Monday, July 13, 2015

Iraq snapshot

Monday, July 13, 2015.  Chaos and violence continue, a new UN report notes that the violence against civilians in Iraq is being carried out by terrorists and by the Iraqi forces, Donald Trump offers a silly and idiotic proposal and that causes outrage -- that causes outrage,  Haider al-Abadi again tries to retake Anbar Province, and much more.



Let's start with some reality.

Donald Trump wants to be the Republican Party's presidential nominee.

Whether that will happen or not remains to be seen.

But all the bottom feeders are out attacking him.


(I know Donald.  I do not like Donald.)


David Letterman came out of his retirement to attack Trump.


Jon Stewart's made his final days on Comedy Central all about Trump.


One of the things Donald Trump is being ridiculed for is declaring that the US should bomb Iraq's oil fields.


Now I'm not for bombing anything.


But the gasping and the clutching of the pearls over the remark, the proposal?


If you think you look educated or humane, think again.


The Iraqi military has shelled Falluja General Hospital.

Not once or twice.

And we're not talking about the 2004 siege of Falluja.

We're talking about in the last twelve months.

It's taken place mulitple times.

All of you hypocrites  -- and, sadly, that is what you are -- who are hollering about how ridiculous Donald Trump is for calling for the bombing of Iraq's oil fields?

He's making a strange argument, but it's just words at this point.

If you really gave a damn about Iraq, you would have been screaming your head off when the Iraqi military was bombing Falluja General in the last 12 months.



In May of last year, Human Rights Watch noted:

Iraqi government forces battling armed groups in the western province of Anbar since January 2014 have repeatedly struck Fallujah General Hospital with mortar shells and other munitions, Human Rights Watch said today. The recurring strikes on the main hospital, including with direct fire weapons, strongly suggest that Iraqi forces have targeted it, which would constitute a serious violation of the laws of war.

Since early May, government forces have also dropped barrel bombs on residential neighborhoods of Fallujah and surrounding areas, part of an intensified campaign against armed opposition groups, including the Islamic State of Iraq and the Sham (ISIS). These indiscriminate attacks have caused civilian casualties and forced thousands of residents to flee.

“The government has been firing wildly into Fallujah’s residential neighborhoods for more than four months, and ramped up its attacks in May,” said Fred Abrahams, special adviser at Human Rights Watch. “This reckless disregard for civilians is deadly for people caught between government forces and opposition groups.”



Hairy fur ball Jon Stewart didn't give a damn about that.

That's why he's not news, why he has never been news.

What he's become is a bully and a bore.

The bombing of Falluja General?

A War Crime.

It's not a theoretical being floated by Donald Trump.

The Iraqi military targeting civilians in Falluja?

Also a War Crime.

Today, the United Nations released "Report on the Protection of Civilians in the Armed Conflict in Iraq" which notes of the attacks by the Iraqi government on civilians and civilian targets such as hospitals:




According to applicable rules of international humanitarian law, civilian infrastructure and property is protected from attack unless and only for such time as it is used by a party to the conflict for military objectives . UNAMI/OHCHR has nonetheless continued to receive reports of Government-associated forces apparently deliberately destroying civilian infrastructure or failing to take adequate precautions in the planning and execution of their operations. Incident reports have increased in tandem with the reclaiming of territory from ISIL control




July 5th, Al Jazeera reported:


At least 73 people have been killed in the the western Iraqi cities of Ramadi and Fallujah, as the Iraqi government stepped up air strikes and artillery fire against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) armed group, sources told Al Jazeera. 
An air strike on a sports field in Ramadi shortly after midnight on Sunday killed at least 50 people and left more than 30 people injured. At least 23 people were killed and around 40 wounded after shelling north of Fallujah. 


And from Saturday's snapshot:

Meanwhile the Iraqi military continues its year and a half long bombing of civilians and civilian homes in Falluja.  Amre Sarhan (Iraqi News) reports a medical source told them that Saturday "Fallujah General Hospital received the bodies of 25 people, including three children and four women, and 23 wounded, including five women and six children, as victims after their homes were subjected to mortar fire in different areas of Fallujah."  In addition, Iraqi Spring MC reports that the Iraqi military bombed civilian areas of Ramadi today.



