Saturday, May 01, 2010

Post-election madness continues and Iraq loses an airplane

I'm drinking sweet champagne
Got the headphones up high
Can't numb you out
Can't drum you out of my mind
They're playing "Goodbye baby, Baby Goodbye,
Ooh, ooh, love is blind"
Up go the flaps, down go the wheels
I hope you got your heat turned on baby
I hope they finally fixed your automobile
I hope it's better when we meet again baby
Starbright, starbright
You got the lovin' that I like, all right
Turn this crazy bird around
I shouldn't have got on this flight tonight

-- "This Flight Tonight" written by Joni Mitchell, first appears on her album Blue.

Chances are Nouri's wishing someone had turned that crazy bird around before it landed in London. Damien McElroy's "First flight from Baghdad to London in 20 years ends in farce with plane impounded" (Telegraph of Lonon)reports:


The first flight from Baghdad to London in 20 years has ended in farce with the plane impounded at Gatwick airport after Kuwait went to the High Court demanding £780 million for planes stolen by Saddam Hussein.
A two decade lawsuit, the UK's longest running legal dispute, over the theft of 10 planes owned by Kuwait at the time of the 1990 invasion by Iraq resulted in the detention of the aircraft and the confiscation of the passport of Iraqi Airways' chief executive Kifah Hassan.

AFP declares
, "The first commercial flight between Baghdad and London in 20 years has turned into a nightmare for Iraq after its national airline boss had his passport seized and a chartered plane was impounded." And Hassan Hafidh and Stefania Bianchi (Wall St. Journal) adds, "The Kuwaiti government argues it has the right to seize planes owned by Iraqi Airways as compensation after Iraq seized a number of Kuwaiti planes." For context, we'll note Zahraa Alkhalisi and Caroline Alexander (Bloomberg News):

Iraq, holder of the world's third-largest oil reserves, still owes Kuwait about $25 billion for damage caused by the invasion and seven-month occupation by Saddam Hussein's forces. Iraq sets aside 5 percent of its oil revenue to pay the reparations, imposed under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter.
Kuwait has opposed lifting the requirement, while Iraq argues that it shouldn’t continue to pay for the mistakes of the former regime and needs the money to revive the economy. Tensions flared last year as lower oil prices reduced Iraqi revenue and lawmakers in Baghdad urged their government to stop paying.

Meanwhile Lara Jakes (AP) reports that Hoshiyar Zebari (Iraq's Foreign Minister) has said the US should not be standing by observing but instead urging a solution to the post-election dispute in Iraq. He accused the Barack Obama administration of being more focused on drawdown deadlines than on the state of Iraq. Jakes adds, "The top US military commander in Iraq, Gen. Ray Odierno, said last year that he planned to hold troop levels steady until two months after the elections, primarily to give a new Iraqi government time to settle. But that timeframe expires next week, and Baghdad has made little headway on forming a new government." March 7th, Iraq held parlamentary elections. Ayad Allawi's political slate led Nouri al-Maliki's by two seats. Since then Nouri has done everything he can think of in order to overturn the results. This is from Ranj Alaaldin's "Turmoil in Iraq threatens US withdrawal plans" (Guardian):

Maliki has also reportedly encountered internal problems within his Islamic Dawa party, with some factions in the group opposing another tenure for him. Any changes in his favour would constitute a political boost and help to silence his critics.

The decisions on the recount and the bans may be perceived on the Iraqi street as yet another set of attempts to sideline the Sunni voice in post-2003 Iraqi politics. But it is too easy to assume that they mark the beginning of the return to Iraq's violent past.

Although there is cause for concern, as argued this week by Simon Tisdall, the recount itself was expected since both Allawi and Maliki complained of irregularities in the voting process and count. Also, he decision to ban the candidates was made on election day itself, meaning all the political entities had ample warning of what was to come; significant in this context is that the ban will not dramatically alter the allocation of seats.



Today's reported violence?

Bombings?

Reuters notes a Baghdad car bombing which claimed 3 lives and left two people injured, a Mosul grenade attack which injured ten people, a Baghdad roadside bombing which left two people injured, a second Baghdad roadside bombing which injured one person and, dropping back to Friday, a Mosul roadside bombing which claimed the life of 1 police officer, a Mosul mortar attack which injured one person and a Mussayab roadside bombing which left three people injured.

Shootings?

Reuters notes 1 man shot dead in Mosul and, dropping back to Friday, 1 teacher shot dead in Mosul.


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























Another US soldier dies in the Iraq War

US Army Spc Anthony Magee was wounded by an April 23rd missle attack in Iraq and evacuated to Germany. WDAM reports he died yesterday at the age of 28. Ben Piper (Hattiesburg American) reports he received the Purple Heart on Thursday, puts his age at 29, and quotes a family statement: "We have lost a son, a father and a hero today who dedicated his life to the service of our nation. His family would like to thank the entire community and nation for their thoughts and prayers." The death brings the number of US service members killed in the Iraq War to 4395 when ICCC updates.

Keith Coe died serving in Iraq Tuesday. Shoshana Walter (Ledger) reports on his death and speaks with his family including his younger brother Matt who states, "I'm like, 'Let's go to Blockbuster and get a movie.' And he's like 'Let's get on top of Blockbuster and make a movie.' He kicked the crap out of me for the first 11 years of my life. You know, big brother stuff."

Meanwhile KECI reports that 500 Missoula soldiers will deploy to Iraq in the fall. While Noel Brinkerhoff (AllGov News) reports:

For the American soldiers manning Joint Security Station Wahab, Iraq, near the border with Iran, life has been a mix of espionage and being forgotten. The soldiers guarding the remote outpost, all from the 4th Brigade of the Army’s 1st Armored Division out of Fort Bliss, Texas, endured the annoyance of not having any portable toilets for a while because the Department of Defense cancelled the contract for Wahab station. Apparently, some official forgot the troops were still out there, forcing the men to use disposable waste bags until new toilets arrived.


