BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE
IN A RARE WHITE HOUSE INTERVIEW, ONLY THE 999TH THIS WEEK ALONE, CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O AND MISMATCH MICHELLE OBAMA SAT DOWN WITH THESE REPORTERS.
AP REPORTS "HOSPITALS, ESPECIALLY THOSE WITH MANY POOR PATIENTS, SAY' YOUR 'PROPOSED CUTS ARE UNFAIR AND WILL HARM THE SICK AND ELDERLY." HOW DO YOU RESPOND?
MICHELLE: SCREW 'EM. THAT'S WHAT WE DID WHEN I WAS ON THE BOARD IN CHICAGO. IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD TREATMENT, YOU SHOULDN'T GET SICK.
BARACK: HEY, DO YOU HAVE CAMERAS WITH YOU? I CAN TAKE OFF MY SHIRT AND WE CAN DO A PHOTO SHOOT IF YOU HAVE A CAMERA.
YOUR DECISION TO SUPPORT DON'T ASK DON'T TELL HAS OUTRAGED MANY OF YOUR FORMER SUPPORTERS. WHAT HAPPENED TO YOUR CLAIM THAT YOU WERE A FIERCE ADVOCATE FOR GAYS AND LESBIANS?
MICHELLE: SCREW 'EM. WHO NEEDS 'EM. HEY WHEN OUR MENTOR JEREMIAH WRIGHT WENT ON PBS, WENT ON BILL MOYERS, AND LAID IT OUT, TOLD YOU HOW HE PREACED AND WHAT WE BELIEVED, NOT 1 PERSON MADE A NOISE. [NOTE, AVA AND C.I. CALLED IT OUT.] HE COMPARED SODOMY TO CRIMES LIKE SLAVERY AND LYNCHING. THAT'S WHAT WE LISTENED TO, THAT'S WHAT WE SAID "AMEN!" TOO. THAT IS WHAT WE BELIEVE.
BARACK: I COULD TAKE OFF MY SHIRT. THAT MIGHT CALL THEM GAYS DOWN. AND I COULD GET SOME ICE FROM THE FREEZER AND MAKE MY NIPS POINTY. I BET THEY'D LIKE THAT.
SINCE YOU BROUGHT HIM UP, YOUR MENTOR JEREMIAH WRIGHT'S BACK IN THE NEWS FOR HIS LATEST BIT OF HATE SPEECH, HIS ATTACK ON "THEM JEWS." ANY THOUGHTS ON THAT?
MICHELLE: BOTHER JEREMIAH'S NOT SAYING ANYTHING THAT'S NOT TRUE. HE KNOWS IT, I KNOW IT AND, IF YOU'RE HONEST, YOU KNOW IT TOO.
BARACK: SOMETIMES, FOR THE PHOTOS, I TWIST MY NIPPLES A LITTLE BEFORE HAND TO MAKE THEM REALLY STICK OUT.
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
Starting with Newsweek. Comedian Stephen Colbert took his Comedy Central show to Iraq and, as a tie-in, was the guest editor of Newsweek for the issue on sale now (with his photo on the cover). For four pages you get more lies from Fareed Zakaria, these are titled "Victory In Iraq." Liar Fareed wants you to know "the democratic ideal is still within reach." Oh really? How do you define "democratic ideal," you damn liar? Two centuries ago, if you lied in the public square the way Fareed has repeatedly, you would have found yourself whipped in the public square and maybe for pundits who put the lives of others at risk we should bring that policy back. Here's reality that liars like Fareed can never tell you about:
We are writing to urge you to call upon the government of Iraq to prevent the persecution of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people, and to protect the right of all Iraqi citizens to be free from all forms of cruel,inhumane or degrading punishment.
Deeply disturbing reports are enamating from Iraq with regard to the torture, beating and killing of LGBT people in that country. The increasing violence is being led by religious zealots who are targeting these individuals simply because of their sexual orientation. This year alone, 63 people have been tortured or killed as a result of religious decrees against gay citizens. A prominent Iraqi human rights activists has reported that Iraqi militia have deployed painful and degrading forms of torture and punishment against homesexuals that must be stopped.
The United States is spending trillions of dollars to fight a war that is based on bringing freedom and democracy to the Iraqi people. These unspeakable actions of violence on Iraqi citizens are in direct violation of our purpose for being in that country and of the stated policy of non-discrimination of the new administration.
Local police in Iraq have issued a statement that "the extra-judicial killing of any citizen is a crime punishable by law. No one has the right to become a substitute for judicial authorities or executive authorities, and if there are complaints against individuals, there is law and there are police and there are government agencies. No group or class has the authority to punish people instead of the state." The violence occuring against LGBT Iraqis is in direct contradiction to this statement.
As one of the signatories to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the Iraqi government has an obligation to protect the right to life (Article 6) and the right of all its citizens "to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" (Article 7). Current actions belie this obligation.
To protect the lives of LGBT Iraqis, we urge you to please take immediate action to stop the violence. We believe that a strong public condemnation of these actions must come from you and our other national leaders, along with the necessary pressure on the Iraqi government to protect the life and liberty of all its citizens.