You may think Donald Trump's idea is crazy (I do).

But it's an idea.

It's not been implemented.

For 16 months, the civilians of Falluja have been under attack.  The attacks have been carried out by the Iraqi military.

This isn't an idea floated by Donald Trump, it's actual War Crimes.

And apparently it doesn't matter.

To those who want to whine about Donald Trump's proposal while ignoring War Crimes?

How are you any better than Bully Boy Bush and others who focused on the oil in Iraq while ignoring the people?

Answer: You're not.


Today, Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi staged his latest attempt at taking (a part of) Anbar Province away from the Islamic State.  As Sinan Salaheddin (AP) observes:


This is not the first time the Iraqi government has announced an operation to retake Anbar — where several key towns, including the provincial capital Ramadi, remain under IS control. In May, authorities announced an operation to retake Ramadi, but there has not been any major progress on the ground since then.



Dominic Evans (Reuters) explains, "The sprawling Sunni Muslim province extends hundreds of kilometers west of Baghdad. Many of the towns and cities that line the banks of the Euphrates, snaking down from the Syrian border, are Islamic State strongholds.Islamic State's capture of Ramadi two months ago marked the biggest defeat for the Baghdad government since the militants swept through the north of the country last June and declared a caliphate in parts of Syria and Iraq straddling the border."

AP has also noted that the announcement was made on Iraqi TV by Yahya Rasool who is the spokesperson for the Joint Operations Command but that he failed to "clarify whether the U.S.-led international coalition is taking part, mentioning only government forces and allied Shiite and Sunni paramilitary troops."  Failed to clarify or failed to credit?


Al Jazeera's Imran Khan offered:

We are hearing the province will be surrounded on three sides going up to the border with Syria. They have announced operations like this one in the past particularly in Ramadi when it was taken by ISIL forces in mid-May. And that's a battle that's still ongoing. It is likely that this operation will concentrate on the second city in Anbar province, Fallujah, and move further west. While this is going on, we have also heard coalition airstrikes have hit an ISIL media and radio station in Anbar province.



What are they fighting for in Iraq?

Freedom?

Or the ability to carry out their own killings?

Mitchell Prothero (McClatchy Newspapers) reports:


Iraqi officials have been candid that the brunt of the fighting about to engulf the city will be borne by an umbrella group of Shiite militia groups formed under the supervision of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, the elite of Shiite Iran. That’s raised dire concerns from American advisers that these sectarian groups – overtly hostile to both Americans and Sunni Muslims – will break the already deeply frayed relationship between the Shiite government in Baghdad and the Sunni tribes that dominate the large swaths of Iraq currently under the Islamic State’s control.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/world/article27167848.html#storylink=cpy
The government claims that Sunni tribal fighters and local policemen from Anbar will join the militia-led assault. But many remain skeptical that Sunnis have joined in sufficient numbers to avoid the impression of a Shiite pogrom against Sunnis in Fallujah.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/world/article27167848.html#storylink=cpy





At the US State Dept press briefing today, spokesperson John Kirby spun wildly.


QUESTION: Slightly Iran-related. In relation to Fallujah, wondering if the United States detects any evidence of Iranian involvement or direction of Shiite militia trying to take back Fallujah?


MR KIRBY: I would point you to the Iraqi Government – this is an Iraqi-led operation – to speak to the participation of these Popular Mobilization Forces and certainly Tehran for the degree that they are or are not facilitating. I do think it’s important to remember a couple of things. This is an Iraqi-led operation, as it should be. And so we’re going to let them speak to the progress of it. And then on the Popular Mobilization Forces, and I mentioned this a week or so ago but I think it bears repeating: About 80 percent of these Popular Mobilization Forces, or Shia militia as they are otherwise known, are not at all connected to Tehran or the Iranian regime. They’re Iraqi citizens proud of their country and wanting to chip in and fight. And what we’ve said from the very beginning is that all the forces arrayed on the ground against ISIL in Iraq need to be under the command and control of the Iraqi Government. And that’s what we’ve seen with the vast majority of these Shia militiamen.

