Monday, March 30, 2015

UN's Ban Ki-Moon in Baghdad notes allegations of abuse by 'pro-government forces'



urges Iraq 2 do all it can to ensure protection of civilians & humanitarian access in conflict zones.
15 retweets 5 favorites


Ban Ki-moon is the United Nations Secretary-General.  He arrived in Baghdad today.


One set of needed remarks are getting attention.




Civilians freed from brutality of Daesh should not have 2 fear liberators. Human rights need 2 be respected, says in Baghdad.
15 retweets 2 favorites



  • And not just from the spokesperson.




    BREAKING: U.N. Secretary General: Concerned about alleged summary executions and torture by pro-government forces in
    19 retweets 5 favorites




    Ned Parker and John Stonestreet (Reuters) quote the Secretary-General, "I am... concerned by allegations of summary killings, abductions and destruction of property perpetrated by forces and militias fighting alongside Iraqi armed forces,"


    The needed remarks come after a missed opportunity last week.  Friday, Human Rights Watch issued a statement which included:

    The United Nations Human Rights Council has missed a key opportunity to address war crimes and rights abuses by all sides to the conflict in Iraq. The council adopted a resolution on the Iraq conflict by consensus on March 27, 2015, that denounces atrocities by the extremist group Islamic State (also known as ISIS), but failed to condemn the abuses by militias, volunteer fighters, and Iraqi forces.

    “No one questions the Human Rights Council's attention to the widespread atrocities by ISIS in Iraq, but ignoring abuses by Iraqi militias and security forces is not only indefensible, it's dangerous,” said John Fisher, Geneva director.

    Iraq prepared the resolution, and the Arab group of countries put it forward at the council on March 19. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights issued a report the same day that documents ISIS abuses. But the High Commissioner also found that militias and Iraqi security forces had “carried out extrajudicial killings, torture, abductions and forcibly displaced a large number of people, often with impunity,” and that by doing so they “may have committed war crimes.” The Human Rights Council asked for the report in September 2014 during an emergency session.

    Human Rights Watch reached similar conclusions following an investigation of abuses in the wake of the ISIS retreat from the town of Amerli in September. Militias looted property of Sunni civilians who had fled the fighting, burned their homes and businesses, and destroyed at least two entire villages, all in violation of the laws of war.



    Meanwhile AP notes two car bombs in northern Baghdad left 11 people dead and twenty-six more injured.   And KUNA notes that the Speaker of the US House of Representatives, John Boehner, arrived in Baghdad today as well.



    New content at Third:








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


    Sunday, March 29, 2015

    Hejira

    The Pentagon announced the following airstrikes in Iraq today:


    Attack, fighter, bomber and remotely piloted aircraft conducted 14 airstrikes against ISIL terrorists in Iraq, approved by the Iraqi Ministry of Defense:
    -- Near Bayji, an airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL fighting position.
    -- Near Fallujah, an airstrike destroyed an ISIL excavator.
    -- Near Mosul, three airstrikes struck two ISIL tactical units and destroyed two ISIL fighting positions, two ISIL vehicles, two ISIL heavy machine guns and an ISIL building.
    -- Near Tal Afar, three airstrikes struck an ISIL large tactical unit, an ISIL storage facility, an ISIL fighting position and destroyed an ISIL building and an ISIL heavy machine gun; and
    -- Near Tikrit, six airstrikes struck six ISIL tactical units and destroyed an ISIL fighting position and an ISIL anti-aircraft artillery weapon.

     All aircraft returned to base safely.


    While the White House is very proud of these bombings, they've not accomplished anything.

    We've been noting that for some time.

    Other voices are joining the chorus.  Maria Fantappie and Peter Harling offer "If Shi'ite militias beat Islamic State in Tikrit, Iraq will still lose" (Reuters):

    The military campaign is thus exacerbating the sense of powerlessness, disenfranchisement and humiliation among Sunni Arabs that gave rise to Islamic State.
    The growing tendency in Baghdad and the south to equate Shi’ite militias with the national army, to declare oneself a patriot while expressing gratitude to Iran for its intervention, and to subsume national symbols under Shi’ite ones — with black, yellow and green flags referring to Hussein ibn Ali ibn Abi Taleb, Shiism’s third Imam, increasingly crowding out the Iraqi flag — is reshaping Iraqis’ national identity in ways that will vastly complicate well-intentioned efforts to advance inclusive politics and governance.

    Fantappie and Harling are with the International Crisis Group.

    The ICR is among a very few groups or outlets that paid attention to Iraq during Nouri al-Maliki's second term (2010 through 2014).  In fact, in terms of significant attention, it really was just the ICR and Human Rights Watch.


    Most groups and outlets preferred to look the other way.

    The assault on Tikrit appears to have prompted more coverage from news outlets.

    Amir Taheri (New York Post) offers:

    That sectarianism is now a key factor in Iraqi politics cannot be doubted. In Tikrit, a city of over 300,000 people, fewer than 200 joined the “liberating forces” sent by Baghdad but spearheaded by armed Shi’ite groups led by Iranian officers. Thanks to massive deployment of heavy weapons, these forces made advances in the suburbs of Tikrit that had already been depopulated when the arrival of IS forced the inhabitants to flee.



    On the 30th day of the operation to take Tikrit back from the Islamic State, Ahmed Rasheed and Ned Parker (Reuters) report, "On Sunday, an attempt to infiltrate Tikrit from the southern district of Shisheen was thwarted by militants. They used anti-tank missiles to destroy a bulldozer being used by the military to clear a path around booby-trapped roads, an official said."


    Meanwhile what does The Nation offer?