The following community websites updated last night and today:



And we'll close with this on embedding from David Ignatius' "The dangers of embedded journalism, in war and politics" (Washington Post):

I've taken advantage of this chance to see the military up close. I have traveled to war zones with Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; with Gen. David Petraeus, the Centcom commander; and many others. I've spent weeks at a time visiting U.S. units in the field, hopping C-130s and Blackhawk helicopters and Humvees. As a result, I have seen more of Iraq and Afghanistan than I possibly could have otherwise, and I think my readers have benefited.

But embedding comes at a price. We are observing these wars from just one perspective, not seeing them whole. When you see my byline from Kandahar or Kabul or Basra, you should not think that I am out among ordinary people, asking questions of all sides. I am usually inside an American military bubble. That vantage point has value, but it is hardly a full picture.

I fear that an embedded media is becoming the norm, and not just when it comes to war. The chroniclers of political and cultural debates increasingly move in a caravan with one side or another, as well. This nonmilitary embedding may have a different rationale, but there's a similar effect that comes with traveling under the canopy of a particular candidate, party or community.




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















thomas friedman is a great man






oh boy it never ends












Friday, April 30, 2010

Iraq snapshot

Friday, April 30, 2010. Chaos and violence continue, GAO did a study (another study), post-election madness continues, Nouri holds a press conference to attack and instill fear, and more.
 
 
Today on hour two of The Diane Rehm Show, Diane and her guests (including caller Ralph) Daniel Dombey (Financial Times of London), Moises Naim (Foreign Policy) and Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers) addressed Iraq.
 
Ralph: . . . It's a no-win situation in all of these because it's fighting and enemy that's a civilian and I don't care what their political reasoning or whatever you cannot win any kind of insurgency or insurrection.
 
Diane Rehm: Interesting, we've got a number of comments on Facebook regarding Iraq which is likely one of the areas Ralph is talking about. Pam says, "Honestly, Iraq will destabilize before we get the last man out regardless of what's put in place. At some point, we just have to leave. It's just sad. We've let their infrastructure  in an almost complete shambles."  Nancy?
 
Nancy A. Youssef: Pam, in a lot of ways, sounds a lot like the Obama administration. The United States has said it is leaving even though it looks like it could be weeks or months before government is formed in Iraq, even though the election appears to have been divisive and that there's real question that Nouri al-Maliki and Ayad Allawi -- the-the, right now the winner -- and their coalitions will be able to work together. And I think the question becomes what could the United States do if it stayed? Remember, the United States is there at the invitation of the Iraqi government and-and the movement that -- the train has sort of left the station. The United States is moving towards training Iraqi forces, putting them in the lead and I'm not sure that there's anything more that the United States could do  --
 
Diane Rehm: What about the election discord? Could that effect the US timetable, Moises?
 
Moises Naim: We're talking about three worlds of difference. These were elections where 325 seats, Parliament, and Maliki's State of Law won 89 and the Iraqiya won 91, so they're the winners.  But they're contesting votes and everything else.  So you can take two-two views about this. You can say, "Well that's what happens in imperfect democracies. We have seen around the world, contested democracies awhere people are clashing including in Florida." So that would be a flippant way of saying: Elections, that's the nature of democracy.   The other more troublesome view, and I think more realistic view, is this is just more of the same -- a manifestation of a deadly, lethal clash, between Sunnis and Shi'ites there and is just a struggle for power and is now taking that manifestation. When that is over, they will continue to battle each other.  The good news is that so far, this has not been as violent and deadly as it used to be two or three years ago.
 
Daniel Dombey: Yes, I would agree with a large part of that.  I mean I think the interesting thing is that this exist shows the fall of US influence.  The Obama administration has been very concerned about what Mr. Malliki's done to try and get the lead in the and the prospect of the next government back from Allawi. It's been very concerned about these effors to strike candidates that have already been elected from Parliament. But those are pleas that aren't backed up by anything very much. And in a certain sense that's perhaps good because these are decisions that Iraq has to make. It's not clear how keeping US combat troops would help.  In fact, one of the big champions of the surge Fred Kagan, of the AEI, wrote a piece in today's Washington Post where he says 'it is really only in the most extraordianary circumstances should the US delay its plans to get its combat troops out' --
 
Diane Rehm: Nancy?
 
Daniel Dombey: -- by the end of this summer. I think that shows it is actually Iraq's problem and not a bad problem for a Middle East country to have: How to work out the results of an election?
 
Diane Rehm: Nancy.
 
Nancy A. Youssef: You know I thought it was interesting this week that we learned that there was a secret prison in Iraq that largely held Sunnis prisoners, where people were tortured  and there are charges that Maliki knew about it.  We're starting to see the kind of state that is emerging. It is a quasi-democracy that still sort of employs tactics that are reminescent of Saddam's regime.  Who makes a good torturer?  But someone who has been tortured. And we're starting to see that.  What can the US do to stop that? The only thing I want to say is that there is a real practical reson why the United States can't leave and that's becauseit's committed troops to Afghanistan. That 30,000 that's being sent into Afghanistan --   is conditioned on US troops leaving Iraq And in addition, you have a US military that's really already starting to think poster  in terms of how it's going to reset itself, train itself for the next kind of warfare. The military's left Iraq already and I think the Obama administration has to.

Diane Rehm: I met a young woman just last night, having served three terms of duty in Iraq headed off to Afghanistan Sunday. 
 
Okay, the above. First off, Frederick W. Kagan didn't write a column -- he co-wrote one.  If you'r colleague already publicly 'joked' on Diane's show about a "cat fight" between Michelle Obama and Carla Bruni, you probably should work a little harder to ensure that you credit women.  The column was written by Frederick Kagan and Kimberly Kagan. (Column ran in this morning's Washington Post.)  Second, the Kagans gave three examples of what would slow the drawdown or stop it.  Or what should in their opinion.  David Dombey needs to learn to read because he has completely misrepresented the Kagans column which was not 'To Drawdown Or Not To Drawdown.'  It was a call for US involvement in the post-election proceedings.  Third, Nancy A. Youssef left the world of facts for opinions.  And that's fine but that doesn't make her right.  Example: The choice is not between staying or a drawdown -- and a drawdown is NOT a withdrawal, something Diane's guests need to learn REAL DAMN QUICK.  That's nonsense.  That's such nonsense that the string of words I would use to describe it could not appear here.
 
