of crisis assistance can contact Military OneSource or the Defense Center of Excellence (DCOE) for Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain Injury Outreach Center.  Trained consultants are available from both organizations 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year.                             
The Military OneSource toll-free number for those residing in the continental U.S. is 1-800-342-9647, their Web site address is http://www.militaryonesource.com    
Overseas personnel should refer to the Military OneSource Web site for dialing instructions for their specific location.              
The DCOE Outreach Center can be contacted at 1-866-966-1020, via electronic mail at Resources@DCoEOutreach.org and at http://www.dcoe.health.mil .       
 The Army's most current suicide prevention information is located at http://www.armyg1.army.mil/hr/suicide/default.asp  
 
Meanwhile Page Gardner, Women's Voices, Women Vote, notes the traditional decline from the number of voters in a general election to those in the mid-terms. They're focusing on the Rising American Electorate (RAE): "The RAE is comprised of Unmarried women (the largest portion), African Americans, Latinos, other people of color and Youths (18-29 yr olds). [. . .] WVWV is committed to keeping the RAE engaged in the democratic process and is at the forefront of analyzing who will turn out to vote in the 2010 midterm elections. To see our work on drop-off voters and the composition of the 2010 electorate, as well as state by state analyses, you can click here and here or visit www.wvwv.org."
 
Finally, Caro (MakeThemAccountable) observes:

I no longer have any respect whatsoever for the Nobel committee. Obama is continuing TWO wars, with no end in sight.
How that can be considered giving hope for peace is simply beyond me. Obama no more deserves this prize than George Bush.
The man never has to do a damn thing for people to shower him with praise and gifts.
 
 

Iraq realities

After I survived my first bombing, I said to myself, I won't see worse than this. Then I survived my second bombing and it changed everything.
It was a Wednesday in August, and I was sitting at my desk in the Foreign Ministry doing routine paperwork. I can't remember what time it was. My colleague entered the room, and at that moment, there was a huge explosion. Glass flew in and the ceiling collapsed. Black smoke came through the window.
I felt pain in my abdomen; blood stained my shirt. I heard a friend moaning. I helped him up and went to the hallway. Employees were screaming. The smoke made it hard to see.
The Aug. 19 attack on the Foreign and Finance ministries killed about 100 people -- and all my hopes for Iraq.


The above is from Saad Khalaf's "Hope survived one Iraq bombing, but not the second" (Los Angeles Times) which I'd hope to note yesterday but there wasn't any time. A friend with LAT reminded me of the article in a phone call this morning. Last year, for those who've forgotten, Khalaf was among the reporters targeted by the Iraqi military (emulating thug Nouri in an open hatred of the press) and shouted out by an Iraqi Colonel about how he could and did ban all photographs from the neighborhoods he patrolled. Despite that and other events, Saad Khalaf had hopes and faith for the future. Read the article and find out how and why that changed due to Black Wednesday. Meanwhile Tim Cocks (Reuters) thinks things are better in Iraq -- a judgment as ill conceived as his current hair cut. With hair as curly as Tim's, a short style like that -- which needs to be straight to set smoothly -- will be a nightmare as it grows out. He can consider the next months of Hair Hell part of his punishment for mistaking his relief over leaving Iraq (and it's good that he's leaving and that he survived so much very dangerous reporting -- reporting, not 'reporting,' he filed some strong pieces) as 'improvement' in Iraq. Anthony Shadid moves to the New York Times in a few months. It's the latest raid from the Post. The Times really is unable to develop their own talent. Hopefully Shadid will not have the problems another correspondent who moved to NYT not all that long ago did -- finding out that there's reality and reporting and then there's the way NYT does things. That reporter's taken a huge hit critically and being blamed for doing it the NYT way. ____ says if the paper business was more stable, it would be time to look for a new job. Robert H. Reid became the latest in the huge wave of Iraq reporters moved elsewhere. AP *has* moved him over Af-Pak. Rebecca Santana is now heading AP's Baghdad bureau.

While Tim mistakes relief for safety, James Denselow (Guardian) explains new actual developments in "The thieves of Baghdad:"

In the past month several high-profile incidents have highlighted what Major General Qassim al-Moussawi, the chief Iraqi military spokesman in Baghdad, described as the outbreak of "a frenzy of violent crime" in Iraq. Writing in the Times, Richard Kerbaj explained how "everyone is looking for a way to make a quick buck in Iraq, but none more so than the insurgents and gangsters". Indeed, present-day levels of crime in Iraq reflect the institutionalisation of criminality that may undermine the country's long-term development.