The [PDF format warning] letter is signed by California state legislatures Mark Leno, Tom Ammiano, Christine Keho, John A. Perez, Jim Beall Jr., Julia Brownley, Sandre R. Swanson, Tom Torlakson, Marty Block, Mariko Yamada, Pedro Nava, ANthony Portantino, Jerry Hill, Hector de la Torre, Mike Feuer, Felipe Fuentes, Cathleen Galgiani, Curren D. Price Jr., Norma J. Torres, Jospeh S. Simitian, Elaine Alquist, Alan Lowenthal, Leland Yee, Gilbert Cedillo, Jenny Oropeza, Gloria Romero, Gloria Negrete McLeod, Lou Correa, Loni Hancock, Lois Wolk, Patricia Wiggins, Ellen Corbett, Carol Liu, Fran Pavley, Bonnie Lowenthal, William W. Monning, Isadore Hall III, Mary Salas, Mike Davis, Paul Fong, Warren T. Furutani, Jared Huffman, Bob Blumenfield, Alex Padilla and Paul Krekorian. The letter was sent this month to US President Barack Obama, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and US Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein.
The issue has been reported on by the Denver Post, the New York Times, the BBC, ABC and many other outlets. Newsweek has NEVER reported on it. Newsweek has never acknowledged the attacks and assaults on Iraq's LGBT community. And that falls on Fareed who decides what makes it into non-guest editorial issues and what doesn't. Fareed doesn't want to touch the subject due to his own apparent homosexual panic. As SourceWatch notes, in October of 2006, War Hawk and Cheerleader Fareed was finally walking away from the illegal war declaring that the puppet government in Iraq "has failed" and calling the US venture/war crime a failure as well. He's back to selling the illegal war all over again. The Henry Kissinger wannabe infamously said as the illegal war on Iraq began, "The place is so dysfunctional any stirring of the pot is good. America's involvement in the region is for the good." Again, a few centuries back, he would have been flogged in the town square. These days he just feeds his own vanity which is how he ends up with an attention getting, four page spread which leads off the news section of the magazine. Vanity, thy name is Fareed.
On a better (and actual news) note, Gretel C. Kovach contributes "Canada's New Leaf" which zooms in on Kimberly Rivera, the Dallas - Fort Worth native and Iraq War veteran who self-checked out and took her family to Canada becoming, in February 2007, the first female Iraq War veteran to publicly seek asylum in Canada. Kovach notes Kimberly next appears before a Canadian court in July:
Now 26, Rivera has more problems than ever. Her mother hasn't spoken to her since she fled to Canada, although Rivera misses her terribly. And the Canadian government keeps trying to send her home to face desertion charges. She might end up in a military prison -- but says she has no regrets about her broken commitment to the service of her country. "At least I can say I never killed anyone, ever," she says. "I think that's a little more honorable."
Kovach demonstrates that Fareed doesn't know how to edit worth s**t. Jimmy Carter, as president, did not pardon deserters. He pardoned draft dodgers and only draft dodgers. He did that in the first month of his administration and there was hope among some (such as US House Rep Elizabeth Holtzman) that he would revist the subject but he never did. Before Jimmy Carter, President Gerald Ford offered a conditional amnesty for deserters and draft dodgers which required that they jump through hoops for a considerable amount of time and may or may not end up with amenesty. Very few attempted Ford's program. Near the end of Ford's presidency -- in November and December -- he considered proposing a pardon for draft dodgers and/or deserters, however, he was convinced (as were columnists at the New York Times) that Jimmy Carter would do this once sworn in. They were mistaken and only had to hear Carter's speech to veterans while campaigning for the presidency where he made clear that, if elected, he would pardon draft dodgers but not deserters. (Carter was booed during this speech.) We've covered this before and it's all public record. The inability of Newsweek and their fact checkers to get the story straight goes a long way towards explaining why all the whining about the death of Big Media is so much blah blah blah b.s. If you can't get damn facts right, you have no business charging anyone even a penny. I'm blaming the editors because I know where Gretel C. Kovach was fed the lies, the same place the lies are always fed up north. And, yeah, there little attacks on this site stemmed from the fact that we wouldn't let them lie in public without correcting the record. A July 10, 2008 entry quoted Robert Trumbull, "Pardon Brings Cautious Response From Some War Exiles in Canada," New York Times, January 23, 1977:
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 deseters 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 rerpesent 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.
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. Kovach is of the opinion (it's a popular one these days -- that doesn't mean it's accurate) that the resisters will all be deported (the decision by Canada's House to pass ANOTHER non-binding resolution on the issue demonstrates that they really won't stand with war resisters) and notes:
All of which means that the United States must now figure out what to do with the deserters who have already begun trickling back. No one expects Obama to issue them a pardon. They'll have to plead their cases before the military command. Prosecution rates of deserters have increased during the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts from 2 percent at the start to about 10 percent now (the remainder receive administrative punishments, like the loss of a stripe).
It's a real shame that 'helpers' up north wanted to refight Vietnam because of their own issues instead of helping today's resisters. (They lost their planned statue right before the resisters began pouring in and that apparently hurt a lot of feelings.) For the record, there are groups in Canada (and I give money to them) that have been successful in getting citizenship for resisters. They don't make a spectacle of themselves because the issue isn't them or what they did or didn't do during Vietnam. The issue is and has always been how to ensure that a resister doesn't have to return to the US. (Elaine wrote about that group, which she also contributes to, in August of last year.) And resisters in Canada can forget about Barack, he will not help any returning deserters. He has taken the Carter position that if some had avoided the draft that was one thing but those who have left service will not be let off. No, we didn't have a draft but that is his position. It was the same position as Carter's which is boiled down as "It's not honorable to desert." [Carter referred to his actions as a pardon and not amnesty, he stated calling it amnesty would push the notion that their avoiding the draft was a 'correct' action and he did not believe it was.] Neither the assaults on Vietnam or Iraq were "honorable" and self-checking out was one of the bravest things anyone could do. Today's resisters deserve praise but they won't get from the White House and many believe they won't get it from the Canadian government.