Reality, Nouri exists -- to this day -- only because US forces have propped him up.  That's not 'opinion' or at least it's not uninformed 'opinion.'  That is the opinion of the bulk of Democratic Senators and they have expressed it repeatedly and publicly -- that includes former senators Joe Biden and Barack Obama who are now vice president and President of the United States.
 
Reality, despite the oil profits (which are not going to the people), Iraq's 'government' still depends on a lot of US tax payer monies.  And they can be denied that money.  There's no reason to provide money (or credits for weapons) just to help Little Nouri become the New Hussein.  No reason at all.  In addition, there are many other diplomatic routes and there is also world opinion which can be courted. 
 
Nancy's spending too much time at the Pentagon and appears to believe that the only answer is kill or don't kill but every problem doesn't require a show of violence to reach a solution.  In her last exchange (last quoted above), I know what she meant but I'm not in the mood to interpret her. (She mispoke.)  She's also wrong.  "WE" did not learn about the secret prisons "this week."  If "WE" had, then it wouldn't have been mentioned on Diane's show last week. Ned Parker broke that story online two Sundays ago. Ned Parker broke the secret prison story for the Los Angeles Times ("Secret prison for Sunnis revealed in Baghdad") and Human Rights Watch issued a report this week on the secret prison ("Iraq: Detainees Describe Torture in Secret Jail "). Nouri's been laughably insisting it's all lies, made up by his enemies, and, so what, look what the Americans did at Abu Ghraib! If someone really thinks the story was breaking news this week, it goes to how little informed they are on the subject.  I am aware it can be hard to think on your feet especially when the topic isn't scheduled but comes up because listeners took to the program's Facebook page. But, as with what she meant in her last exchange, I'm not in the mood to interpret her, I'm not in the mood to be generous.
 
A drawdown is not a withdrawal.  Were I Nouri al-Maliki -- or apparently Barack Obama -- I would declare that all reporters repeating that LIE should be imprisoned. But they need to start getting their facts right.  A drawdown is what may take place.  A drawdown would take the number of US service members in Iraq down to approximately 50,000.  Such a drawdown has not yet taken place.  If and when it does, it will be a fact that reporters can toss around.  At present, they disgrace themselves when they make like Miss Cleo telling us what's happening months from now.  How about you stop the predicting and get your facts right?  It's not that difficult and it might let you know when a story broke or who wrote a column or any number of things.  But when you're in such a rush to gas bag that you can't do the facts, you're not helping anyone.
 
Will the drawdown take place.  "I'm no prophet, and I don't know nature's ways," Carly Simon sang (and wrote) in "The Right Thing To Do" (first appears on her No Secrets album). We do know the top US commander in Iraq, Gen Ray Odierno, is due to issue a report.  Community member Joan caught a problem with yesterday's snapshot -- the bulk of a sentence is missing and it's my fault because of a link I put in that I didn't close and when it was dictated around later it ended up knocking out half a line.  So this is what should have appeared in yesterday's snapshot ("*" indicates it's added today):

Speaking Tuesday to John Hockenberry on The Takeaway, BBC News' Gabriel Gatehouse also felt that the counting would take longer than some estimates, "That could take several weeks. Then the votes have to be certified." In addition to noting that lengthy process, Gatehouse is apparently the only reporter aware of wh*at is supposed to be coming, a report by the top US commander in Iraq, Gen Ray Odierno.  Gatehouse explained, "*General Odierno is the overall in charge of US forces here, has promised to make an assessment -- another assessment of that withdrawal time table two months after the election so we're looking at about a week from now. So I think we'll wait to see what he says in about a week's time."

An evaluation is due from Odierno? And it will determine and assess.  Now Barack can (and may) choose not to listen to it or at least not let effect the current stated plan or 'plan'; however, until that's decided, there is no, "In August, ____ happens."  And reporters need to stop claiming that there is. You are not predictors.  You deal in the known.  When you fail to do that, you better not whine when someone objects to your bias.  In fact, when you leave the factual world repeatedly, you are begging readers, listeners, viewers to check you for your bias. 
 
Odierno will issue a report.  It's probably not going to be the only report issued between now and August.  President Barack Obama's stated plan is that the number of US troops in Iraq will drop down to approximately 50,000 as summer draws to a close.  That's his plan.  It's spring right now.  What will or will not happen will not be known until then.  That's reality.
 
Reality is that from November 2008 through January 2009, had George W. Bush attempted to sign million and billion dollars deals, people would be outraged.  He was outgoing.  He shouldn't be tying the country into any deals, agreements or debt.  But Nouri, whose party did not win the most seats in the March 7th elections, is doing just that.  Sylvia Pfeifer (Financial Times of London) reports that Nouri's prepping a potential one billion dollar deal in which Iraq will purchase "Hawk trainer jets from the UK". What does the Iraqi Parliament say about that deal?  Nothing.  Their terms expired.  Until the newly elected members are sworn in, there is no Parliament.  Nouri's term should have expired as well.  But he's pushing deals that will tie Iraq down for sometime including the five-year plan that he could never get through Parliament so he's now rammed it through his council.

UPI reports that Moqtada al-Sadr "has demanded that 'illegal' contracts signed with foreign oil companies in 2009 be negotiated." Nizar Latif (The National Newspaper) adds, "The Sadrists, fervent nationalists although they have been heavily linked with Iran, where their leader is currently based, say the deals break Iraqi laws. The Iraqi oil ministry says the contracts will result in 'more than US $100 billion' (Dh367bn) worth of investment."

Nouri rejected any notion of an interim government. Ayad Allawi is calling for one. But if Nouri doesn't control the government, then he can't get his recounts and he can't get the judges to go along with him and he can't steal the election. He also can't make any of the deals he wants to. Caesar Ahmed and Borzou Daragahi (Los Angeles Times) report Nouri al-Maliki appeared on Iraqi state TV today to declare, "We will not allow any foreign interference in our internal affairs that will breach our sovereignty."  Which brings us back to Nancy A. Youssef.  First, Nouri, Iraq was breached in March 2003.  You weren't concerned about "foreign interference" then.  No, you were cheering on an invasion.  Nancy A. Youssef wants to claim that the US is present at Iraq's invation.  What a load of s**t.  First off, an uninvited guest who never leaves is not there on any invitation. Second, who 'invited'?  Not the people of Iraq who want the foreign forces off their land.  Not the Parliament as evidenced by the huge number of MPs who elected to skip the November 2008 vote. Ahmed and Daragahi report Nouri attacked Allawi in his televised statements and also of Allawi and others, "I don't know why there are parties criticizing the Iraqi judiciary. This demonstrates that there is a regional, international project against Iraq that seeks to overthrow [the government] via the ballot box."  Does the idiot understand that using the ballot box to reject someone is more than allowed? 
 