    This is what we wrote when the US invaded Iraq in 2003. Help us keep speaking truth to power:





    And the battle for Tirkit continues.  On day 30, Ahmed Rasheed and Ned Parker (Reuters) report, "On Sunday, an attempt to infiltrate Tikrit from the southern district of Shisheen was thwarted by militants. They used anti-tank missiles to destroy a bulldozer being used by the military to clear a path around booby-trapped roads, an official said."



    This is what we wrote when the US invaded Iraq in 2003. Help us keep speaking truth to power:





    They've Tweeted that nonsense daily for about ten days in a row.


    I'm really not understanding the point other than self-stroking?

    I'm not spending each day here re-posting what I wrote over a decade ago.

    I could.

    It would certainly be easier than writing something new about today.


    The Nation has nothing to offer but moldy things from the past.

    Poor Katrina vanden Heuvel, she's run that magazine into the ground.

    And while she likes to claim/charge that I'm running some sort of "jihad" (her term) against the publication and her, the reality is I was just ahead of the curve on the criticism (the just criticism) that is coming her way.  

    For example, the current issue of Harper's magazine contains Adolph Reed Jr.'s "Nothing Left: The long, slow surrender of American liberals."  And both she and her magazine get a 'shout-out':


    Taking into account the left's disappearance into Democratic neoliberalism helps explain how and why so many self-proclaimed leftists or progressives — individuals, institutions, organizations, and erstwhile avatars of leftist opinion such as The Nation — came to be swept up in the extravagant rhetoric and expectations that have surrounded the campaign, election, and presidency of Barack Obama.
    [. . . ]
    Indeed, even ersatz leftists such as Glenn Greenwald, then of Salon.com, and The Nation's Katrina vanden Heuvel defended and rationalized Obama's willingness to disparage black poor people. Greenwald applauded the candidate for making what he somehow imagined to be the "unorthodox" and "not politically safe" move of showing himself courageous enough to beat up on this politically powerless group. For her part, vanden Heuvel rationalized such moves as his odious "Popeyes chicken" speech as reflective of a "generational division" among black Americans, with Obama representing a younger generation that values "personal responsibility."* Perhaps, but it's noteworthy that Obama didn't give the Popeyes speech to groups of investment bankers.



    What's going to happen when the criticism continues to pile on?

    And at what point do I or someone else go public about how Katrina strong-armed certain program hosts to book her?

    Because I can.

    I can do that right now.

    I've been saving that for a rainy day.

    She bought her place at the table not for the left, not to help the magazine, but to get herself covered in the media.  Maybe her name should be Katrina vanity Heuvel?



    She's got to nothing to offer on Iraq.  She can't comment on today because she's not done the work required.  She offers superficial commentary in a magazine that's going under.


    This despite the fact that it was the Iraq War, specifically the opposition to it, that allowed The Nation to thrive and increase readership while support for it came close to burying The New Republic.






    I'm traveling in some vehicle
    I'm sitting in some cafe
    A defector from the petty wars
    That shell shock love away
    -- "Hejira," written by Joni Mitchell, first appears on her album of the same name


     The number of US service members the Dept of Defense states died in the Iraq War is [PDF format warning] 4494.



    The following community sites -- plus Jody Watley and the Guardian  -- update:











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











    Richard Diebenkorn's paintings capture a fresh and intriguing Californian light

    This is a repost from Great Britain's Socialist Worker:

    Richard Diebenkorn's paintings capture a fresh and intriguing Californian light

    The Royal Academy’s exhibition of Richard Diebenkorn’s art brings together abstraction and the natural world and should not be missed, writes Nick Grant

    Published Tue 24 Mar 2015

    Issue No. 2446



    Richard Diebenkorn, Cityscape I, (Landscape No. 1), 1963, Oil on canvas
    Richard Diebenkorn, Cityscape I, (Landscape No. 1), 1963, Oil on canvas (Pic: Photograph: 2014 The Richard Diebenkorn Foundation)



    This is a rare opportunity to see a selection of work by the US artist Richard Diebenkorn.
    Art critic Robert Hughes has described Diebenkorn as “a mediator between abstraction and natural vision”.


    He said Diebenkorn’s 1967-88 Ocean Park series of paintings are “abstractions which don’t reject the world but contain it in a concentrated form.”


    Diebenkorn is virtually unknown in Britain. None of his work is held in collections or museums here. None has been seen here since an exhibition at London’s Whitechapel Gallery in 1991.

    This new exhibition traces his post-war career up until his death in 1993 and has been greeted with critical acclaim.

    What is it that makes Diebenkorn’s work so enticing?

    When you see his work the appeal is quite simple and obvious. Three things stand out.

    First, there is the way he evokes fresh Californian light through daring but always intriguing colour contrasts. He spent most of his life in the coastal district of Los Angeles that his works are named after.

    Second, he foregrounds compositional beauty. In his later work, the structure is shown by  charcoal-sketched grids drawn in parallel and angled lines.

    Distant

    Critics have suggested that  the distant and elevated point of view typical of Diebenkorn’s art was inspired by his first flight in 1951. The journey from Albuquerque, in New Mexico, to San Francisco will have taken him over patchwork landscapes.

    Third, there is both a mystery and hesitancy to his work, which encourages contemplation.

    For example, his pictures that include people tend to avoid facial detail and are set in complex spaces.

    Most of his large Ocean Park series—of which five can be seen here—have thin veils of paint over other shapes.

    The edges do not show signs of masking tape. The paint on seemingly unprimed canvas is starting to fade and crack.

    The catalogue includes  this revealing quote from the artist, “One of the most interesting polarities in art is between representation at one end of the stick, and abstraction at the other end, and I’ve found myself all over that stick.”

    This is an exhibition that is not to be missed.


    Richard Diebenkorn. Royal Academy of Arts, London W1J 0BD. Until 7 June. royalacademy.org.uk