Jessica Ramirez examines the effects of deployments on families in "Children Of Conflict" and finds that "roughly 890,000" parents have been deployed since September 11, 2001 and that "[t]he personal sacrifices of military kids can go unnoticed amid the grown-ups' struggles, in part because the scars they may sustain aren't necessarily the visible kind. But they are real and long-lasting, and they are not diminished by the fact that levels of violence in Iraq have dropped or that U.S. troops are no longer taking the lead on combat operations there." Christopher Anderson contributes a photo essay on Iraq and US forces in Iraq. Dan Ephron explores the War Porn Six Days in Fallujah. And an article by Daniel Stone, Eve Conant and John Barry on the effects at home for the returning:
Part of the trouble with long tours is the stress of holding together a normal life back home. "When you're gone o long, you put your whole life on hold," says Ohle. "You can't plan anything." That can be OK if you're single, but Ohle has been dating another Army intelligence officer who is in a different brigade. They met during a training exercise many years ago, and then in 2006 spent a few months together "downrange," as Ohle calls the combat zone. After that, the dating was long distance. They've been "together-together" only since February, and Ohle expects her boyfriend to deploy again sometimes this summer.
Whenever she comes back to the United States, Ohle faces culture shock similar to anyone who returns from a foreign land. She's overwhelmed by the food selection in the markets, and the number of people in the aisles. But unlike ordinary travelers, she also needs to keep her anger in check. "When someone with a shopping cart gets in your way, you can't just yell at them to get out of the way," she says. "Interacting with people requires a reset."
Most of the features are not available online. Fareed is but we don't link to trash. A West Point story is available online and we'll link to that. What does Colbert do in the issue besides 'guest editing'? He speaks to the readers on page five and contributes letters (the earliest from 1933) in his TV character complaining about Newsweek coverage over the ages (starting with 1933). He also does the Conventional Wisdom on page 15 and an essay on page 68.
Colbert's trip to Iraq resulted in Newsweek focusing on Iraq. It's not a great issue but it is attention to an ongoing illegal war and that is an accomplishment. I don't care for Colbert but I applaud him for that. It also got attention from the daily papers -- many of whom have also forgotten that the Iraq War continues to drag on. (James Rainey (Los Angeles Times) covers Colbert's trip to Iraq.) AP reports members of Mississippi's National Guard's 155th Brigade Combat Team is preparing for its second deployment to Iraq and notes the previous deployment resulted in 14 deaths. WKYC reports 161 Ohians are deploying to Iraq ("part of the Ohio Army National Guard's 1192nd Engineer Company"). But because it's so very difficult for people to pay attention to Iraq, let's all pretend the war is over. That's how it works, right?
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"The war dance"
"Nouri Saddam al-Maliki"
"I Hate The War"
"Quick entr in the Kitchen"
"Sibel Edmonds on SSP"
"The digitial divide"
"Brief"
"Vacationing Bully Boy"
"anne frank"
"lance selfa"
"Ty hears from Manly Woman "
"Jerry Wright's hatred"
"This and that and Bob Somerby"
"House Veterans Affairs Strategic Forces Subcommittee"
"Moyers and Winship on guns"
"Letterman"
"Fake mustache and eyebrows"
"Prisons, reading"
"Bob Somerby, Debra Sweet "
"Idiot of the week goes to . . . "
"Facebook"
"THIS JUST IN! BARRY & JERRY'S FOR BIGOTS EVERYWHERE!"
"Jeremiah Wrights crawls out from under his rock"
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Jeremiah Wrights crawls out from under his rock
BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE
HATE MERCHANT AND HOMOPHOBE JEREMIAH WRIGHT POPPED BACK IN THE NEWS WEDNESDAY MORNING SPEWING AT HATE AIMED AT "THEM JEWS." "THEM JEWS" WERE KEEPING WRIGHT AWAY FROM CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARACK OBAMA.
AFTER THE REMARKS WERE REPORTED, THERE WAS A SHOOTING AT THE HOLOCAUST MUSEUM. PROFESSIONAL APOLOGIST AMOS BROWN SHOWED UP ON THE SCENE INSISTING THAT PEOPLE WERE -- WHAT ELSE -- HEARING "SNIPPEST" AND NEEDED "TO CHILL OUT" BECAUSE THEY WERE MISSING THE CONTEXT.
THE CONTEXT OF "THEM JEWS."
SEEMS TO US WHEN H. ROSS PEROT SPOKE TO A GROUP OF AFRICAN-AMERICANS AND SAID "YOU PEOPLE," NO ONE WORRIED ABOUT SNIPPETS OR CONTEXT. IT WAS OBVIOUS WHAT PEROT MEANT THE SAME WAY IT'S OBVIOUS WHAT JERRY WRIGHT MEANS.
JERRY WRIGHT TOLD THE NEW YORK TIMES HE MEANT TO SAY "ZIONISTS" AND NOT "THEM JEWS" BUT JERRY WRIGHT TOLD THESE REPORTERS, "IT IS THEM JEWS KEEPING ME AND BARRY APART. WE'D HAVE OUR OWN ICE CREAM COMPANY BY NOW IF IT WEREN'T FOR THEM JEWS. WE'D CALL IT BARRY & JERRY'S AND WE'D DO ALL SORTS OF FUN FLAVORS LIKE HITLER ICE AND TWINKEE BINGE DEFENSE. ME AND BARRY WOULD BE SO CHILLING RIGHT NOW IF IT WEREN'T FOR THEM JEWS. G*D DAMN AMERICA AND G** DAMN THEM JEWS!"