In DC today, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with Kuwait's Deputy Prime Minister Muhammad al-Sabah.  The two spoke to reporters in the Treaty Room (link has text and video) and took questions.  In one of her replies, Hillary noted the following:
 
The deputy prime minister and I discussed recent political developments in Iraq and the ongoing process of forming a new government. The security and stability of Iraq is critical to the security and stability of Kuwait, but of indeed the entire region. The United States recognizes that there is still work to be done to address some of the outstanding issues related to the Iraq-Kuwait relationship, and we are committed to working with Kuwait and the new Government of Iraq and the United Nations in the months ahead.

On the post-election madness, Heather Robinson (Huffington Post) notes:

 

Iraqi liberal Mithal al-Alusi, who raised concerns about fraud against himself and fellow liberals after he lost his seat in Parliament in the March 7 elections, is now raising concerns about a potential lack of oversight of the Baghdad recount that he says could lead to a repeat of the fraud that prompted the recount in the first place.     

"It will be a disaster if the same people who did the first counting will do the second counting," Alusi told me in a phone interview from Baghdad.                

Alusi is no stranger to controversy. Iraqi-born and bred, in the 1970's he protested Saddam Hussein's human rights abuses, and was forced to flee the middle east for his life. He returned to Iraq with his two grown sons following the U.S. invasion and took a position as culture director of the de-Baathification commission in the Iraqi interim government.

 
We dealt with the Kagans already.  (Disclosure, as noted before I know Robert Kagan, that's Fred's bother, Kimberly's brother-in-law.) But, again, their column was completely distorted.  From the right (the neocon right), the Frederick and Kimberly Kagan argue in today's Post:
 
 
Washington should strongly support Iraqi leaders such as Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi and Allawi, who have strongly opposed the AJC's illegal effort to manipulate the results. The United States must encourage Iraq's Presidency Council to adhere to the electoral laws and reject the AJC's manipulation. The United States must also ensure that legal processes and court decisions about the elections are not unduly influenced by political or violent intimidation. Above all, the United States must oppose any effort to exclude votes properly cast and counted.             
U.S. officials must state clearly that Iraq's government should be formed by Iraqis in Iraq and encourage Iraqis to form a government that ensures real power-sharing and continued political accommodation -- rather than cobbling together a government without any genuine political settlement.               
Staying silent is not the same as remaining neutral. This does not mean that Washington should choose a party or prime minister, but the United States must protect the electoral process from politicians (and external actors) seeking to manipulate its outcome.
 
Again, the Kagans are right-wingers.  Let's get some other opinions.  For example, the Toledo Blade's editorial board argues what listeners of Diane Rehm's program were wrongly told the Kagans (or at least Fred) argued:
 
Hints by U.S. military leaders suggest the withdrawal might be delayed if Iraqis don't assemble a credible government soon. But that plays right into the hands of Iraqi political and business interests that want U.S. funds - about $2 billion a month - to continue to flow there. Mr. Maliki and others also want to maintain the protective American shield around themselves and their government.                  
America's interest is to withdraw according to schedule. There is no good reason to divert from that plan.
 
That is consistent with the Toledo Blade's February editorial "Don't yield to Iraqi stunts." Turning to the Carnegie Endowment For International Peace.  When noting that 'NGO,' we will always note that they're not as 'independent' as they'd love to pretend, they are an arm of the US government.  So what are they saying?  Marina Ottaway and Danial Kaysi feel the rule of law is being ignored and that the Justice and Accountability Commission is among the worst offenders:
 
This decision to ban elected officials has truly taken Iraq into uncharted waters, where it is becoming increasingly difficult to separate ad hoc political decisions from those based on the legal criteria. The January 2008 law that established the JAC and defined its mandate did not foresee the possibility of banning candidates after the election and no precedent exists on which to base a decision as these are the first elections under the law. Making the decision even more political -- the post-election bans will affect Iraqiya particularly hard, as did the pre-election exclusions. With twenty-two of the candidates banned after the vote belonging to Iraqiya, it could lose its slim two-seat advantage over State of Law. 
There are also questions concerning the current legal status of the JAC, whose members were nominated by the council of ministers, approved by parliament, and ratified by the presidency council -- institutions whose mandate was terminated at the end of the last parliament and are operating in a legal limbo in the transitional period until a government is formed. The situation will worsen as the transitional period stretches from the few weeks foreseen by the constitution to the many months that now appear possible.
 
 
Today Alsumaria TV reports on seven candidates banned by JAC: "Al Iraqiya List spokesman Haidar Al Mulla revealed to Alsumaria News the names of seven candidates subject to the Justice and Accountability Law. Candidates include Fallah Hassan Zaydan, Iskandar Watout, Itab Jassem Nassif, Jamal Al Batikh, Adnan Al Jinabi, Mohammed Al Karbouli and Qays Shathar Hussein while an eighth winning candidate was not named."
 
Another view is offered by Jim Waldo in a letter to the Duluth News Tribune where he observes, "Every day it seems we read about bombs going off in civilian settings and the marketplaces in Iraq. How long will it take before exasperated citizens put a strongman in power through voting or a coup?  He might stop the carnage by temporarily suspending democracy, installing a secret police, forming a republican guard and adopting repressive measures.  And he might indeed success in stopping the bombings." But, Jim Waldo feels, this is how the New Saddam Hussein is created.  Alsumaria TV reports that Nouri insisted today that Iraq was at risk of "a coup" from within the region and internationally and that threats are being made of a rocket attack on the Green Zone.  Save us, Nouri, save us!!!! (Yes, he does trade on the fear.  It's always been his only currency.)
 