CNN has a very strong report on yesterday's Senate committee hearing entitled "Man with breast cancer testifies that he blames Marine base." No excerpt. There were four personal stories shared in the hearing and each was powerful and important. I tried to give each equal weight in the snapshot yesterday and to do an excerpt from the CNN report would be to give weight to one. (CNN covers three of the personal stories.) The hearing is online now and can be streamed. If you do stream and there's a section that stands out for you not covered in the snapshot yesterday, e-mail before the snapshot goes up -- e-mail by 4:00 pm EST to be sure I hear about the e-mail -- and I'll pull out the notes and we'll include it in today's snapshot.

We'll also cover the latest report on Iraqi refugees in today's snapshot. Avi Selk (Dallas Morning News) reports on Iraqi refugees and notes Feizah Hussein whose family settled in Fort Worth, Texas after receiving threatening letters:

Hussein and her sister got their letters in early 2007, but figured they had been sent in error when a final warning never followed.
A month later, the two women were walking to the grocery store when four men jumped out of cars and shot Hussein in the head. She passed out before she could see them execute her sister.
After Hussein got out of the hospital, her family moved to a Shiite neighborhood, where her Sunni husband was kidnapped and never seen again. She and her children holed up in Syria for a year and a half while their application to America wound through international bureaucracies.
She was among a dozen area Iraqis who shared detailed accounts of terror, trauma and torture.

Meanwhile Zhang Pengfei (CCTV) reports that Iraq's lack of potable water has a band-aid in one region -- "Iran has agreed to provide regular shipments of drinking water to the drought-striken areas in southern Iraq." "Band-aid" is not a criticism of Iran, it's noting that Nouri was installed in the spring of 2006 and, nearly four years later, the issue of drinking water has still not been addressed.

Caro (MakeThemAccountable) observes:

I no longer have any respect whatsoever for the Nobel committee. Obama is continuing TWO wars, with no end in sight.
How that can be considered giving hope for peace is simply beyond me. Obama no more deserves this prize than George Bush.
The man never has to do a damn thing for people to shower him with praise and gifts.

TV notes, NOW on PBS begins airing tonight on most PBS stations:

How did private discussions between seniors and their doctors about end-of-life choices for the very ill or dying become a flash point in the national health care debate?
This week, NOW travels to Wisconsin to sit in on some of these sessions and see how health care reform could profoundly affect the lives of American seniors.
The not-for-profit Gundersen Lutheran Hospital has two decades of experience in this area. Their "Respecting Choices" initiative has become one of the most comprehensive end-of-life planning programs in the country.
Two families grappling with the most difficult and complex life and death issues gave NOW on PBS extraordinary access to their discussions and their decisions.

Washington Week was among the shows taking off last week due to the latest Ken Burns documentary. Tonight (on most PBS stations), Gwen returns and joining her around the table are Peter Baker (New York Times), Joan Biskupic (USA Today), Ceci Connolly (Washington Post) and Martha Raddatz (ABC News).

Meanwhile Bonnie Erbe will sit down with Amanda Carpenter, Cari Dominguez, Jaclyn Friedman and Patricia Sosa to discuss the week's events on PBS' To The Contrary. Check local listings, on many stations, it begins airing tonight. And turning to broadcast TV, Sunday CBS' 60 Minutes offers:

Golf Company
Scott Pelley spends time with a U.S. Marine company in Helmand Province, sent there as part of President Obama's troop buildup in Afghanistan. | Watch Video


A Blow To The Brain
New studies show that athletes, especially professional football players, who suffered many blows to the head, became brain damaged. Bob Simon reports. | Watch Video


The Birdmen
In the latest craze that has killed several extreme adventurers, men don wing suits, jump off mountain tops and glide at speeds of 140 miles per hour. Steve Kroft reports. | Watch Video


60 Minutes, this Sunday, Oct. 11, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.


Public radio notes, today on NPR's The Diane Rehm Show (begins airing on most NPR stations and streaming live online at 10:00 am EST), Diane's guest host Susan Page (USA Today) discusses (first hour) domestic news with Jeanne Cummings (Politico), Michael Fletcher (Washington Post) and Jerry Seib and (second hour) international news with Karen DeYoung (Washington Post), Hisham Melhem (Al-Arabiya TV and An-Nahar) and Paul Richter (Los Angeles Times).