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
"Our country has been in conflict for nearly eight years, service members and their families are bearing the brunt of multiple deployments, with no foreseeable end in sight. It is important that we uphold our responsibility to care for those who volunteer to serve our nationa in uniform and their families, given the sacrifices they are making in defense of our nation," declared US House Rep Susan Davis this morning as she brought the US House Armed Services Committee's Military Personnel Subcommittee to order. This was a mark up meeting -- mark up of HR 2647 -- and the legislation would create a 3.4% pay raise for the military (Barack has asked for a 2.9% increase) and it also includes monies for families such as spouse internships. Davis chairs the Subcommittee. Wilson is the Ranking Member and his big point was displeasure that the proposal was unable to address disabilities. Davis had noted that "we do not have the mandatory offsets to pay for this $5.1 billion proposal within the subcommittee. The Democratic leadership, however, is working with the committee and a resolution to the issue is expected." The mark was adopted by a unanmious vote. Mark ups are not hearings and we don't generally cover them but we're noting it for a few reasons including that Chair Davis has the nasty DC summer cold. (Ava, Wally and I have it as well as Kat noted last night.) Second, some of her statements need to be noted and juxtaposed with what's going on in Iraq.
* Our country has been in conflict for nearly eight years, service members and their families are bearing the brunt of multiple deployments, with no foreseeable end in sight. It is important that we uphold our responsibility to care for those who volunteer to serve our nationa in uniform and their families, given the sacrifices they are making in defense of our nation.
* This is the Year of the Military Family, as such, we have included a number of initiatives that are focused on military families. These include a pilot program for spouse overseas area and a requirement for the Secretary of Defense to study the appropriateness of the current housing standards. These are just a few of the provisions that we have included to support our military families.
Those are Davis' statements and you can also toss in US House Rep Ellen Tauscher's remarks in the House Armed Services' Strategic Forces Subcommittee mark up this afternoon when Chair Tauscher thanked the Ranking Member for his work on HR 2647, "We don't agree on everything of course but we agree on more than we disagree and you are a great partner, Mike [Turner]."
To attend the mark up hearings was to see members of Congress working together to address the concerns of the military and, with Davis' Subcommittee especially, to address the concerns of the military members and their families. For a brief moment, you could almost believe that the families might be treated with respect and compassion. For a moment.
Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) makes clear that whatever Congress does or does not do, military families will be spat upon by the US government. So that we're all on the same page and also to take care of correction, let's drop back to yesterday's snapshot:
"They freed them? The American military did? Somebody needs to answer for it." That's Danny Chism quoted by Qassim Abdul-Zahra and Robert H. Reid (AP) yesterday. We noted it in yesterday's snapshot and Danny Chism's son, the late Jonathan Bryan Chism, is in the news today. McClatchy Newspapers buries a major story by Richard Mauer entitled "Who was behind Karbala assualt, in which 5 Americans died." January 23, 2007 the Department of Defense announced that four US soldiers "died in Jan 20 in Karbala, Iraq, from wounds sustained when their patrol was ambushed while conducting dismounted operations." The four were identified as Jacob N. Fritz, Jonathan B. Chism, Shawn P. Falter and Johnathon M. Millican. Also killed in the attack was Brian S. Freeman. Bryan Chism was from Louisiana and WAFB reported January 31, 2007 that the military was "trying to cover up the details of an incident in Iraq," that the four "were actually abducted from a tightly-secured American compound by an insurgent commando team. The insurgents were driving American vehicles, wearing American uniforms and carrying American weapons. In fact, on eof the kidnappers is reported to have even had blonde hair." Over two years later, Richard Mauer has uncovered additional details. "The men inside were dressed in U.S. army camouflage and carried American weapons," he reports. "They knew enough English to bark simple commands and offer polite greetings. They knew exactly how the U.S. soldiers would defend the compound. They knew that the compound's most important room was the command and control center -- with its radio base stations -- and they knew that at 6 p.m., the soldiers in the room would be off guard and relaxing. They even knew that the two most senior American officers in Karbala would be in the room next door." Via a Freedom of Information request, McClatchy just obtained an investigative report by the military which was completed February 27th and which "put the onus for intelligence-gathering and ground support [in the attack] on Iraqi police, America's supposed ally. Not only were police negligent in surrendering their guard positions to the intruders without firing a shot or warning the Americans, the report says, but investigators found strong circumstantial evidence that police officials gave the attackers key intelligence and may have been complicit in allowing an advance force of attackers into the compound."
Now drop back to yesterday's news. The US military traded the Iraqi prisoner said to be responsible for the murders -- traded him for five British hostages. Laith al-Khazali was traded. Was freed. Which is why Danny Chism was asking, "They freed them? The American military did? Somebody needs to answer for it."
First the correction. Mauer's excellent report was published by the Fort Worth Star-Telegram on Tuesday; however, it originally ran in 2007. Thank you to a friend at McClatchy who caught that and pointed it out to me. My apologies. With the basics above, we have five US soldiers who were killed in Iraq. The military's own study finds that the Iraqi police assisted in the attacks on the US military. If you haven't read Mauer's report, just to summarize quickly, various civilian Iraqis who worked on the base, often until ten thirty at night, failed to show up the day of the attack. All the Iraqi police, except for two, skipped out as well. The two who showed up? They made a point to unlock the gate that the attackers would come through. This was planned and it wa splanned with the help of al-Maliki's forces. It was planned and it was carefully carried out.