So I think it’s just important to keep a little context in here. When we talk about Shia militia fighting here or fighting there, there’s this automatic sort of connection drawn to Tehran, and that’s just not the case mathematically.




The assault on Anbar comes as the United Nations News Centre reports:


The ongoing conflict in Iraq continues to exact a “terrible” and deadly toll on the country’s civilians, particularly in the areas still under control by the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), according to a new report released today by the United Nations.
The report – a joint effort compiled by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the UN Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) – notes that the situation facing civilians in ISIL-controlled territory remains dire with many of those perceived to be opposed to the extremist group’s ideology being murdered, often in “grim public spectacles.”
Members of ethnic and religious communities, for instance, continue to be persecuted with as many as 3,500 members of the Yezidi community remaining under ISIL captivity enduring physical and sexual violence.
Others, meanwhile, are apparently being persecuted based on their perceived sexual orientation. On 8 March, the report says, ISIL beheaded two individuals accused of homosexuality and a third for blasphemy in the Bab al-Toob area of Mosul.
[. . .]
Although the report widely focuses on the crimes perpetrated by ISIL extremists, it also documents violations committed by the Iraqi Security Forces and affiliated forces, including indiscriminate airstrikes and shelling as well as actions of reprisal against civilians. 



Meanwhile Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) counts 90 violent deaths across Iraq today.


Her count comes as the UN announced 15,000 deaths in the last 18 months.







  • CHPSRE: RT KenRoth: Iraq civilian toll in past 18 months: 15,000 dead, 30,000 injured--UN report. …
































  • Haider eyes Anbar

    Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi is working hard to pimp his latest attempt at taking (a part of) Anbar Province away from the Islamic State as something new.

    If only the press would play along.

    Instead, Sinan Salaheddin (AP) observes:

    This is not the first time the Iraqi government has announced an operation to retake Anbar — where several key towns, including the provincial capital Ramadi, remain under IS control. In May, authorities announced an operation to retake Ramadi, but there has not been any major progress on the ground since then.



    Arabic social media is noting that Haider's condemning the use of child soldiers . . . while giving money to a Shi'ite militia that is using them.




    New content at Third:







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


    Sunday, July 12, 2015

    Hejira

    How I hate the stupid.

    I really, really hate the stupid.

    I don't mean your average dumb person.

    I mean the stupid among the press.

    Armed with a position they never really earned and too stupid to have gotten a real degree in anything, these glorified general studies majors do so much damage while convinced they've done some actual work.

    They're hacks who destroy the world with every lie they retell as they type away under the mistaken pretense that they're (a) educated and (b) informed.

    They're idiots -- that's all they are.

    And they do so much damage.

    I'm reminded of that with the latest garbage the Christian Science Monitor's published.


    Gretel Kauffman's the idiot in question and click here for what only a fool would call 'reporting.'

    There are War Resisters in Canada.

    We've gone over this before.

    And we've corrected the record before and we've slapped around the stooges who can't get it right.

    But here comes Gretel.

    She types:

    This cooler welcome is due in part to the fact that these resisters are deserters "who volunteer to serve in the armed forces of a democratic country and simply change their mind to desert," as opposed to the Vietnam draft dodgers, who never chose to be involved with the military, immigration minister Jason Kenney explained in 2009. "And that’s fine, that’s the decision [the deserters] have made, but they are not refugees.”



    Did Jason Kenney say that?

    Jason Kenney knows two things.



    1) How to stick his finger up his ass.

    2) How to sniff it after.



    That's about all Jason Kenney has ever known.

    "Draft dodgers" and "deserters."

    Canada took in both during Vietnam.

    Both were awarded asylum.

    We've gone over this and over this.

    A "draft dogers" was someone who refused to be inducted.

    A "deserter" was someone who was inducted and then self-checked out.

    Canada took in both.

    I'm sorry that a little piece of s**t like Gretal -- what can we expect with that name anyway, certainly not brave journalism -- can't do the work required to cover the topic.

    I'm sorry that she thinks quoting from NY Mag is the height of journalism.