With Aimee Allison, David Solnit authored the seminal Army Of None -- a must read and, sadly, one of the few books of this era you can say that about. (It's a wonderful book.) David Solnit has a request with regards to books and Courage to Resist, so listen to the author:


We need your $ and they will be amazing events. If we are ever going to fight our way out of imperial wars, corporate capitalism, and climate chaos we are going to have to support the 2 1/2 million armed soldiers and their tens of million of family members n the US being part of the solution, as with getting out of Viet Nam. Courage to Resist exists for this purpose.

First Sunday Oct 18th with US Army Colonel Ann Wright, who publicly resigned to protest the 2003 Iraq War and now has a book about others who also spoke out, and leading journalist who just came out with an amazing book on GI resistance. I have a new book I put together with my sister and with contributions from my Direct Action Network co-organizers from a decade ago; The Battle of the Story of the Battle of Seattle (AK Press, Nov 2009) will be out just before the ten year anniversary, and bizarrely the next meeting in Geneva of the WTO-- to the day: Nov 30! Courage co-organizers put me in the event, so I'll give a book preview with strategy lessons for toppling corporate power and it's ugly wars and global warming.

The following Sunday My sister Rebecca will talk from her amazing new book, joining Gulf War 1 resister Aimee Allison and leading Int'l law expert Prof Majorie Cohn, who will explain the clear legal reasons why we need to rebel.

Hope to see you at both and please invite your friends and comrades!

hope and resistance, David

Book release benefit events for Courage to Resist, Oct. 18 & 25, 7pm, Oakland
First Congregational Church of Oakland, 2501 Harrison St (@27th St-Across from Whole Foods), Oakland



First Congregational Church

Image

Sunday, October 18, 7 pm - more info
Ann Wright, US Army Colonel (retired) and former US diplomat. Dissent: Voices of Conscience—Gov't Insiders Speak Out Against the War in Iraq
Dahr Jamail, author and journalist. The Will to Resist—Soldiers who Refuse to Fight in Iraq and Afghanistan
David Solnit, author and organizer. The Battle of the Story of the "Battle of Seattle" (Ak Press, Nov 2009)

Sunday, October 25, 7 pm - more info
Prof. Marjorie Cohn, President of the National Lawyers Guild. Rules of Disengagement: The Politics and Honor of Military Dissent
Rebecca Solnit, award winning author/writer/essayist.A Paradise Built in Hell: The Extraordinary Communities that Arise in Disaster
Aimee Allison, author/public affairs/TV host. Co-host of The Morning Show on Pacifica station KPFA

This event is a benefit for Courage to Resist in support of military war resisters. Endorsed and supported by Veterans for Peace SF Bay Area Chapter, Iraq Veterans Against the War (SF Bay Area), BAY-Peace, Asian Americans for Peace and Justice, CodePink, War Resisters League-West, United for Peace and Justice - SF Bay Area, and American Friends Service Committee - SF.

Events graphic & events PDF leaflet. Many of these great books are available from our orders page.

Free event, $5 donation suggested. Wheelchair accessible. Book signing will be held.

For more information, contact 510-488-3559.



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















60 minutes
cbs news
pbs
to the contrary
bonnie erbe
npr
the diane rehm show

New York Times tries to bury the war they started

jason carrera

That's Iraq War veteran Jason Carrera pictured above. You may remember him from last month when police were in a 'standoff' with Carrera. As Reed Parker (WIBC), the Indianapolis Star and WRTV 'report,' he won't be charged. 'Report'? What appears to have happened is no standoff. What appears to have happened is Carrera was asleep on the couch for the entire 'standoff.' It appears his roommate called the police when there was no reason to. Left out of the 'reports' is why Carrera won't be charged and what appears to be the reality is that he used no weapon in the standoff and threatened no one (including himself). He simply slept on his couch. It appears the 'danger' may have been inflated in a call to the police. If that's the case, Carrera is owed the right to have the record corrected.

Speaking of trashy 'reporting,' let's turn to the New York Times where one of those rare 'reports' from Iraq is filed prompting readers to groan and wonder why they ever miss the Iraq 'reporting' from the paper. Marc Santora (New York Times) opens with:

There is no more visible sign that America is putting the Iraq war behind it than the colossal operation to get its stuff out: 20,000 soldiers, nearly a sixth of the force here, assigned to a logistical effort aimed at dismantling some 300 bases and shipping out 1.5 million pieces of equipment, from tanks to coffee makers.

