Thursday, November 6, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the treaty maybe moves forward but American citizens cannot have any details, Iraqi Christians feel betrayed by those who promised representation, Joshua Frank explores the War Hawks considered for cabinet positions and more. At the Vatican today, a conference of Muslim and Christian leaders came to a close today. BBC (text and video) quotes Pope Benedict XVI stating, "Muslims and Christians have different approaches in matters concerning God but must consider themselves members of one family." The Pope completed his remarks with a request (video, not in text), "Let us work with all people, especially the young, to build a common future." AP's Frances D'Emilo notes that Archbishop Louis Sako (from "the northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk") was among the religious leaders present. Dr. Seyyed Damdad (Dept of Islamic Studies at The Academy of Sciences in Iran) and Tariq Ramadan were among the Muslim leaders attending. Asia News reproduces the joint declaration those attending agreed to. Last month in Iraq, the exodus of Iraqi Christians from Mosul following attacks and threats garnered some press attention. IRIN reports, "About 400 Christian families, (some 2,400 individuals) have returned to their homes in the northern city of Mosul after a spate of threats and killings led them to flee in early October, according to officials." Today the Kurdish Globe interviews Nechirvan Barzani, the KRG's prime minister (Massoud Barzani is the region's president and also Nechirvan's uncle). Nechirvan Barzani: There is an unfortunate history of attacks against Christians in Iraq by terrorist groups since the liberation of Iraq in 2003. For example, in August 2004, churches in Baghdad and later in Basra, Mosul, and Kirkuk were targeted by terrorists. Christians were assassinated, abducted, and pressured to convert or pay ransom. Such things continued until nearly 50,000 Christian families had no option but to flee. Of these, 20,000 families fled to the Kurdistan Region and settled in the Duhok and Erbil governorates. Other families settled in the towns around the Nineveh Plain, and the remainder left Iraq for Syria and Jordan. The Kurdistan Regional Government has provided as much assistance as possible to these Christian families. This assistance has included employing them within the Kurdistan Regional Government, reconstructing approximately 100 villages, and helping around 10,000 families with monthly stipends. The KRG has been helping Christian families with assistance through churches and cultural and community centers. When the exodus of Christians became know, the KRG allocated 250,000 ID to each family to help them until the federal government in Baghdad can find a permanent solution. Other KRG institutions, like the Parliament and the governorates of Duhok, Erbil, and Sulaimaniya, have also offered financial and material aid to those in need, through churches and civil society organizations. The KRG Council of Ministers convened to condemn attacks against the Christians. Even before this, many KRG cabinet members, parliamentarians, and governors visited locations where the displaced Christian families have fled. Barzani goes on to reject the talk that the Kurds were behind the assaults and threats on the Christians stating, "The Kurds would politically lose most from these incidents, since the Arab proportion of the population would rise. Those wishing to lay the blame for these incidents on our doorstep are enemies of democracy, enemies of a federal Iraq. They wish to make blatantly false claims in order to undermine the basic rights of freedom, democracy, and fair representation." That may be but those pointing the fingers at the Kurds were not claiming that the assaults were meant to push Christians out of the area for all time. The assertion was that Kurds wanted to send in the Pershmerga and had created a situation that only they could be the 'heroes' and 'saviors' of. This would, the accusations argued, allow the Kurdish region to get a stronghold in an area that is not widely seen as up in the air as to who has dibs on it. True or false, that was the accusation. (At this point, no group has been found responsible for the attacks and threats.) Meanwhile Baghdad's Bishop Shlemon Warduni speaks with Asia Times which reports: "The auxiliary bishop of Baghdad had far harsher words for the 'slashed representation' of minorities in the upcoming provincial elections. On Monday 3 November the Parliament approved a resolution, by 106 votes out of 150, to reserve only 6 seats for all minorities: three for Christians (Baghdad, Nineveh and Bassora), one each for Yazidis and Shabaks in Nineveh and the last to the Sabei, in the capital. 'It is pittance -- dencounces Msgr. Warduni - but we don't want it. We want equal rights'. The Chaldean bishop recalls the battle launched by the Church 'for the reinstatement of article 50 of the electoral law', which would have guaranteed 15 seats (out of a total of 440) to minorities, 13 to Christians, one to the Shabaks and the last to the Yazidis. 'We met with Premier al-Maliki, the president and the Muslim religious leaders among them the great Ayatollah al Sistani, the Sheiks and tribal chiefs. All of them promised the article would be reintroduced based upon the principal, enshrined in the constitution that all Iraqis are equal and enjoy equal rights. Evidently they preferred to give us this pittance; but we won't accept it, we want equal rights'." Alaa Majeed (UPI) explains, "Elections are one of those factors of the Iraqi Constitution that rely on transparent principles as a guide for the people. Democratic elections are an achievement in Iraq that will enable the people to decide for their future. The upcoming provincial elections, scheduled tentatively for January, give reason for the people to participate in forming a solid foundation for their country." Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) noted yesterday, "The elections will feature political races heavily influenced by Iraq's complex and sectarian conflicts. They could exacerbate tensions in southern Iraq between U.S.