    I'm sorry that she thinks being a stooge who refuses to do the basic fact check necessary qualifies as journalism.

    But she's found the right post.

    Only at the Christian Science Monitor could a two-bit whore like Gretal survive.

    What was the last big lie they pimped?

    I think it was when we had to slap the little liars around for their editorial about how Vietnam veterans were physically spat on.

    Remember that lie?

    It's one lie after another from this rag that has strayed so far from the roots of its creator.

    When this lie about Canada only taking "draft dodgers" first started to get popular early in the war, I spoke with several "deserters" who live in Canada and I said, "It would really help today's War Resisters, if you would come out publicly."

    And two did.

    They stepped forward, they gave interviews and the lie about "draft dodgers" only subsided.

    But it only takes one cheap whore to start the lie back up.

    Gretal gave herself a whore's bath, sat down at her laptop and decided to spread the journalistic equivalent of a venereal disease.

    Thanks, Gretal.

    Maybe next time, you can get your lazy ass into the Ford archives to get actual numbers of US "draft dodgers" and "deserters" who used President Gerald Ford's clemency program to return to the US from Canada?

    I can find those numbers in a snap.

    Here they are lazy ass Gretal: 736 and 5,555.

    Yeah, Gretal, there were more deserters than draft dodgers in Canada using the Ford program.

    But I guess you'd have to get off your back and sit upright to do some actual work.

    Here's another question, Gretal, you are aware of the US lesbian war resister who went to Canada in the last decade and did get refugee status, aren't you?

    Oh, no, you're not because she's not in your story.

    Your story is propaganda and lies because you're the laziest whore in the world.

    You've done nothing to help people in need but you have repeated a lie, a falsehood, by Jason Kenney who has done everything to prevent War Resisters from being granted asylum today.

    You should be ashamed of yourself.

    Your colleagues should be embarrassed to work with you.

    Shame isn't enough when your lazy, whorish ways hurt people.

    And that's all you've done, Gretal.

    You've hurt people with your whoring.



    As the War Resisters Support Campaign notes:

    Although many Vietnam War resisters came to Canada due to the imposition of the draft, 10,000 of those Americans were volunteers. Many of the most outspoken opponents of the Vietnam War had signed up to serve but later realized that they did not wish to participate in an immoral war of aggression. At the time, Canada welcomed both draft dodgers and deserters (volunteers).


    When we were noting that we were also pointing out that no "deserter" was asked, "Well you were drafted, right?  You weren't? You signed up?  Well you can't stay in Canada!"




    There are so many lies told about War Resistance and Canada.  I'm glad the WRSC has created a page regarding the issue of "draft dodgers" and "deserters."

    But there are so still so many lies out there.


    And, yeah, let's go there, let's do it.

    For too long WRSC didn't tell the truth.  Maybe they didn't know it.

    And we'd have to do it here and you know who (the American non-military who fled to Canada and had her little piss panties online, you remember her, yeah, we all do) would take to her lousy blog to attack us for correcting the historical record.



    That included this from July 10, 2008 (and I'll note the end of the excerpt with "-----------------------"):

    Yeah, I saw the story. We're not linking. It's nonsense. It does explain a lot, though, doesn't it. Like how the 'movement' in Canada still struggles?

    It's a bunch of nonsense. The 'journalist' doesn't even grasp that war resisters who went to Canada during Vietnam included deserters and, no, not all of them were drafted into service.

    Whatever was supposed to have been accomplished with the article, nothing was. But in terms of the movement (or 'movement'), until everyone stops repeating this nonsense that Canada took in draft dodgers but not deserters, any real movement building suffers.