Is America putting Iraq behind it? That's not *only* factually incorrect, it's also highly insulting. Did we not hear yesterday from Russell Powell, an Iraq War veteran, explaining to the Senate about how exposure to Sodium Dichromate in Iraq has seriously destroyed his health? Is Russell Powell "putting the Iraq war behind" him?

No, the New York Times wants to put the war behind it.

Why? Because they sold the illegal war. Little liars -- and it went far beyond Judith Miller who, for the record, was woefully misguided but did not lie because she honestly thought there were WMDs in Iraq and that's why she commandeered that squadron while in Iraq to 'discover' the non-existent WMDs -- sold that illegal war. And it wasn't just the Times but it was the Times which never got accountable for their actions. There was the mini-culpa, the meaningless tiny item that might as well have been a blind item for all the weight it carried. And the promise of a later investigation into their errors. Where's that later coverage? Oh, right, they never did it.

The New York Times would love to put the Iraq War behind it. First of all, it damanged their reputation in ways Jayson Blair can only dream of. Second of all, they can't sell a new war -- and, make no mistake, the New York Times always sells wars -- effectively while the Iraq War is still on people's minds. Look at the pushback the current administration is experiencing on their desire for war with Iran. What keeps getting brought up? Iraq. The lies that led to that war. So, yeah, the paper wants to put the Iraq War behind it. And the media at large does.

But shame on all of them for pimping that when you have people suffering (including Iraqis but as John F-ing Burns explained so long ago, the paper's only concerned with Americans) and so many dead. Shame on them. It's not just that they lied to sell an illegal war, it's that they never owned the consequences of their decision to do so, let alone taken accountability.

Marc Santora and the New York Times want to put the Iraq War behind them. How sweet for them. In the real world? William Cole (Honolulu Advertiser) notes that an estimated 4,300 members of the 2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team at Schofield Barracks has received orders to deploy to Iraq "in the summer of 2010." Gregg K. Kakesako (Honolulu Star-Bulletin) adds, "They are part of the three brigades and one armored cavalry regiment with 15,000 soldiers that the Pentagon said will be sent to Iraq next year." But don't worry, Marc Santora and the New York Times have put Iraq 'behind' them.

Many Iraqi and American families don't have luxury of putting that (ongoing) illegal war behind them; however, the Times has never been known for having a sense of perspective.

With Aimee Allison, David Solnit authored the seminal Army Of None -- a must read and, sadly, one of the few books of this era you can say that about. (It's a wonderful book.) David Solnit has a request with regards to books and Courage to Resist, so listen to the author:


We need your $ and they will be amazing events. If we are ever going to fight our way out of imperial wars, corporate capitalism, and climate chaos we are going to have to support the 2 1/2 million armed soldiers and their tens of million of family members n the US being part of the solution, as with getting out of Viet Nam. Courage to Resist exists for this purpose.

First Sunday Oct 18th with US Army Colonel Ann Wright, who publicly resigned to protest the 2003 Iraq War and now has a book about others who also spoke out, and leading journalist who just came out with an amazing book on GI resistance. I have a new book I put together with my sister and with contributions from my Direct Action Network co-organizers from a decade ago; The Battle of the Story of the Battle of Seattle (AK Press, Nov 2009) will be out just before the ten year anniversary, and bizarrely the next meeting in Geneva of the WTO-- to the day: Nov 30! Courage co-organizers put me in the event, so I'll give a book preview with strategy lessons for toppling corporate power and it's ugly wars and global warming.

The following Sunday My sister Rebecca will talk from her amazing new book, joining Gulf War 1 resister Aimee Allison and leading Int'l law expert Prof Majorie Cohn, who will explain the clear legal reasons why we need to rebel.

Hope to see you at both and please invite your friends and comrades!

hope and resistance, David

Book release benefit events for Courage to Resist, Oct. 18 & 25, 7pm, Oakland
First Congregational Church of Oakland, 2501 Harrison St (@27th St-Across from Whole Foods), Oakland



First Congregational Church

Image

Sunday, October 18, 7 pm - more info
Ann Wright, US Army Colonel (retired) and former US diplomat. Dissent: Voices of Conscience—Gov't Insiders Speak Out Against the War in Iraq
Dahr Jamail, author and journalist. The Will to Resist—Soldiers who Refuse to Fight in Iraq and Afghanistan
David Solnit, author and organizer. The Battle of the Story of the "Battle of Seattle" (Ak Press, Nov 2009)