Turning to some of the violence reported today . .
 
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports  a Garma roadside bombing injured two people and, dropping back to yesterday, reports a Heet roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 Iraqi soldier and left a second one wounded, a Baghdad roadside bombing wounded six people, a Baghdad car bombing claimed 8 lives and left twenty people wounded, a Baghdad sticky bombing which wounded CTO Sadoun Seyid Qassim. Xinhua notes a Baghdad roadside bombing which claimed 2 lives and left nine people injured. Reuters notes that 1 US service member was injured by a Baghdad roadside bombing last night.
 
 
Yesterday, a subcommittee of the US House Veterans Affairs Committee held a hearing on the "Status of Veterans Small Business."  Calling the Economic Opportunity Subcommittee to order, Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin noted, "Today's hearing will provide the US Government Accountability Office an opportunity to update us on the ongoing work on veteran-owned small businesses, and brought the hearing to order and noted " This Subcommittee last held a hearing on veterans and small business on March 11, 2010.  The focus was on the Center for Veterans Enterprise and the Subcommittee were informed about problems to do with verification -- how some businesses that were not VA-owned were making it onto the list while others which were veteran-owned but could not make the list.  What's changed?  They did a study, the Government Accountability Office did a study.  We'll note this exchange between the Chair, GAO's William B. Shear and Ranking Member John Boozman.
 

Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin: [. . .]  Because we have, as it relates to contracting requirements, a goal of making sure that it's veteran-owned businesses that are getting this opportunity just as it is in terms of the restriction Ms. [Diane]  Farrell described, they're jobs created here as the objective so I -- You know, in your written testimony, you stated that the VA had hired a contractor to assess the verification programs process and the contractor's report included recommendations. Again, we're a little concerned with the progress the VA's making on the verifications as it relates to those on the database who have been verified to be veteran-owned businesses to deal with the issue of sort of veteran shopping that we have had concerns about with the Subcommittee previously.  Can you elaborate on what recommendations were given to the VA?
William B. Shear: Uhm, I will paraphrase in a way that, uhm, as you know we have a draft report and as I stated we have a draft report. And among those, the needs to really implement information technology in a way that allows for more efficient processing of these applications. You also need -- really it's development of people in terms of their ability of the guidance that they have to have in terms of how they verify businesses.  So I'm -- I'm segueing a little bit into what's-what's-what we're reporting on. But-but basically that it's been very slow in this process. And the reason we think it's very important is because the preferences are meant to serve veterans and veteran owned small business and there's not an assurance that that is happening. And it's been delayed for some period of time, so just the fact that the consultant study, that it took so long until they kind of like moved in that direction is of concern to us.
 
Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin: Mr. Boozeman?
 
Ranking Member John Boozemmn: Thank you, Madame Chair.  Mr. Shear, Public Law 109-461 requires VA to review contracts for compliance with subcontracting proposals. Would you share GIO's view of VA's performance in implementing the provisions
 
William B. Shear:  Subcontracting was the one part that is contained -- will be contained in our final report. And what we observed with subcontracting requirements, there's -- there's certain issues as far as the date when that becomes effective. But what we have observed to date is that the -- with respect to subcontracting  VA falls very short of its goals.
 
 
If we wanted to go deeper into the hearing, we could note that you do not appear before Congress chewing (smacking) gum.  It's not a possible rule, it's a rule.  Smacking your gum between and during your testimony not only distracts from your testimony, it makes it appear you really aren't ready to appear before Congress and that they might need to instead seat you at the kiddie table.
 
 
Hike for our Heroes is a non-profit started by Iraq War veteran Troy Yocum who is hiking across the country to raise awareness and money for veterans issues. He explains at the website:

I am an Iraq-war veteran who is hiking 7000 miles across America to raise money for struggling veterans, and help get a national "Day of the Deployed" by getting signatures from mayors and governors across America on a custom Louisville Slugger bat

And with over 200 of the 7000 miles completed already, he has another milestone scheduled for the week: He's getting married Sunday. More information and videos can be found at Drum Hike.

William J. Booher (Indy Star) reports
that May is when Troy is set to be walking in Indiana and provides a list of some of the events including "a public barbecue May 7 at American Legion Post 252, 334 U.S. 31 S., between Main Street and Smith Valley Road." That is open to the public and begins at 12:30 in Greenwood, Indiana.
 
TV notes, Washington Week begins airing on many PBS stations tonight (and throughout the weekend, check local listings) and joining Gwen around the table this week are Naftali Bendavid (Wall St. Journal), Eamon Javers (Politico), Margaret Kriz Hobson (National Journal) and Karen Tumulty (Washington Post). And Gwen's column this week is "Washington Rhetoric: The Decoder." Remember that the show podcasts in video and audio format -- and a number of people sign up for each (audio is thought to be so popular due to the fact that it downloads so much quicker). If you podcast the show, remember there is the Web Extra where Gwen and the guests weigh in on topics viewers e-mail about. And also remember that usually by Monday afternoon you can go to the show's website and stream it there (including Web Extra) as well as read the transcripts and more. Meanwhile Bonnie Erbe will sit down with Melinda Henneberger, Eleanor Holmes Norton and Genevieve Wood. on the latest broadcast of PBS' To The Contrary to discuss the week's events. And at the website each week, there's an extra just for the web from the previous week's show and this week's it's immigration reform. For the broadcast program, check local listings, on many stations, it begins airing tonight. And turning to broadcast TV, Sunday CBS' 60 Minutes:

The All American Canal
The most dangerous body of water in the U.S. is a deep canal on the Mexican border with California where over 550 people - mostly illegal immigrants - have drowned. Scott Pelley reports. | Watch Video


Chef Jose Andres
Pioneering Chef Jose Andres takes Anderson Cooper's taste buds on a savory tour of his culinary laboratory, featuring his avant-garde cooking technique, molecular gastronomy. | Watch Video


Conan
Late-night television comedian Conan O'Brien appears in his first interview since having to give back his spot on the "Tonight Show" to Jay Leno. Steve Kroft reports.