    The stupidity at this point is the biggest obstacle to building a war resistance movement in Canada. Note the following:


    Jeff Enger, a deserter from the Army and therefore excluded from the Presidential pardon, will be sworn in as a Canadian citizen next Friday, one of the many self-exiled American war resisters who "want to make our lives here." However, like other deserters, Mr. Egner would like to be able to travel freely in the country of his birth.
    The Presidential pardon covered nearly all draft evaders of the Vietnam War period. Mr. Carter postponed a decision on the men who entered but then deserted the armed forces.
    Jack Colhoun, a leader in the Toronto exile community, is one of those deserters who insist that they would fight in a "just war," or "if the United States were attacked," as Mr. Colhoun put it.
    The men interviewed, who represent a cross section of the estimated 20,000 to 25,000 American war resisters living in Canada, have in common a yearning for recognition by Americans at home that their actions were an acceptable exercise of principle "in the American tradition," as one said.
    "We don't expect to be congratulated or anything," said Mr. Egner, a law student at the University of Toronto, "but we believe we acted correctly."
    They also share a deep conviction that the deserters, as well as the draft evaders, should be pardoned.



    Robert Trumbull, "Pardon Brings Cautious Response From Some War Exiles in Canada," New York Times, January 23, 1977. Let's just stay with the Times because I pulled all their articles from that period out of the journals and put them in a folder.


    For Sidney and Ruth Schwarzmann of Nassau County, the war in Vietnam did not end when the last troops came home. Or when former President Gerald R. Ford declared his clemency program. Or when President Carter, on his first full day in office, signed a pardon for some Vietnam war resisters.
    The Schwarzmann's 31-year-old son, Victor, has been living in Canada since 1968, in what amounts to enforced exile, since he faces desertion charges if he returns to the United States. He left the Army after passing his physical, applying for conscientious objector status and being turned down.



    That's Paul Wilner's "After Vietnam, a War of Emotions," New York Times, April 3, 1977. In August 1976 when then candidate Jimmy Carter spoke to the American Legion in Seattle, what did he say? "I do not favor a blanket amnesty but for those who violated Selective Service laws, I intend to grant a blanket pardon." He's speaking of the draft. That's all he offered. If you doubt it, go to a real library and pull the rolls of film to look up January 22, 1977 when the Times ran "Evaders In Canada Call Action A Sham: Exclusion of Deserters Is a Source of Bitterness to Exiles Who Say Pardon Will Affect Only 2,000." The author is again Robert Trumbull. Second paragraph in the article:



    Jack Colhoun, co-editor of a magazine for the self-exiled Americans in Canada who is a deserter from the Army, branded Mr. Carter's plan "a real sham, sinsiter, almost Nixonesque."
    [. . .]
    There is no official figure, since the Canadian Government omits reference to military status in its immigration procedures, but Mr. Colhoun's group estimates that the number is from 20,000 to 25,000 of whom 6,000 to 7,500 are believed to hae become Canadian citizens.
    After counting out the deserters and those who have taken Canadian citizenship, only about 2,000 of the exiles in Canada, or one of every 10 or 17, will benefit by Mr. Carter's pardon, Mr. Colhoun declared.


    Carter's decision was called out for leaving out deserters before Carter took office. In December 28, 1976, Tom Wicker was doing just that from the op-ed pages of the New York Times in "Clemency, It's Not So Simple."


    We could go on and on all night. Carter did not pardon deserters. He set out the framework he was using on the campaign trail in 1976. He refused to alter it. Gerald Ford did offer a clemency program for deserters and draft dodgers. You had to jump through hoops and most war resisters found it to be a joke, but he offered it. Carter focused on draft dodgers, not deserters. For those who like to play what-if, if Carter hadn't talked up his 'big plan,' Ford might have issued a pardon. He was considering it. It was reported. But Carter had been elected and was coming in with his 'big plan.' As Elizabeth Holtzman told PBS on the first day of Carter's administration, she hoped he would revist his decision. He didn't. There was that hope. A lot of people were hoping. But he didn't revisit it.