Sunday, October 25, 7 pm - more info
Prof. Marjorie Cohn, President of the National Lawyers Guild. Rules of Disengagement: The Politics and Honor of Military Dissent
Rebecca Solnit, award winning author/writer/essayist.A Paradise Built in Hell: The Extraordinary Communities that Arise in Disaster
Aimee Allison, author/public affairs/TV host. Co-host of The Morning Show on Pacifica station KPFA

This event is a benefit for Courage to Resist in support of military war resisters. Endorsed and supported by Veterans for Peace SF Bay Area Chapter, Iraq Veterans Against the War (SF Bay Area), BAY-Peace, Asian Americans for Peace and Justice, CodePink, War Resisters League-West, United for Peace and Justice - SF Bay Area, and American Friends Service Committee - SF.

Events graphic & events PDF leaflet. Many of these great books are available from our orders page.

Free event, $5 donation suggested. Wheelchair accessible. Book signing will be held.

For more information, contact 510-488-3559.



Senator Daniel Akaka is the Chair of the Senate's Veterans Affairs Committee and we'll note his opening statement in full from yesterday's hearing while NYT attempts to air brush out the Iraq War:

Today, we will focus on how the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Defense respond to in service exposures to environmental hazards. As the Committee charged with oversight of the Department of Veterans Affairs, we must be certain that VA is providing appropriate health care and compensation to those who are harmed by exposures while serving in the military. In order for VA to do that, the Department of Defense must first determine who was exposed, what they were exposed to, and the health consequences of such exposure, and then share that information with VA.

Given that any claimed exposures from a servicemember or a veteran would, by definition, have occurred in service, DOD has the responsibility for answering questions about who was exposed and about what they were exposed to.

Two of the matters we will look at today relate to claimed exposure of members of the armed forces during the current conflicts. The other two involve claimed exposures in the past, and relate not only to members of the armed forces, but also to family members. These are very different issues, and as such require different approaches.

On the question of who might have been exposed in connection with the present conflicts, current DOD records should be available to answer that question. If they are not, then the Committee must know why not? For the earlier exposures, DOD must pull together records to provide some estimation of potentially exposed populations.

Once DOD has indentified those at risk of exposure and helped develop information on the elements of the exposure, the next challenge is to evaluate the potential consequences of the exposure. That facet of the effort must rely on independent scientific reviews and analysis – all done with transparency.

On the overall issue of providing information on exposures, I believe that it is vital that DOD commit to ensuring that, going forward, no one will leave active duty without both a comprehensive physical that might identify any health concerns related to possible in service exposures and a detailed record of where the individual was stationed, with specific reference to any known exposures to environmental hazards. Far too much time and energy is expended trying to recreate information on where individuals were located during their time on active duty.

VA’s role is to merge the information regarding potential exposure and the scientific analysis so as to craft an appropriate response. This effort must be carried out giving the benefit of the doubt to the veterans concerned. In some cases, there has been an absence of reliable information on exposures, including health consequences. In other cases, it is not possible to achieve consensus on the science.

It is when the information is not clear cut that VA is presented with the greatest challenge and also when the Congress is most often engaged. At that juncture, the resolution is less often guided by a data-driven understanding and more by policy considerations.

One note of clarification -- when I make reference to DOD's roles in dealing with exposure issues, I want to be clear that this Committee is not charged with direct oversight of DOD. That responsibility falls to the Armed Services Committee. However, this Committee does share with the Armed Services Committee responsibility for oversight where the roles of DOD and VA intersect. Issues relating to claimed in service exposure are one such instance of overlap. Also, I note that six members of this Committee, including Senator Burr and me, sit on the Armed Services Committee, so, as a practical matter, when we come upon matters clearly under the jurisdiction of the Armed Services Committee, we can take those matters to that Committee.

One thing is clear. Those harmed by an in service exposure to environmental hazards should receive a timely and appropriate response from the government, including access to needed health care and compensation. At the same time, a key element in making such an appropriate response is determining who is at risk from a possible exposure and who is not. It is my experience that, at least in the first instance, Congress is not the ideal forum for seeking to resolve complex, often emotional issues, related to potential exposure to hazardous substances during military service, and it is for that reason that we must be sure that both DOD and VA are working effectively on such issues, both separately and in cooperation and coordination.

The following community sites updated last night:




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

















thomas friedman is a great man






oh boy it never ends