60 Minutes, Sunday, May 2, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.

 

 


Post-election madness (and silence from one side)

Greg Miller (Washington Post) reports on CIA deployment (overseas) and notes, "Altering that arrangement creates logistical challenges as well as security risks, particularly as the agency ramps up the rotation of analysts in the war zones of Iraq and Afghanistan." Would Barack like to tell us when CIA forces might be 'withdrawing' from Iraq?

Didn't think so. Meanwhile this Jane Arraf story has some community members complaining. Brad is among them. While this Jane Arraf story has some community members praising. Kayla is among them. What's the big difference? I believe (and Kayla and Brad agree with this -- they're the only ones who've responded back this morning -- to the e-mails I sent out this morning) that it's the headline. The first link is the Christian Science Monitor ("New twist in Iraq election crisis: Maliki's enemies latch onto torture allegations") and the second link is McClatchy Newspapers ("As Iraqi election recount about to launch, Maliki faces other troubles"). What's the biggest problem with the Christian Science Monitor headline?

Is Ned Parker one of "Maliki's enemies"? Is Human Rights Watch? In the real world, the answer is no but those who follow the media -- especially the Arab media which does enjoy covering all of Nouri's meltdowns (something the US press apparently has a distaste for with few exceptions) -- are aware that Nouri put this off on his enemies. Ned Parker broke the secret prison story for the Los Angeles Times ("Secret prison for Sunnis revealed in Baghdad"). Human Rights Watch issued a report on the secret prison ("Iraq: Detainees Describe Torture in Secret Jail "). And Nouri's been laughably insisting it's all lies, made up by his enemies, and, so what, look what the Americans did at Abu Ghraib!

It's amazing how the western press has downplayed or ignored Nouri's Abu Ghraib 'defense.'

I don't consider the details "allegations." Along with Parker and Human Right Watch, Trudy Lieberman's also covered this. The two reporters covered it independently, they were not working together. But "allegation" has to be used because Nouri loves to sue. (And because many chicken s**t outlets -- including every, EVERY, US newspaper was too cowardly to stand with the Guardian when Nouri sued them.)

Joan e-mailed to note that something was missing from yesterday's snapshot:

Speaking Tuesday to John Hockenberry on The Takeaway, BBC News' Gabriel Gatehouse also felt that the counting would take longer than some estimates, "That could take several weeks. Then the votes have to be certified." In addition to noting that lengthy process, Gatehouse is apparently the only reporter aware of wh General Odierno is the overall in charge of US forces here, has promised to make an assessment -- another assessment of that withdrawal time table two months after the election so we're looking at about a week from now. So I think we'll wait to see what he says in about a week's time."

"In addition to noting that lengthy process, Gatehouse is apparently the only reporter aware of wh General Odierno is the overall in charge of US forces here, has promised to make an assessment --" I think that's my error. A lot of the links are put in by me at lunch time and I dictate around them when I dictate the snapshot. I believe there was a link to an article (New York Times) that had no clue about a report b Odierno being done. I must not have done the link properly (didn't close the tag, most likely) and it screwed it up. So that was my fault. And it lets us note again that Odierno has a report due. "General Odierno" begins Gatehouse's quote, by the way.

On the post-election madness, Heather Robinson (Huffington Post) notes:

Iraqi liberal Mithal al-Alusi, who raised concerns about fraud against himself and fellow liberals after he lost his seat in Parliament in the March 7 elections, is now raising concerns about a potential lack of oversight of the Baghdad recount that he says could lead to a repeat of the fraud that prompted the recount in the first place.

"It will be a disaster if the same people who did the first counting will do the second counting," Alusi told me in a phone interview from Baghdad.

Alusi is no stranger to controversy. Iraqi-born and bred, in the 1970's he protested Saddam Hussein's human rights abuses, and was forced to flee the middle east for his life. He returned to Iraq with his two grown sons following the U.S. invasion and took a position as culture director of the de-Baathification commission in the Iraqi interim government.

In 2004, he traveled to Israel to participate in a counter-terrorism conference. In response to breaking the taboo in Iraqi society against visiting the Jewish state, terrorists killed his two sons. Refusing to be intimidated, Alusi stayed in Iraq, got his political party, the Iraqi Nation Party, onto the ballot, and won a seat in the December, 2005 elections.



The Kagan family helped sell the illegal war and cheer led it like crazy. They would disagree with that assessment (as disclosed before, I know Robert Kagan) but most observers, even in the MSM, would more than agree with that assessment. Frederick W. Kagan and Kimberly Kagan have a column in the Washington Post calling on the US to do something:

Washington should strongly support Iraqi leaders such as Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi and Allawi, who have strongly opposed the AJC's illegal effort to manipulate the results. The United States must encourage Iraq's Presidency Council to adhere to the electoral laws and reject the AJC's manipulation. The United States must also ensure that legal processes and court decisions about the elections are not unduly influenced by political or violent intimidation. Above all, the United States must oppose any effort to exclude votes properly cast and counted.
U.S. officials must state clearly that Iraq's government should be formed by Iraqis in Iraq and encourage Iraqis to form a government that ensures real power-sharing and continued political accommodation -- rather than cobbling together a government without any genuine political settlement.

What can the US do? What, if anything, should the US do? As usual, the right-wing is engaging in the topic and the left? They're still slobbering over the homophobe's eco-conference. Way to stay focused. And way to yet again throw the LGBT community under the bus. Those of us old enough to remember Vietnam in real time? We can remember the overwhelming amount of Americans being against it at the end. And yet revisionary history more than changed that, didn't it? Made it appear that it was a 50-50 split. How did that happen? As Jane Fonda has pointed out, the right keeps going back and going back. And on the left, we resist that urge. Thereby surrendering the argument.

On the left, outlets aren't even exploring whether the US should do anything. On the right? They're already making recommendations.