    Until the war resistance movement (in Canada and in the US) starts telling the truth about what happened, it's going to be a long muddle. You can find muddles and lies all over the internet, click here for one example, but that doesn't change reality. Canada's not being asked to do anything that they didn't do before. That's the talking point. Until that's established, the counter-argument will always be "There's no draft today!" There's no need for that back-and-forth. It's counter-productive and it wastes time. Canada welcomed draft dodgers and deserters during Vietnam. Today it's being asked to recognize deserters the same way it did during Vietnam. It's not being asked to do anything different or new.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



    And now, from June 12, 2009, we'll again address the differences between what Ford offered War Resisters and what Jimmy Carter offered:


    Because the lies from up north continue, we're apparently going to have to do a slow walk through.   David Postman (Seattle Times) outlined what Gerald Ford offered to war resisters: "a limited clemency for Vietnam draft resisters and military deserters."   Here's Gerald Ford speaking in September of 1974 (and link has text and audio):
     
    In my first week as President, I asked the Attorney General and the Secretary of Defense to report to me, after consultation with other Governmental officials and private citizens concerned, on the status of those young Americans who have been convicted, charged, investigated, or are still being sought as draft evaders or military deserters.        
    On August 19, at the national convention of Veterans of Foreign Wars in the city of Chicago, I announced my intention to give these young people a chance to earn their return to the mainstream of American society so that they can, if they choose, contribute, even though belatedly, to the building and the betterment of our country and the world.
     
     
    That's Ford and his jump through hoops program which a study by the New York Times found, before Ford even left office, was being utitlized by very few of the over 50,000 who had self-checked out.  Now let's move to Jimmy Carter once he becomes president.   Here's how PBS's The NewsHour (then The MacNeil/Lehrer Report) reported Carter's program on January 21, 1977 (link has text, audio and video):
     
    Just a day after Jimmy Carter's inaguration, he followed through on a contentious campaign promise, granting a presidential pardon to those who had avoided the draft during the Vietnam war by either not registering or traveling abroad.  The pardon meant the government was giving up forever the right to prosecute what the administration said were hundreds of thousands of draft-dodgers. . . . Meanwhile, many in amnest groups say that Carter's pardon did too little.  They pointed out that the president did not include deserters -- those who served in the war and left before their tour was completed -- or soliders who received a less-than-honorable discharge.  Civilian protesters, selective service employees and those who initiated any act of violence also were not covered in the pardon.
     

    Use the link and you can read, listen or watch the roundtable which includes then US House Rep Elizabeth Holtzman who states, "I'm pleased that the pardon was issued, I'm pleased that it was done on the first day and I'm pleased that President Carter kept a commitment that he made very clear to the American people.  I would have liked to have seen it broader, I would like to have seen it extended to some of the people who are clearly not covered and whose families will continue to be separatedf rom them . . . but I don't think President Carter has closed the door on this category of people."  I like Liz and I've known her for years but it was this b.s. attitude of praising Jimmy instead of pressuring him that allowed him to never revist the issue again.  He never did another thing and its appalling that a magazine called "Newsweek" which wants $5.95 an issue for their 'factual' reporting can't get their damn facts straight.  (Hint to other reporters, stop believing the lies you hear up north.  It is your job to fact check statements if you present them in your articles.)  Jimmy Carter did not offer an "unconditional pardon" to deserters.  He offered nothing to deserters and just because an old man in Canada (a deserter) told you that Carter offered something doesn't make it true.  It's also appalling because Newsweek covered some of this in real time so the magazine (wrongly) fabled for its fact checking should have caught these lies before they made it into print. 

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    So there you have it.

    The next time a lazy whore like Gretal wants to 'report' on the topic, she or he can review the above -- many have links -- and pull up the real time coverage to avoid lying or quoting liars like Jason Kenney.



    For the record, it's the spring of 1969 when Canada, under Pierre Trudeau, officially decides to stop turning deserters over to the US government.

    That's a reality that no one wants to talk about.

    We may after Canada holds their elections.

    For now the fable of Pierre can stand because it puts pressure on his son.


    Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) counts 203 violent deaths across Iraq today.


    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] 4497.


  •  






  • Non-community members are asking where Isaiah's comics are?


    They're in the newsletters.

    They aren't here.

    He's covering Barack and Iran and doing a hilarious job.

    But he's elected not to post them here because if the deal goes under he doesn't want the fall out or the blame.

    Hopefully, the deal will be over -- one way or another -- this week.

    But as community members know, Isaiah's being skewering it repeatedly in all four (weekly) community newsletters.



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


    xxx