-backed Prime Miniter Nouri Maliki's nationalist Islamic Dawa Party and the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, the two main Shiite Muslim parties in the country. The results of the internal Shiite rivalry are likely to determine whether Iraq is broken up into semiauntonomous regions or retains a strong central government." But some will not be participating due to a number of reasons. For religious minorities, it's the seat assignment which they find insulting and which is less than Article 50 guaranteed them (before it was stripped) and less than what the United Nations was recommending. Qassim Khidhir (Kurdish Globe) reports that the bill is now before Iraq's presidency council and "Christians, Shabaks, and Yazidis have warned the presidency council not to approve it. Nevertheless, the Iraqi presidency spokesman stated that the Iraqi presidency will still approve the bill despite the warning. Mahma Khalil, a member of Iraqi Parliament from the Kurdistan Alliance list who is a Yazidi, threatened that Yazidis will merge their territories with Kurdistan Region if the bill is approved." From the elections to the treaty masquerading as a Status Of Forces Agreement. This morning AP reported that the US has 'officially' responded to Iraq's requests for amendments and Reuters quoted Ali al-Dabbagh, spokesperson for al-Maliki, stating, "America has responded and the Iraqi side has received the American response. They had some remarks on some of the amendments, which now requires meetings with the Americans to reach a common understanding." At the White House this morning, Dana Perino told the press, "We have gotten back to the Iraqis with a final text. Through this step we've concluded the process on our side, and now it is their court to move forward with their process." Asked about the ticking clock (December 31st the UN mandate expires), Perino responded, "We've been trying to get it done and we recongizne that there's a deadline for when the UN security mandate expires. But we're moving forward. Now they have our response to the request of the changes that they had. So they'll move forward now. I think their parliament is in session for the next two weeks. I don't know all the details in terms of how -- what the next steps are on their end, but we've returned a final text to them." Later this morning, the State Dept's spokesperson briefed the press. Robert Wood declared, "Yeah, we've gotten back to the Iraqis with a final text, and so the process has concluded on our side and we look forward to hearing back from the Iraqis. . . . We believe the process has -- on our side, has been concluded. So it's now the Iraqis' turn for them to move the document through their internal polticial process." He stressed that "the negotiating process has come to an end" but despite the US having 'finished' on their end ("the process has concluded") according to Wood, he refused to provide any details. He was no more specific on when Iraqis were informed of the official response: "Last night or early this morning." Yesterday Ryan Crocker entertainined Iraqi officials at the fortress US Embassy in the Green Zone and Suadad al-Salhy and Katherine Zoepf (New York Times) explain that approximately "250 Iraqi officials, diplomats and dignataries" gather "Wednesday morning" where they were served "green-tinted fruit punch" and a huge sheet cake (which was dry -- not a detail in the paper). Gina Chon (Baghdad Life, Wall St. Journal) notes. "The U.S. embassy used the elections as the reason to have its first official function at the new embassy in Baghdad." Staying with so-called diplomacy, Joshua Frank (Dissident Voice) examines possible cabinet members in Barack's administration and we'll focus on The Problem From Hell Samantha Power because that War Hawk is so rarely called out: Samantha Power, cheerleader for humanitarian intervention, also has Obama's ear and may even entice him to put U.S. forces in Darfur. "With very few exceptions, the Save Darfur campaign has drawn a single lesson from Rwanda: the problem was the US failure to intervene to stop the genocide. Rwanda is the guilt that America must expiate, and to do so it must be ready to intervene, for good and against evil, even globally. That lesson is inscribed at the heart of Samantha of Power's book, A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide. But it is the wrong lesson," writes author Mahmood Mamdani in the London Review of Books. As Mamdani continues: "What the humanitarian intervention lobby fails to see is that the US did intervene in Rwanda, through a proxy … Instead of using its resources and influence to bring about a political solution to the civil war, and then strengthen it, the US signalled to one of the parties that it could pursue victory with impunity. This unilateralism was part of what led to the disaster, and that is the real lesson of Rwanda … Applied to Darfur and Sudan, it is sobering. It means recognising that Darfur is not yet another Rwanda. Nurturing hopes of an external military intervention among those in the insurgency who aspire to victory and reinforcing the fears of those in the counter-insurgency who see it as a prelude to defeat are precisely the ways to ensure that it becomes a Rwanda." Prior to Our Modern Day Carrie Nation visiting England and imploding, Amy Goodman was all over Power and how amazing it was and how she was going to be the next Secretary of State (and as bad as Goody was on DN!, she was far worse on WBAI airwaves as she yammered on about Samantha endlessly in one Friday's pledge drive) and of course Jeremy Scahill was all up in some Samantha Power because the Bloody War Hawk had been acting as one of his unnamed sources. But then Power went to England and imploded. She talked smack about Gordon Brown (which never got publicity here -- apparently the US doesn't give a damn if Power insults a world leader who is one of America's closest's allies), called Hillary Clinton a "monster" (which got all the attention) and told the BBC Barack's 'promise' that US troops would be out of Iraq in 16 months wasn't for real. Samantha Power was not called out for those March remarks. Instead, Tom Hayden showed up July 4th wanting to know why they were ignored. Ask John Nichols (busy lying that Samantha and Hillary were close friends to excuse the "monster" remark), ask David Corn who shot down Samantha's remarks repeatedly in press briefings with the Hillary campaign, ask ALL THE LIARS WHO REFUSED TO CALL THE WAR HAWK OUT. As irritating as Tom-Tom can be and as much as he's sold out in 2008, it does bear noting that in 2007, he was among the few willing to call out Samantha Power or her running buddy and fellow counter-insurgency cheerleader Sarah Sewall. Whatever happened to that Tom Hayden? As Bananarama once sang, "He was really saying something . . . " Turning to some of today's reported violence . . . Bombings? Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 Baghdad roadside bombing targeting "Awakening" Council members that left 2 dead and five wounded, a Baghdad sticky bombing, a Baghdad roadside bombing that claimed 1 life and left five people injured and another Baghdad bobming ("put in a rubbish bin") that resulted in five wounded, and a Mosul roadside bombing that left two Iraqi soldiers injured. Shootings? Reuters notes 1 person shot dead by US forces in Hawija. Corpses? Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse discovered in Mosul and 1 outside of Kirkuk. Yesterday (late) the US military announced: "A Multi-National Division – Center Soldier died of non-combat related causes Nov. 5." That brings the total number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4191. Ralph Nader was this year's independent presidential candidate and Matt Gonzalez was his running mate. We'll note this from Team Nader: Against all odds. We prevailed. On $4 million total -- what Obama raised in one day. Nader/Gonzalez overcame ballot access obstacles. We put our shift the power agenda on 45 state ballots. We set the world record for campaigning in 21 towns and cities in 24 hours during our Massachusetts Marathon. We exposed Obama and Biden for the corporate politicians they are. (And today, ABC News is reporting that Obama wants the militarist reactionary Rahm Emanuel as his chief of staff.) We drew the line. And together, we chose to make a stand. You stood with hundreds of thousands of Americans. Against the corporate militaristic machine. Our consciences are clear. Our hands are clean. We made the moral choice. History will look back and say -- those Americans back in 2008 who supported Nader/Gonzalez -- they were right. So, thank you fellow traveler. Thank you for your donations. And your hard work. It has been a joy -- standing with you. Fighting for justice. Onward The Nader Team And Chris Floyd (Empire Burlesque) evaluates president-elect Barack: To which we could add his bellicose saber-rattling at Iran, his promise to roll back "Russian aggression" and extend war-triggering treaty protection to an aggressive Georgian regime (which cluster-bombed its own people, as we learned this week), his advocacy of destabilizing and civilian-shredding military strikes in Pakistan, his opposition to gay marriage (and campaigning with gay-bashing preachers), and his support for extending the death penalty to cover non-fatal offenses, and so on.Any one of these positions would be roundly condemned by "progressives" if they were taken or advocated by George W. Bush -- as in fact many of them have been. Indeed, one of the most remarkable things about this campaign is how Obama has managed to embody the deep and desperate thirst for change among millions of Americans -- hence the genuinely moving scenes of jubilation and revived hope that have greeted his victory -- while his actual positions in many if not most key areas track very closely with Bush's, if they are not actually identical with them.Take Iran, for example. Obama has taken what is regarded as a more nuanced position, holding out the promise of direct negotiations with Iranian leaders. Yet he has repeatedly stated what the outcome of these "negotiations" must be: Iran must "abandon its nuclear program." If it does not, then more and more draconian sanctions will be applied, with the clear threat of military action if these don't bring Tehran to heel. This is, chapter and verse, the precise policy followed by Bush, who has also repeatedly offered to "negotiate" with Iran as long as they agree to surrender on every point before talks begin. |
Thursday, November 06, 2008
Iraq snapshot
The US military announces another death
Yesterday (late) the US military announced: "A Multi-National Division – Center Soldier died of non-combat related causes Nov. 5." That brings the total number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4191. We'll come back to fatalities in a minute. In this morning's Washington Post, Ann Scott Tyson's "Combat Brigade Is Cut 6 Weeks Early in Iraq" runs on A10 and informs that former top US commander in Iraq and now head of Centcom Gen David Petraeus is cutting the brigade numbers down to fourteen from fifteen and doing so "as a result of dramatically lower violence there, Pentagon officials said yesterday. . . . Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has stated that further increases in U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan -- where American commanders say they need three more brigades and thousands of support forces to combat a growing insurgency -- will be contingent upon further withdrawals from Iraq next year."
Tyson reports the decision was made on reduced violence (which does not appear to include the attacks on Iraqi Christians last month) and deaths of US service members which the paper lists as 12 for October ("Twelve American service members died last month, including six from noncombat causes."). That is wrong. The number is fourteen. From ICCC:
On the subject of Afhganistan, Anne Geran's "Tough morning for Obama: Russian threats and Afghan deaths greet the president-elect" (AP) explains:
In Afghanistan, the U.S.-backed president demanded that Obama change U.S. tactics as villagers said U.S. warplanes killed 37 people -- nearly all of them women and children -- during a cat-and-mouse hunt for militants.
"We cannot win the fight against terrorism with airstrikes," President Hamid Karzai said. "This is my first demand of the new president of the United States -- to put an end to civilian casualties."
And it's only Karzai's "first demand of the new president". As al-Maliki has so aptly demonstrated, sometimes the puppet pulls the strings.