The US military believes that Laith al-Kahali and his brother orchestrated the assault. Over the weekend -- with no notice to the families of the five US soldiers killed in the attack -- the US military released al-Kahali. Today Jane Arraf reports that Qais al-Khazali, the brother, is now expected to be released as well. An unnamed US official states, "This isn't about freeing the hostages" referring to the five British citizens held by the brothers' group for over two years now, "it's about getting Asa'ib al-Haq to stop its attacks."
I have no idea how that's going to play. In April of 2008, when The Davy Petraeus and Ryan Crocker Variety Hour played before various Congressional bodies, I would have thought there would be outrage over the 'strategy' Crocker and Petraeus spoke of and endorsed: Paying off Sahwa because that meant Sahwa wouldn't attack US troops or the equipment of US troops. Generally speaking, the appearance of strength doesn't come from forking over your lunch money to ensure you're not beat up on the playground. So maybe the above will again bother no one? But US soldiers were killed in an attack and the two thought responsible are being let out of prison, released to go free, and the US 'reasoning' is that "it's about getting Asa'ib al-Haq to stop its attacks"?
Okay, let's carry that 'logic' on out. I want Leonard Peltier to be free (I really do want him to be free). So the message the US is sending is that I should drop advocacy within the system and instead begin launching attacks on US sites? (I don't believe in violence, before anyone fears I'm ab out to storm the Anna Sui Store in Manhattan.) That is the message that's being sent. And it's probably not the message an occupying power wants to send. Anyone who wants a prisoner freed in Iraq now knows how: Start launching attacks on the US military.
This little stunt was always questionable. It went against every basic in international relations theory but, as a one-off move, it could have been defended. The White House chose not to defend it (and reporters chose not to press on the issue). But now, as they release the second prisoner, and as they insist that the release is to get the brothers' group to stop attacking the US military in Iraq, this is an embarrassment that puts every US service member in Iraq in jeopardy.
It also says that US service members in Iraq are nothing but canon fodder. The illegal war was based on lies and there's no doubt about that at this late date. But the message being sent now, by the current administration, is that US service members are canon fodder and will be used and their deaths will be forgotten. The message sent is that they don't matter. While the military ranks are trained not to leave one of their injured or fallen behind, up in the brass the decision's been made that their lives don't matter and if they die and their killers can blackmail the US with continued attacks, their deaths will be dishonored in a rush to make their killers happy.
It's disgusting. And, again, it puts every US service member in Iraq at risk. (It also sends a larger geo-political message which is why it's so appalling that the press has refused to go after this story. Long after Barack is out of the White House, these moves will follow the United States.) The message is clear: "We will send you to Iraq. We will expect you to fight till your death. If you die we will honor your sacrifice up until the point that we can sell you out for our own benefit." That is the message sent to US troops when 2 killers -- who carried out one of the most well planned assaults on US forces in Iraq -- are freed because, a US official states publicly, "it's about getting Asa'ib al-Haq to stop its attacks."
And don't argue, as some may try, that getting Asa'ib al-Haq to stop attacking the US military means the US military will be safer. (A) They're not because they're now targets for anyone who wants the US to come to the negotiating table. And (B) anyone who wanted to the US military to be safe would have begun a full and total withdrawal of US forces from Iraq.
Arraf quotes an unnamed US State Dept official declaring of the moves, "This is what will have to happen. We did the same thing with Moqtada Sadr and the same thing with the SOIs [Sons of Iraq]." No, it is not the same thing at all. "Sons Of Iraq" and "Awakening" are the same thing as Sahwa. We addressed this earlier this week and we'll note it again. "The United States doesn't negotiate with terrorists!" Of course they do. And they do it on a case-by-case basis and have always done so. The hard-line public stance is not, however, merely a face-saving device for whomever is president (it may or may not be that), it's also based on the belief that if it is known that the US negotiates with terrorists that puts every US citizen abroad at risk of being kidnapped in order to force the government of the United States to do as a group or organization wants it to.Sahwa are Sunnis who turned from resistance fighters (fighting all foreign forces in Iraq including the US) into allies because they were paid. And when that began happening, a number of people were outraged. Arianna Huffington was among the ones outraged and apparently didn't understand that for any war to end, all sides need to come to the table and begin negotiations.(That was a point Tom Hayden could make back before he became scared of his own shadow. In part because Laura Flanders attacked him, after he'd hung up the phone, on air for comments he'd made about who comes to the table and how. She viciously attacked him and then, realizing she'd gone way too far, she tried to blame it on her radio show's blog but none of the comments she made appeared on her show's blog.)Sahwa was willing to put down their arms (at least against the US) if paid. And they didn't propose that arrangement. The US military initiated that and it took approximately eight months of offers before there was any move from Sahwa in that direction.That's Sahwa. Asa'ib al-Haq is not a Sunni organization. It's a Shi'ite organization. Thought to be supported by some segment (government or otherwise) in Iran. Yes, there is humor to this considering that for years Michael Gordon preached war on Iran with the 'facts' that Iran was supporting Sunnis.That's only one difference.The other is that Sahwa wasn't holding anyone. By holding five hostages, Asa'ib al-Haq is different than Sahwa and whether or not the US should have released a prisoner or even had talks with Asa'ib al-Haq is a major issue and it's one that's going to remain long after Barack Obama leaves the White House.
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Journalists under assault in Iraq, yesterday's bombing"
"Some pretend to cover the Congressional song and dance, most ignore it"
"American Dad"
"Roger and 'Of Ice And Men'"
"'irregarding steve'"
"American Dad stem, stem, seed . . ."