Salah Hemeid (Al-Ahram Weekly) offers a look at post-election Iraq including the following:

There are many reports in Iraq's media of carnage, explosions, funerals, grieving victims and relatives, and their loathing of new politicians who are only interested in playing political games in order for the chaotic state of affairs to continue. The result is the tragic deaths of hundreds of innocents across the country. In Iraq today, and especially in the capital, there is no cheerful news in the midst of this dangerous and stressful reality.
The only positive event was Iraq's second Blossom Parade sponsored by Baghdad's local government, which took place despite continued deaths and complications. The timid three-day event was soon over, giving way once again to the echo of missiles and explosives and hundreds of victims.
For more than seven years, this miserable state of affairs has been the norm, and continues to be so. Many sources believe that for many reasons Iraq is heading towards more violence caused by political rivalries, power grabs and politicians not able to agree on forming a new government after the Iraqi people did their part and went to the polls on 7 March, despite the bombings, to elect their representatives, who have so far failed the democracy test.
"We cast our ballots and did our part," stated an Iraqi restaurant employee near the Green Zone. "Iyad Allawi and Nuri Al-Maliki won but they failed the people, especially Al-Maliki who refuses to share power. One way or another he will have to give it up because the US does not want him and nor do the people. While he stays in power, anything is possible. The recent explosions in Baghdad are a result of the political struggle and impede the people. Everyone knows that."
The developments taking place behind the scenes are cause for concern in light of a stagnant political process and quarrels over recounting the ballots in several governorates. They are most likely the reason why Mowafaq Al-Rabei, a leader in the coalition government, visited the Shia leader Ali Al-Sistani and informed him of the dangers caused by Al-Maliki's refusal to step down as prime minister. Al-Rabei insisted that holding new elections would be a catastrophe which would lead the country to a civil war. He further warned that the terrorists are manipulating the constitutional vacuum caused by the inability of the various factions to form a government by targeting civilians. In fact, civilians are the targets not only for terrorist groups, but also armed groups of various political dispositions which are active in Iraq.


TV notes, Washington Week begins airing on many PBS stations tonight (and throughout the weekend, check local listings) and joining Gwen around the table this week are Naftali Bendavid (Wall St. Journal), Eamon Javers (Politico), Margaret Kriz Hobson (National Journal) and Karen Tumulty (Washington Post). And Gwen's column this week is "Washington Rhetoric: The Decoder." Remember that the show podcasts in video and audio format -- and a number of people sign up for each (audio is thought to be so popular due to the fact that it downloads so much quicker). If you podcast the show, remember there is the Web Extra where Gwen and the guests weigh in on topics viewers e-mail about. And also remember that usually by Monday afternoon you can go to the show's website and stream it there (including Web Extra) as well as read the transcripts and more. Meanwhile Bonnie Erbe will sit down with Melinda Henneberger, Eleanor Holmes Norton and Genevieve Wood. on the latest broadcast of PBS' To The Contrary to discuss the week's events. And at the website each week, there's an extra just for the web from the previous week's show and this week's it's immigration reform. For the broadcast program, check local listings, on many stations, it begins airing tonight. And turning to broadcast TV, Sunday CBS' 60 Minutes:

The All American Canal
The most dangerous body of water in the U.S. is a deep canal on the Mexican border with California where over 550 people - mostly illegal immigrants - have drowned. Scott Pelley reports. | Watch Video


Chef Jose Andres
Pioneering Chef Jose Andres takes Anderson Cooper's taste buds on a savory tour of his culinary laboratory, featuring his avant-garde cooking technique, molecular gastronomy. | Watch Video


Conan
Late-night television comedian Conan O'Brien appears in his first interview since having to give back his spot on the "Tonight Show" to Jay Leno. Steve Kroft reports.


60 Minutes, Sunday, May 2, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.

Radio. Today on The Diane Rehm Show (airs on most NPR stations and streams live online beginning at 10:00 am EST), Diane is joined the first hour (domestic news roundup) Susan Page (USA Today), Jerry Seib (Wall St. Journal) and Chris Cillizza. Cillizza is with the Washington Post and part of the newly rolled out PostPolitics.com which this morning headlines Howard Kurtz' article on how the Obama administration is targeting journalists including James Risen of the New York Times. For the second hour (international news roundup), Diane is joined by Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers), Daniel Dombey (Financial Times of London) and Moises Naim. Naim announced this week that he was stepping down as editor of Foreign Policy. Susan Glasser, another frequent guest on Diane's show, will be his successor at Foreign Policy. And today on To The Point, Warren Olney explores the use of drones.


In the US, the Senate Democratic Policy Committee continues to highlight the economy and finances in a number of videos this week. Click here to be taken to the DPC video page. We'll highlight Senator Blanche Lincoln.



And we'll close with this from "THIRD POLITICAL PARTY URGENTLY NEEDED TO STOP U.S. 'NATIONAL-SECURITY STATE'" (Veterans Today):

As both the Republican and Democratic political parties are locked into a national security state that is perpetually at war, Americans urgently need to create a third political party, a law school dean writes.
“It will take a third party to allow us to shed the national-security state…which the two major parties are locked into, which they maintain regardless of the votes of the populace, and which will destroy us as surely as it has destroyed previous empires,” writes Lawrence Velvel in his book “An Enemy of the People”(Doukathsan).
As has been shown by the second Gulf War, both parties are “incapable of doing the right thing. They are too beholden to big money---money is virtually all that our politicians care about,” writes Velvel, dean of the Massachusetts School of Law at Andover. The political parties “have gotten too used to the ethically crooked, morally criminal ways of our system, (and) cannot even envision serious change in the political and electoral system.”
Both parties, he charges, cling to policies which do not work, such as the country’s “traditional ready resort to war” that has been “practically an addiction since 1950” and that “has created disasters at home and abroad.” “If we do not cure ourselves of the American addiction to violence,” Velvel continued, “it is only a matter of time until much of the world gangs up on us, with results that nobody can foresee. Such has been the fate of all empires…”

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






mcclatchy newspapers
the los angeles times
ned parker









npr
the diane rehm show










Wounded, fallen, PTSD, wedding and other veterans issues

Reuters notes that 1 US service member was injured by a Baghdad roadside bombing last night.
Yesterday the Defense Department issued the following: "The Department of Defense announced today the death of a soldier who was supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom. Sgt. Keith A. Coe, 30, of Auburndale, Fla., died April 27 in Khalis, Iraq, of wounds suffered when enemy forces attacked his unit with an explosive device. He was assigned to 1st Battalion, 37th Field Artillery Regiment, 3rd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Wash. For more information media may contact the Joint Base Lewis-McChord public affairs office at 253-967-0147 or 253-967-0152." The Seattle Times adds the he deployed to Iraq in September of last year. Keith Coe has just turned 30 thirteen days before his death. A Facebook page in his memory, "Remembering Sgt. Keith Adam Coe 4/14/1980 - 4/17/2010" notes:

To remember Fulton native Keith Coe. Keith was killed by a roadside explosion in Northern Iraq on April 27, 2010. Keith was a dedicated, loving husband and father who leaves behind his wife and four children.
Our thoughts and prayers are with Keiths family and friends in this time of sorrow. Keith died doing his job, keeping all Americans safe and free. For that Keith will forever be a brave warrior and HERO! Let us never forget Keith!