On the subject of Iraqi Christians, IRIN reports:
About 400 Christian families, (some 2,400 individuals) have returned to their homes in the northern city of Mosul after a spate of threats and killings led them to flee in early October, according to officials.
"We have so far registered nearly 400 Christian families who have returned to their houses and jobs, and resumed normal lives thanks to the deployment of security forces," said Jawdat Ismaiel, head of the Ministry of Displacement and Migration in the province.
That's IRIN reporting today, dropping back to Monday, they issued an alert again stating that it was not safe for refugees to return to Iraq:
The Iraqi government should review its policy of encouraging Iraqi refugees to return home by offering them free plane or bus tickets, until it is able to ensure security, local and international NGOs said.
"For the time being, the government should take care of the refugees and meet their daily needs in their host countries until it can secure suitable life conditions to allow them to go back to their homes," said Basil al-Azawi, head of the Baghdad-based Commission for Civil Society Enterprises, an umbrella group of over 1,000 NGOs operating inside and outside Iraq.
On the issue of any decline in violence, we'll note these observations by Andrew North (BBC) :
This uncertain situation is now encased in an incredible amount of concrete - the blast barriers that have become one of the signature images of Baghdad
There were plenty in place when I was last here a year ago. Now there are even more and journeys take longer than ever.
There are checkpoints with heavy machine-guns every 300 metres on many roads now - far more than you ever saw under the police-state rule of Saddam Hussein.
Baghdad is a city under complete military occupation. So the relative quiet here may be deceptive.
Leila Fadel's "Does a New American President Change Iraq?" (Baghdad Observer, McClatchy Newspapers) is a roundup she did prior to the election results.
And we'll close with this from Larry Pinkney's "An Obama Presidency: More Of The Same Only Worse" (Information Clearing House):
After the Democratic Party Republicrats so-called election euphoria and celebrating is over, the Obama / Biden Republicrat regime will get down to the business of placing the ongoing exploitation of the every day people of this nation on fast track. The masses of Black Americans, along with the oppressed and exploited Brown, Red, Yellow, and White peoples of this nation will learn first hand that, notwithstanding the deceptive Obama rhetoric, exploitation nationally and internationally will be intensified. The "clash between those who want freedom, justice, equality for everyone and those who want to continue the system of exploitation" about which Malcolm X referred, will be intensified under Barack Obama, with Obama representing the interests of the oppressors. The political contradictions in this regard will also be increasingly obvious.
Those so-called leftist and progressives who were and are collaborators with U.S. Empire will, for a time, try to pretend that their support of Barack Obama was not a sell out, and that they simply need more time to persuade the U.S. Empire’s colored corporate emperor to do the right thing. Meanwhile, Black, Brown, Red, Yellow, and White peoples will be enduring an unprecedented rate of economic and social suffering. The anger of the people will ultimately peak and explode, as a result of having bought into false hope and raised expectations. This is precisely why the U.S. corporate government has already made military contingency plans to contain and massively quash dissention within the United States. Barack Obama will serve to provide his corporate / military masters with colored political cover for political repression in this nation; and he will have already provided a small respite of wiggling room for them in this regard. Nevertheless, as brutal reality forces the proverbial scales of blindness to drop from eyes of the masses, it will become crystal clear that the supposed "change" to which Barack Obama referred in his campaign rhetoric, was nothing more than a vicious ruse of double-speak by him, backed by his corporate and military handlers. Indeed, the emperor will be shown to "have no clothes." But what of the fate of millions of Black, White, Brown, Red, and Yellow peoples inside the U.S.? How many horrible sacrifices will have been, and will yet need to be made by the people in order to get the boot of economic blood-sucking and political repression off their / our necks?
The "clash," to which Malcolm X referred, "between those who want freedom, justice, and equality for everyone and those who want to continue the system of exploitation" will deepen, as will repression and systemic contradictions. The "clash" will have, by necessity, as Malcolm X suggested, gone beyond "the color of the skin." Notwithstanding his double speak rhetoric, it will become clear to people that a president Barack Obama supports and wants to “continue the system of exploitation” at home and abroad. Despite continued double speak and corporate disinformation and misinformation, it will be become undeniably clear that a president Barack Obama is the servant of the corporate/ military / prison apparatus of U.S. Empire, and a key facilitator of exploitation and political repression inside and outside the United States.