"The do nothing Wartime Contracting Commission"
"Gloria Feldt, Bob Somerby, American Dad"
"William Blu, American Dad, Roger & Hayley"
"Deborah Vagins, World Can't Wait, American Dad"
"World Can't Wait, Kelley B. Vlahos, American Dad"
"Letterman the dirty old man"
"THIS JUST IN! LETTERMAN'S A PERV!"
HATE MERCHANT AND HOMOPHOBE JEREMIAH WRIGHT POPPED BACK IN THE NEWS WEDNESDAY MORNING SPEWING AT HATE AIMED AT "THEM JEWS." "THEM JEWS" WERE KEEPING WRIGHT AWAY FROM CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARACK OBAMA.
AFTER THE REMARKS WERE REPORTED, THERE WAS A SHOOTING AT THE HOLOCAUST MUSEUM. PROFESSIONAL APOLOGIST AMOS BROWN SHOWED UP ON THE SCENE INSISTING THAT PEOPLE WERE -- WHAT ELSE -- HEARING "SNIPPEST" AND NEEDED "TO CHILL OUT" BECAUSE THEY WERE MISSING THE CONTEXT.
THE CONTEXT OF "THEM JEWS."
SEEMS TO US WHEN H. ROSS PEROT SPOKE TO A GROUP OF AFRICAN-AMERICANS AND SAID "YOU PEOPLE," NO ONE WORRIED ABOUT SNIPPETS OR CONTEXT. IT WAS OBVIOUS WHAT PEROT MEANT THE SAME WAY IT'S OBVIOUS WHAT JERRY WRIGHT MEANS.
JERRY WRIGHT TOLD THE NEW YORK TIMES HE MEANT TO SAY "ZIONISTS" AND NOT "THEM JEWS" BUT JERRY WRIGHT TOLD THESE REPORTERS, "IT IS THEM JEWS KEEPING ME AND BARRY APART. WE'D HAVE OUR OWN ICE CREAM COMPANY BY NOW IF IT WEREN'T FOR THEM JEWS. WE'D CALL IT BARRY & JERRY'S AND WE'D DO ALL SORTS OF FUN FLAVORS LIKE HITLER ICE AND TWINKEE BINGE DEFENSE. ME AND BARRY WOULD BE SO CHILLING RIGHT NOW IF IT WEREN'T FOR THEM JEWS. G*D DAMN AMERICA AND G** DAMN THEM JEWS!"
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
"Our country has been in conflict for nearly eight years, service members and their families are bearing the brunt of multiple deployments, with no foreseeable end in sight. It is important that we uphold our responsibility to care for those who volunteer to serve our nationa in uniform and their families, given the sacrifices they are making in defense of our nation," declared US House Rep Susan Davis this morning as she brought the US House Armed Services Committee's Military Personnel Subcommittee to order. This was a mark up meeting -- mark up of HR 2647 -- and the legislation would create a 3.4% pay raise for the military (Barack has asked for a 2.9% increase) and it also includes monies for families such as spouse internships. Davis chairs the Subcommittee. Wilson is the Ranking Member and his big point was displeasure that the proposal was unable to address disabilities. Davis had noted that "we do not have the mandatory offsets to pay for this $5.1 billion proposal within the subcommittee. The Democratic leadership, however, is working with the committee and a resolution to the issue is expected." The mark was adopted by a unanmious vote. Mark ups are not hearings and we don't generally cover them but we're noting it for a few reasons including that Chair Davis has the nasty DC summer cold. (Ava, Wally and I have it as well as Kat noted last night.) Second, some of her statements need to be noted and juxtaposed with what's going on in Iraq.
* Our country has been in conflict for nearly eight years, service members and their families are bearing the brunt of multiple deployments, with no foreseeable end in sight. It is important that we uphold our responsibility to care for those who volunteer to serve our nationa in uniform and their families, given the sacrifices they are making in defense of our nation.
* This is the Year of the Military Family, as such, we have included a number of initiatives that are focused on military families. These include a pilot program for spouse overseas area and a requirement for the Secretary of Defense to study the appropriateness of the current housing standards. These are just a few of the provisions that we have included to support our military families.
Those are Davis' statements and you can also toss in US House Rep Ellen Tauscher's remarks in the House Armed Services' Strategic Forces Subcommittee mark up this afternoon when Chair Tauscher thanked the Ranking Member for his work on HR 2647, "We don't agree on everything of course but we agree on more than we disagree and you are a great partner, Mike [Turner]."
To attend the mark up hearings was to see members of Congress working together to address the concerns of the military and, with Davis' Subcommittee especially, to address the concerns of the military members and their families. For a brief moment, you could almost believe that the families might be treated with respect and compassion. For a moment.
Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) makes clear that whatever Congress does or does not do, military families will be spat upon by the US government. So that we're all on the same page and also to take care of correction, let's drop back to yesterday's snapshot:
"They freed them? The American military did? Somebody needs to answer for it." That's Danny Chism quoted by Qassim Abdul-Zahra and Robert H. Reid (AP) yesterday. We noted it in yesterday's snapshot and Danny Chism's son, the late Jonathan Bryan Chism, is in the news today. McClatchy Newspapers buries a major story by Richard Mauer entitled "Who was behind Karbala assualt, in which 5 Americans died." January 23, 2007 the Department of Defense announced that four US soldiers "died in Jan 20 in Karbala, Iraq, from wounds sustained when their patrol was ambushed while conducting dismounted operations." The four were identified as Jacob N. Fritz, Jonathan B. Chism, Shawn P. Falter and Johnathon M. Millican. Also killed in the attack was Brian S. Freeman. Bryan Chism was from Louisiana and WAFB reported January 31, 2007 that the military was "trying to cover up the details of an incident in Iraq," that the four "were actually abducted from a tightly-secured American compound by an insurgent commando team. The insurgents were driving American vehicles, wearing American uniforms and carrying American weapons. In fact, on eof the kidnappers is reported to have even had blonde hair." Over two years later, Richard Mauer has uncovered additional details. "The men inside were dressed in U.S. army camouflage and carried American weapons," he reports. "They knew enough English to bark simple commands and offer polite greetings. They knew exactly how the U.S. soldiers would defend the compound. They knew that the compound's most important room was the command and control center -- with its radio base stations -- and they knew that at 6 p.m., the soldiers in the room would be off guard and relaxing. They even knew that the two most senior American officers in Karbala would be in the room next door." Via a Freedom of Information request, McClatchy just obtained an investigative report by the military which was completed February 27th and which "put the onus for intelligence-gathering and ground support [in the attack] on Iraqi police, America's supposed ally. Not only were police negligent in surrendering their guard positions to the intruders without firing a shot or warning the Americans, the report says, but investigators found strong circumstantial evidence that police officials gave the attackers key intelligence and may have been complicit in allowing an advance force of attackers into the compound."
Now drop back to yesterday's news. The US military traded the Iraqi prisoner said to be responsible for the murders -- traded him for five British hostages. Laith al-Khazali was traded. Was freed. Which is why Danny Chism was asking, "They freed them? The American military did? Somebody needs to answer for it."
First the correction. Mauer's excellent report was published by the Fort Worth Star-Telegram on Tuesday; however, it originally ran in 2007. Thank you to a friend at McClatchy who caught that and pointed it out to me. My apologies. With the basics above, we have five US soldiers who were killed in Iraq. The military's own study finds that the Iraqi police assisted in the attacks on the US military. If you haven't read Mauer's report, just to summarize quickly, various civilian Iraqis who worked on the base, often until ten thirty at night, failed to show up the day of the attack. All the Iraqi police, except for two, skipped out as well. The two who showed up? They made a point to unlock the gate that the attackers would come through. This was planned and it wa splanned with the help of al-Maliki's forces. It was planned and it was carefully carried out.
The US military believes that Laith al-Kahali and his brother orchestrated the assault. Over the weekend -- with no notice to the families of the five US soldiers killed in the attack -- the US military released al-Kahali. Today Jane Arraf reports that Qais al-Khazali, the brother, is now expected to be released as well. An unnamed US official states, "This isn't about freeing the hostages" referring to the five British citizens held by the brothers' group for over two years now, "it's about getting Asa'ib al-Haq to stop its attacks."
I have no idea how that's going to play. In April of 2008, when The Davy Petraeus and Ryan Crocker Variety Hour played before various Congressional bodies, I would have thought there would be outrage over the 'strategy' Crocker and Petraeus spoke of and endorsed: Paying off Sahwa because that meant Sahwa wouldn't attack US troops or the equipment of US troops. Generally speaking, the appearance of strength doesn't come from forking over your lunch money to ensure you're not beat up on the playground. So maybe the above will again bother no one? But US soldiers were killed in an attack and the two thought responsible are being let out of prison, released to go free, and the US 'reasoning' is that "it's about getting Asa'ib al-Haq to stop its attacks"?
Okay, let's carry that 'logic' on out. I want Leonard Peltier to be free (I really do want him to be free). So the message the US is sending is that I should drop advocacy within the system and instead begin launching attacks on US sites? (I don't believe in violence, before anyone fears I'm ab out to storm the Anna Sui Store in Manhattan.) That is the message that's being sent. And it's probably not the message an occupying power wants to send. Anyone who wants a prisoner freed in Iraq now knows how: Start launching attacks on the US military.
This little stunt was always questionable. It went against every basic in international relations theory but, as a one-off move, it could have been defended. The White House chose not to defend it (and reporters chose not to press on the issue). But now, as they release the second prisoner, and as they insist that the release is to get the brothers' group to stop attacking the US military in Iraq, this is an embarrassment that puts every US service member in Iraq in jeopardy.
It also says that US service members in Iraq are nothing but canon fodder. The illegal war was based on lies and there's no doubt about that at this late date. But the message being sent now, by the current administration, is that US service members are canon fodder and will be used and their deaths will be forgotten. The message sent is that they don't matter. While the military ranks are trained not to leave one of their injured or fallen behind, up in the brass the decision's been made that their lives don't matter and if they die and their killers can blackmail the US with continued attacks, their deaths will be dishonored in a rush to make their killers happy.
It's disgusting. And, again, it puts every US service member in Iraq at risk. (It also sends a larger geo-political message which is why it's so appalling that the press has refused to go after this story. Long after Barack is out of the White House, these moves will follow the United States.) The message is clear: "We will send you to Iraq. We will expect you to fight till your death. If you die we will honor your sacrifice up until the point that we can sell you out for our own benefit." That is the message sent to US troops when 2 killers -- who carried out one of the most well planned assaults on US forces in Iraq -- are freed because, a US official states publicly, "it's about getting Asa'ib al-Haq to stop its attacks."
And don't argue, as some may try, that getting Asa'ib al-Haq to stop attacking the US military means the US military will be safer. (A) They're not because they're now targets for anyone who wants the US to come to the negotiating table. And (B) anyone who wanted to the US military to be safe would have begun a full and total withdrawal of US forces from Iraq.