Matt Misterek (News Tribune) adds, "Coe is the second soldier from Lewis-McChord to die in Iraq in the past week. Staff Sgt. Christopher D. Worrell, 35, died April 22 in Baghdad of injuries sustained in a noncombat incident."

Last week Iraq War veteran Sgt Matthew Christopher Moran died. Chris Roberts (El Paso Times) reports that it appears the 23-year-old, who recently returned from Iraq, took his own life.

Meanwhile Tove Tupper (Oregon's KDRV -- link has video and text) reports on PTSD and TBI, zooming in on Iraq War veteran Shane Hornbeck, only 24-years-old, who experienced multipe roadside bombings, was shot by a sniper (earning him a Purple Heart) and 14 service members he served with died. He returned to the US suffering from PTSD and TBI and had difficulty reaching out to his family and began self-medicating with alcohol ("It allowed me to keep on living and not be suicidal and not be completely depressed and in a dark hole"). He ender up with legal problems and hit his own personal rock bottom. Now he speaks about what he's gone through and has started the organization A Driven Force.

Hike for our Heroes
is another non-profit. Iraq War veteran Troy Yocum is hiking across the country to raise awareness and money for veterans issues. He explains at the website:

I am an Iraq-war veteran who is hiking 7000 miles across America to raise money for struggling veterans, and help get a national "Day of the Deployed" by getting signatures from mayors and governors across America on a custom Louisville Slugger bat

And with over 200 of the 7000 miles completed already, he has another milestone scheduled for the week: He's getting married Sunday. More information and videos can be found at Drum Hike.

William J. Booher (Indy Star) reports
that May is when Troy is set to be walking in Indiana and provides a list of some of the events including "a public barbecue May 7 at American Legion Post 252, 334 U.S. 31 S., between Main Street and Smith Valley Road." That is open to the public and begins at 12:30 in Greenwood, Indiana.

If time and space permits, we'll cover another Congressional hearing on veterans issues in today's snapshot. There wasn't room yesterday for both hearings.

From Tim King and Nahida Izzat's "SPLC, Palestine and Genocide" (Salem-News), we'll note this:

The Southern Poverty Law Center may be as racist as anything else in the deep south. It hit me like a ton of bricks when I finally took the time to visit their Website today to investigate these allegations I have been hearing, about how they will not say a word against Israel's extremely inhumane treatment of the Palestinian people.


I'm a little vague in my overall understanding, I admit that. There were a few things to confirm that they acknowledge the importance of protecting people of Arab descent, but if you enter the word 'Gaza' into their Website, and this is what you get in return:


"Minuteman fence modeled on West Bank, Gaza barriers".


What?


So I thought, let's just do a general search and enter the one word in the world that is synonymous with genocide: 'Palestine'.

I was not ready to see that this anti-racism site would come up empty for such a query. No site with these claims could possibly overlook the hundreds of murdered children in Gaza, that is unless they were another American fantasy, another national disgrace, one more ruse in red, white and blue.


I have always thought a great deal of this group, hearing their stories of championing the rights of black people and Jewish people in the country's southern states, but as I increasingly become aware of the constant daily suffering of the Palestinians, I learn that they are still a cog in the wheel of racism. Really it is worse than that, as SPLC is little more than a pro-Israel political operation.


It seems as though every other word on their pages is 'anti-Semitism' and it is a serious boy who cried wolf scenario. Our team of writers including the acclaimed Maidhc Ó Cathail in Japan, along with distinguished Professors, Dr. Alan Sabrosky and Dr. Paul Balles in the U.S., Award-winning international Writer Alan Hart in London, and noted Author/Attorney Jeff Gates, took the time to explore the mystery of Zionism in a special Salem-News.com series[1][2][3][4].


I don't have any regret or moral questions about calling the plight of the modern day Palestinians a tragedy and genocide in the making. It evolves from an attitude, and from hatred toward the Arab people. This hate is extreme and widespread in Israel, and always described as "defensive" when in fact it is rarely that. Everyone in Israel is not this way, many are fighting the racism from within, but it is all tied to that theory that a chosen few get every square inch of land. That is Zionism, and it is used as an excuse for murder, with the bloody hands of America loading the guns.





And we'll close with this from Sherwood Ross' "Historian Examines Why Americans Get Upset Over 'Historical Revisionism'" (Veterans Today):

Americans run into trouble evaluating their past “when cherished stories that are part of our identity are investigated and made more complex,” distinguished historian Edward Linenthal says.
This explains the controversies swirling around the battlefield at the Little Big Horn River in Montana where General Custer was defeated in 1876 and the National Air and Space Museum’s(NASM) exhibit on the dropping of the nuclear bombs on Japan that abruptly ended World War II.
Linenthal, a professor at Indiana University and editor of the Journal of American History, says when histories accepted as reflecting accurately on events are revised, “The urge is to lash out at those doing it (the revision) as somehow being subversive.”
When historians ask new questions about evidence or come across new evidence, or look at evidence in a different way, they are looked upon as “revisionists,” he writes, adding: “To my mind, any historian who is not intellectually senile is a revisionist.” Linenthal goes on to say:
“Flashpoint words like ‘political correctness’ and ‘revisionism’ sound like accusations when in fact we are constantly revising who we think we are, not only in history but in medicine and in art and in architecture, and in technology.”



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



















thomas friedman is a great man






oh boy it never ends