the washington post
ann scott tyson
leila fadel
mcclatchy newspapers
anne geran
andrew north
Tyson reports the decision was made on reduced violence (which does not appear to include the attacks on Iraqi Christians last month) and deaths of US service members which the paper lists as 12 for October ("Twelve American service members died last month, including six from noncombat causes."). That is wrong. The number is fourteen. From ICCC:
| 29-Oct-2008 | 2 | | US: 2 | UK: 0 | Other: 0 | ||
| US | Private 1st Class Bradley S. Coleman | Qayyarah Airfield - Ninawa | Non-hostile | |
| US | Sergeant Scott J. Metcalf | Mosul (died in Balad) - Ninawa | Non-hostile | |
| 24-Oct-2008 | 1 | | US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0 | ||
| US | Private 1st Class Cody J. Eggleston | National Naval Medical Center, Bethesda | Hostile - hostile fire - indirect fire | |
| 23-Oct-2008 | 1 | | US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0 | ||
| US | Staff Sergeant Brian P. Hause | Balad Air Base - Salah Ad Din | Non-hostile - medical | |
| 20-Oct-2008 | 1 | | US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0 | ||
| US | Lance Corporal Stacy A. Dryden | Al Asad - Anbar | Non-hostile | |
| 16-Oct-2008 | 1 | | US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0 | ||
| US | Private 1st Class Heath K. Pickard | Ba'qubah - Diyala | Hostile - hostile fire - indirect fire | |
| 15-Oct-2008 | 1 | | US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0 | ||
| US | Specialist Justin A. Saint | Baghdad | Non-hostile | |
| 14-Oct-2008 | 1 | | US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0 | ||
| US | Private 1st Class Christopher A. McCraw | Baghdad (Nasar Wa Salam) | Hostile - hostile fire - small arms fire | |
| 12-Oct-2008 | 1 | | US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0 | ||
| US | Specialist Geoffrey G. Johnson | Baghdad | Non-hostile | |
| 11-Oct-2008 | 1 | | US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0 | ||
| US | Corporal Reuben M. Fernandez III | Majar Al Kabir (Amara) - Maysan | Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack | |
| 07-Oct-2008 | 1 | | US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0 | ||
| US | Sergeant Michael K. Clark | Mosul - Ninewa | Hostile - hostile fire - small arms fire | |
| 05-Oct-2008 | 2 | | US: 2 | UK: 0 | Other: 0 | ||
| US | Colonel Michael R. Stahlman | Anbar Province | Non-hostile | |
| US | Sergeant William P. Rudd | Mosul - Ninewa | Hostile - hostile fire - small arms fire | |
| 03-Oct-2008 | 1 | | US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0 | ||
| US | Private 1st Class Tavarus D. Setzler | Majar al-Kabir - Maysan | Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack | |
| 02-Oct-2008 | 0 | | US: 0 | UK: 0 | Other: 0 | ||
| Total | 14 | | US: 14 | UK: 0 | Other: 0 |
On the subject of Afhganistan, Anne Geran's "Tough morning for Obama: Russian threats and Afghan deaths greet the president-elect" (AP) explains:
In Afghanistan, the U.S.-backed president demanded that Obama change U.S. tactics as villagers said U.S. warplanes killed 37 people -- nearly all of them women and children -- during a cat-and-mouse hunt for militants.
"We cannot win the fight against terrorism with airstrikes," President Hamid Karzai said. "This is my first demand of the new president of the United States -- to put an end to civilian casualties."
And it's only Karzai's "first demand of the new president". As al-Maliki has so aptly demonstrated, sometimes the puppet pulls the strings.
On the subject of Iraqi Christians, IRIN reports:
About 400 Christian families, (some 2,400 individuals) have returned to their homes in the northern city of Mosul after a spate of threats and killings led them to flee in early October, according to officials.
"We have so far registered nearly 400 Christian families who have returned to their houses and jobs, and resumed normal lives thanks to the deployment of security forces," said Jawdat Ismaiel, head of the Ministry of Displacement and Migration in the province.
That's IRIN reporting today, dropping back to Monday, they issued an alert again stating that it was not safe for refugees to return to Iraq:
The Iraqi government should review its policy of encouraging Iraqi refugees to return home by offering them free plane or bus tickets, until it is able to ensure security, local and international NGOs said.
"For the time being, the government should take care of the refugees and meet their daily needs in their host countries until it can secure suitable life conditions to allow them to go back to their homes," said Basil al-Azawi, head of the Baghdad-based Commission for Civil Society Enterprises, an umbrella group of over 1,000 NGOs operating inside and outside Iraq.
On the issue of any decline in violence, we'll note these observations by Andrew North (BBC) :
This uncertain situation is now encased in an incredible amount of concrete - the blast barriers that have become one of the signature images of Baghdad
There were plenty in place when I was last here a year ago. Now there are even more and journeys take longer than ever.
There are checkpoints with heavy machine-guns every 300 metres on many roads now - far more than you ever saw under the police-state rule of Saddam Hussein.
Baghdad is a city under complete military occupation. So the relative quiet here may be deceptive.
Leila Fadel's "Does a New American President Change Iraq?" (Baghdad Observer, McClatchy Newspapers) is a roundup she did prior to the election results.
"The American elections have no importance to me at all. Their presidency is one thing and their policy is another, therefore there is no real difference who wins. American foreign policy is constant. Iraqis are not ignorant, we have seen this over the years; one president goes and another comes and he does nothing to remedy his predecessor's mistakes only what concerns the American people. As for people in other countries they don't count because they don't vote." -- Aqeel Mohammed, 37, a Shiite minibus driver from southern Baghdad
"What possible change can either of them bring? And if they do anything, it is only to the interests of their own country – not for our sake. They might "bring their boys home" and "stop spending their money in Iraq" and "let Iraqis shoulder their own responsibilities"…. Where are we in all this?
Maybe Obama would withdraw their forces – but is that good? I would be happy to see them go – but I am also afraid.
What they do, they do for themselves. -- Widad Hamid, 74, a Sunni Arab retired high school teacher from western Baghdad.
"We do follow the news, but I don't expect any change at all. I have no faith in their promises because they say only what they think the American people want to hear. They dissemble their own people – not others. They don't care about the Iraqi people. It's all about their security freedoms, their boys, their money and their democracy. American foreign policy is one line, presidents come and go." -- Khalid Abu Abdullah, a Sunni Arab shopowner from northern Baghdad
"The residents of Sadr city don't car about the American presidential election, now we care only about the blocked roads and the traffic jams...I don't think the American policy will change towards our country," -- Khaleel Abu Ahmad, 37, a Shiite engineer from the east Baghdad district of Sadr City.
"I care about the lack of electricity and fuel, why should I care about the American elections?" -- Ammar, 30, a Shiite Arab from Baghdad.
And we'll close with this from Larry Pinkney's "An Obama Presidency: More Of The Same Only Worse" (Information Clearing House):
After the Democratic Party Republicrats so-called election euphoria and celebrating is over, the Obama / Biden Republicrat regime will get down to the business of placing the ongoing exploitation of the every day people of this nation on fast track. The masses of Black Americans, along with the oppressed and exploited Brown, Red, Yellow, and White peoples of this nation will learn first hand that, notwithstanding the deceptive Obama rhetoric, exploitation nationally and internationally will be intensified. The "clash between those who want freedom, justice, equality for everyone and those who want to continue the system of exploitation" about which Malcolm X referred, will be intensified under Barack Obama, with Obama representing the interests of the oppressors. The political contradictions in this regard will also be increasingly obvious.
Those so-called leftist and progressives who were and are collaborators with U.S. Empire will, for a time, try to pretend that their support of Barack Obama was not a sell out, and that they simply need more time to persuade the U.S. Empire’s colored corporate emperor to do the right thing. Meanwhile, Black, Brown, Red, Yellow, and White peoples will be enduring an unprecedented rate of economic and social suffering. The anger of the people will ultimately peak and explode, as a result of having bought into false hope and raised expectations. This is precisely why the U.S. corporate government has already made military contingency plans to contain and massively quash dissention within the United States. Barack Obama will serve to provide his corporate / military masters with colored political cover for political repression in this nation; and he will have already provided a small respite of wiggling room for them in this regard. Nevertheless, as brutal reality forces the proverbial scales of blindness to drop from eyes of the masses, it will become crystal clear that the supposed "change" to which Barack Obama referred in his campaign rhetoric, was nothing more than a vicious ruse of double-speak by him, backed by his corporate and military handlers. Indeed, the emperor will be shown to "have no clothes." But what of the fate of millions of Black, White, Brown, Red, and Yellow peoples inside the U.S.? How many horrible sacrifices will have been, and will yet need to be made by the people in order to get the boot of economic blood-sucking and political repression off their / our necks?
The "clash," to which Malcolm X referred, "between those who want freedom, justice, and equality for everyone and those who want to continue the system of exploitation" will deepen, as will repression and systemic contradictions. The "clash" will have, by necessity, as Malcolm X suggested, gone beyond "the color of the skin." Notwithstanding his double speak rhetoric, it will become clear to people that a president Barack Obama supports and wants to “continue the system of exploitation” at home and abroad. Despite continued double speak and corporate disinformation and misinformation, it will be become undeniably clear that a president Barack Obama is the servant of the corporate/ military / prison apparatus of U.S. Empire, and a key facilitator of exploitation and political repression inside and outside the United States.
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
iraq
the washington postann scott tysonleila fadelmcclatchy newspapersanne geranandrew north
Entertaining badly at the US Embassy
The U.S. embassy used the elections as the reason to have its first official function at the new embassy in Baghdad. Security was tight around the compound and dozens of private security personnel stood outside the embassy area. Inside, a projector displayed the latest elections news from CNN on a wall, and information sheets on the two presidential candidates and other information about the American electoral process lined a table. In the back of the room was a gigantic cake.
U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker told the crowd of Iraqi officials, journalists and others that the elections marked the historic occasion of the first African-American elected to the U.S. presidency. But Mr. Crocker also emphasized the democratic traditions that were represented in the U.S. race. Mr. Obama's win marked the 44th peaceful transition of power in the U.S. and the 22nd time a new political party was taking over the presidency through democratic means, Mr. Crocker said.
Mr. Crocker then cited an excerpt from Mr. Obama's victory speech: "To those who would tear the world down: We will defeat you. To those who seek peace and security: We support you. And to all those who have wondered if America’s beacon still burns as bright: Tonight we proved once more that the true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity and unyielding hope."
The ambassador said he couldn't think of a place where Mr. Obama's words were more important than in Iraq, where two elections are scheduled to take place next year.
The above is from Gina Chon's "Obama’s Victory Came as a Surprise to Many Iraqis" (Baghdad Life, Wall St. Journal) and it's not at all surprising that Barack's threat was used as such in Iraq. As noted in yesterday's snapshot, Gary Leupp's "" (Dissident Voice) offered a decoding of Barack's bullying:
"To those -- to those who would tear the world down: We will defeat you."
In other words: Under my administration we Americans will continue to simplistically conceptualize the existence of an enemy that is pure evil and wants to destroy the world, and imagine we can "defeat" it through the War on Terror.
"To those who seek peace and security: We support you."
In other words: You Georgians facing Russia. You Afghans facing Pakistan-based attacks. You Israelis facing what you imagine to be the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran. You can trust an Obama administration to behave just like other recent U.S. administrations have behaved: with threats and sanctions, illegal cross-border raids and more war. Have no fear. As the world's greatest imperialist country, with bases in over half the countries on the planet, we can seek peace and security and support whoever we want. Yes we can!
Yesterday's snapshot also noted Corey Flintoff (NPR's All Things Considered) report on Crocker entertaining at the embassy for those needing or preferring audio. Suada al-Salhy and Katherine Zoepf cover it in this morning's New York Times with "U.S. Envoy Hosts First Event at New Embassy in Baghdad" which explains the US embassy/fortress hosted approximately "250 Iraqi officials, diplomats and dignitaries . . . Wednesday morning" for a beyond tacky meet up that served up bad sheet cake (I'm calling it bad based on reports beyond NYT, they merely mention how large it was) and "green-tinted fruit punch." As a general rule, serving any green colored liquid should be done on St. Patrick's Day and, even then, done in moderation. Maybe it was to symbolize the Green Zone? It certainly wasn't to appear appetizing. Crocker stressed that nothing's changed and, of course, nothing has. The reporters note:
Yet the embassy, built like a fortress, suggested a degree of permanence to the American presence here that at least some of the Iraqi guests seemed to find comforting.
"The size of this embassy and the number of employees who will occupy it are a sign of the American government’s commitment to democracy in Iraq," said Hoshyar Zebari, Iraq’s foreign minister. He did not remember the details of the original lease agreement for the land, he said, "but it was a very long lease."
Amazing that Americans can't be informed how long the lease is, isn't it? They are the ones footing the bill. No doubt it's a 'national security' issue that must be kept classified.
A visitor e-mailed the public account asking that we note Sam Smith's "The real Obama" and a few points. Smith is a bad reporter, a really bad one. You don't need to know his work during the Clinton administration to know that but it does show you how truly bad he is. In this article, he brags about being "a good boy" (he's over 65, grow the hell up) and sitting on issues relating to Barack. That goes to the fact that he's not a reporter. A reporter does not try to influence the outcome and certainly doesn't keep facts hidden. We'll note his late to the party piece but via Green Change and not via Sam Smith's bad website:
There is one story from Chicago, however, that remains relevant. A citizen walks into his alderman's office looking for a job. "Who sent you?" he asks. "Nobody," he replies. Says the staffer: "We don't want nobody nobody sent."
Who sent Barack Obama remains a mystery. He has risen from an unknown state senator to president in exactly four years and that only happens when somebody sends for you.
The black liberal image falters on a number of other scores including Obama's affection for extreme right wingers like Chuck Hagel and an obvious indifference to anybody who votes like, say, a state senator from Hyde Park. Think back over the campaign and try to recall a single instance when Obama reached out to the progressive wing of the Democratic Party or to the better angels of the Congressional Black Caucus. Instead his ads attacked as 'extreme' the single payer health insurance backed by many of his own supporters, he dissed ACORN and Colin Powell was as radical a black as he wanted to be seen palling around with.
The key issue that has driven Obama throughout his career has been Obama. He has achieved virtually nothing for any other cause. His politics reflects whatever elite consensus he gathers around himself. This is why his "post partisanship" needs to be watched so carefully. If Bernie Sanders and John Conyers don't get to White House meetings as often as Chuck Hagel, Obama will glide easily to the right, as every president has done over the past thirty years. If liberals, as they did with Clinton, watch without a murmur as their president redesigns their party to fit his personal ambitions, then the whole country will continue to move to the right as well.
Since the real Obama doesn't exist yet, it is impossible to predict with any precision what he will do. But here is some of the evidence gathered over the past months that should serve both as a warning and as a prod to progressives not to take today's dreams as a reasonable facsimile of reality [. . .]
Late to the party. Expect to see a lot more come crawling out over the coming months. And for those who don't grasp how bad a 'reporter' Sam Smith is, please note, he's one of those "They killed Vince Foster!" nutcakes. And, to be clear, he didn't just sit on Barack concerns while savaging the Republicans, he refused to cover Ralph Nader or Cynthia McKinney. He's a bag boy for Barack. He is not a journalist. He never was. During the 90s spectacle, you could find him and the drunken Chris Hitchens blathering on with their crazed conspiracy talk.
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
iraq
gina chon
the wall street journal
gary leupp
npr
all things considered
corey flintoff
the new york times
katherine zoepf
suadad al-salhy
U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker told the crowd of Iraqi officials, journalists and others that the elections marked the historic occasion of the first African-American elected to the U.S. presidency. But Mr. Crocker also emphasized the democratic traditions that were represented in the U.S. race. Mr. Obama's win marked the 44th peaceful transition of power in the U.S. and the 22nd time a new political party was taking over the presidency through democratic means, Mr. Crocker said.
Mr. Crocker then cited an excerpt from Mr. Obama's victory speech: "To those who would tear the world down: We will defeat you. To those who seek peace and security: We support you. And to all those who have wondered if America’s beacon still burns as bright: Tonight we proved once more that the true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity and unyielding hope."
The ambassador said he couldn't think of a place where Mr. Obama's words were more important than in Iraq, where two elections are scheduled to take place next year.
The above is from Gina Chon's "Obama’s Victory Came as a Surprise to Many Iraqis" (Baghdad Life, Wall St. Journal) and it's not at all surprising that Barack's threat was used as such in Iraq. As noted in yesterday's snapshot, Gary Leupp's "" (Dissident Voice) offered a decoding of Barack's bullying:
"To those -- to those who would tear the world down: We will defeat you."
In other words: Under my administration we Americans will continue to simplistically conceptualize the existence of an enemy that is pure evil and wants to destroy the world, and imagine we can "defeat" it through the War on Terror.
"To those who seek peace and security: We support you."
In other words: You Georgians facing Russia. You Afghans facing Pakistan-based attacks. You Israelis facing what you imagine to be the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran. You can trust an Obama administration to behave just like other recent U.S. administrations have behaved: with threats and sanctions, illegal cross-border raids and more war. Have no fear. As the world's greatest imperialist country, with bases in over half the countries on the planet, we can seek peace and security and support whoever we want. Yes we can!
Yesterday's snapshot also noted Corey Flintoff (NPR's All Things Considered) report on Crocker entertaining at the embassy for those needing or preferring audio. Suada al-Salhy and Katherine Zoepf cover it in this morning's New York Times with "U.S. Envoy Hosts First Event at New Embassy in Baghdad" which explains the US embassy/fortress hosted approximately "250 Iraqi officials, diplomats and dignitaries . . . Wednesday morning" for a beyond tacky meet up that served up bad sheet cake (I'm calling it bad based on reports beyond NYT, they merely mention how large it was) and "green-tinted fruit punch." As a general rule, serving any green colored liquid should be done on St. Patrick's Day and, even then, done in moderation. Maybe it was to symbolize the Green Zone? It certainly wasn't to appear appetizing. Crocker stressed that nothing's changed and, of course, nothing has. The reporters note:
Yet the embassy, built like a fortress, suggested a degree of permanence to the American presence here that at least some of the Iraqi guests seemed to find comforting.
"The size of this embassy and the number of employees who will occupy it are a sign of the American government’s commitment to democracy in Iraq," said Hoshyar Zebari, Iraq’s foreign minister. He did not remember the details of the original lease agreement for the land, he said, "but it was a very long lease."
Amazing that Americans can't be informed how long the lease is, isn't it? They are the ones footing the bill. No doubt it's a 'national security' issue that must be kept classified.
A visitor e-mailed the public account asking that we note Sam Smith's "The real Obama" and a few points. Smith is a bad reporter, a really bad one. You don't need to know his work during the Clinton administration to know that but it does show you how truly bad he is. In this article, he brags about being "a good boy" (he's over 65, grow the hell up) and sitting on issues relating to Barack. That goes to the fact that he's not a reporter. A reporter does not try to influence the outcome and certainly doesn't keep facts hidden. We'll note his late to the party piece but via Green Change and not via Sam Smith's bad website:
There is one story from Chicago, however, that remains relevant. A citizen walks into his alderman's office looking for a job. "Who sent you?" he asks. "Nobody," he replies. Says the staffer: "We don't want nobody nobody sent."
Who sent Barack Obama remains a mystery. He has risen from an unknown state senator to president in exactly four years and that only happens when somebody sends for you.
The black liberal image falters on a number of other scores including Obama's affection for extreme right wingers like Chuck Hagel and an obvious indifference to anybody who votes like, say, a state senator from Hyde Park. Think back over the campaign and try to recall a single instance when Obama reached out to the progressive wing of the Democratic Party or to the better angels of the Congressional Black Caucus. Instead his ads attacked as 'extreme' the single payer health insurance backed by many of his own supporters, he dissed ACORN and Colin Powell was as radical a black as he wanted to be seen palling around with.
The key issue that has driven Obama throughout his career has been Obama. He has achieved virtually nothing for any other cause. His politics reflects whatever elite consensus he gathers around himself. This is why his "post partisanship" needs to be watched so carefully. If Bernie Sanders and John Conyers don't get to White House meetings as often as Chuck Hagel, Obama will glide easily to the right, as every president has done over the past thirty years. If liberals, as they did with Clinton, watch without a murmur as their president redesigns their party to fit his personal ambitions, then the whole country will continue to move to the right as well.
Since the real Obama doesn't exist yet, it is impossible to predict with any precision what he will do. But here is some of the evidence gathered over the past months that should serve both as a warning and as a prod to progressives not to take today's dreams as a reasonable facsimile of reality [. . .]
Late to the party. Expect to see a lot more come crawling out over the coming months. And for those who don't grasp how bad a 'reporter' Sam Smith is, please note, he's one of those "They killed Vince Foster!" nutcakes. And, to be clear, he didn't just sit on Barack concerns while savaging the Republicans, he refused to cover Ralph Nader or Cynthia McKinney. He's a bag boy for Barack. He is not a journalist. He never was. During the 90s spectacle, you could find him and the drunken Chris Hitchens blathering on with their crazed conspiracy talk.
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
iraq
gina chonthe wall street journalgary leupp
npr
all things consideredcorey flintoff
the new york timeskatherine zoepfsuadad al-salhy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)