Arraf quotes an unnamed US State Dept official declaring of the moves, "This is what will have to happen. We did the same thing with Moqtada Sadr and the same thing with the SOIs [Sons of Iraq]." No, it is not the same thing at all. "Sons Of Iraq" and "Awakening" are the same thing as Sahwa. We addressed this earlier this week and we'll note it again. "The United States doesn't negotiate with terrorists!" Of course they do. And they do it on a case-by-case basis and have always done so. The hard-line public stance is not, however, merely a face-saving device for whomever is president (it may or may not be that), it's also based on the belief that if it is known that the US negotiates with terrorists that puts every US citizen abroad at risk of being kidnapped in order to force the government of the United States to do as a group or organization wants it to.Sahwa are Sunnis who turned from resistance fighters (fighting all foreign forces in Iraq including the US) into allies because they were paid. And when that began happening, a number of people were outraged. Arianna Huffington was among the ones outraged and apparently didn't understand that for any war to end, all sides need to come to the table and begin negotiations.(That was a point Tom Hayden could make back before he became scared of his own shadow. In part because Laura Flanders attacked him, after he'd hung up the phone, on air for comments he'd made about who comes to the table and how. She viciously attacked him and then, realizing she'd gone way too far, she tried to blame it on her radio show's blog but none of the comments she made appeared on her show's blog.)Sahwa was willing to put down their arms (at least against the US) if paid. And they didn't propose that arrangement. The US military initiated that and it took approximately eight months of offers before there was any move from Sahwa in that direction.That's Sahwa. Asa'ib al-Haq is not a Sunni organization. It's a Shi'ite organization. Thought to be supported by some segment (government or otherwise) in Iran. Yes, there is humor to this considering that for years Michael Gordon preached war on Iran with the 'facts' that Iran was supporting Sunnis.That's only one difference.The other is that Sahwa wasn't holding anyone. By holding five hostages, Asa'ib al-Haq is different than Sahwa and whether or not the US should have released a prisoner or even had talks with Asa'ib al-Haq is a major issue and it's one that's going to remain long after Barack Obama leaves the White House.
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Journalists under assault in Iraq, yesterday's bombing"
"Some pretend to cover the Congressional song and dance, most ignore it"
"American Dad"
"Roger and 'Of Ice And Men'"
"'irregarding steve'"
"American Dad stem, stem, seed . . ."
"The do nothing Wartime Contracting Commission"
"Gloria Feldt, Bob Somerby, American Dad"
"William Blu, American Dad, Roger & Hayley"
"Deborah Vagins, World Can't Wait, American Dad"
"World Can't Wait, Kelley B. Vlahos, American Dad"
"Letterman the dirty old man"
"THIS JUST IN! LETTERMAN'S A PERV!"
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Letterman the dirty old man
BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE
DAVID LETTERMAN FLASHED HIS AGE AND LACK OF WIT THIS WEEK BY 'JOKING' ABOUT ALASKA GOVERNOR SARAH PALIN AND HER 14 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER WILLOW GOING TO THE YANKEE GAME AND WILLOW GETTING "KNOCKED UP" BY ALEX RODRIGUEZ IN THE 7TH INNING.
REALIZING HOW OLD, TIRED AND TRASHY HE CAME OFF, DAVID LETTERMAN TONIGHT ATTEMPTED TO INSIST HE MEANT BRISTOL, PALIN'S 18 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER.
A) BRISTOL DIDN'T GO TO NEW YORK WITH HER MOTHER. B) THE 'JOKE' IS REALLY OFFENSIVE AND HE'S APPARENTLY NOW CLAIMING WHAT HE MEANT TO SAY WAS: "PREGNANT ONCE, EASY FOREVER MORE!" C) THERE WAS NEVER ANY REASON FOR THE JOKE. WILLOR OR BRISTOL, THERE WAS NO REASON FOR THE JOKE. WILLOW'S A CHILD AND BRISTOL HAD A BABY OUTSIDE OF MARRIAGE. SO WHAT?
THESE REPORTERS ASKED DAVID LETTERMAN IF HE WAS SAYING ANY WOMAN WHO HAD A BABY WITHOUT BEING MARRIED WAS A WHORE AND ADVISED HIM TO REMEMBER HIS CHILD WAS BORN WITHOUT ANY WEDDING BAND. AT WHICH POINT THE OLD MAN SAID, "I JUST WANT TO BE FUNNY." WE SUGGESTED HE TRY THAT AND INFORMED HIM THAT AMERICA WOULD ENJOY IT IF HE COULD BE FUNNY AGAIN BUT THAT SHIP SEEMED TO SAIL BACK IN 1995.
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
Today the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan released [PDF format warning] "At What Cost? Contingency Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan Interim Report June 2009" which found:
** Neither the military nor the federal civilian acquisition workforces haveexpanded to keep pace with recent years' enormous growth in the number andvalue of contingency contracts. ** Contracting agencies must provide better and more timely training foremployees who manage contracts and oversee contractors' performance. Inparticular, members of the military assigned to perform on‐site performanceoversight as contracting officer's representatives often do not learn of theassignment until their unit arrives in theater, and then find insufficient time andInternet access to complete necessary training. ** Contract auditors are not employed effectively in contingency contracting. ** Contracting officials make ineffective use of contract withhold provisionsrecommended by their auditors, and many contract audit findings andrecommendations are not properly resolved. ** The government still lacks clear standards and policy on inherentlygovernmental functions. This shortcoming has immediate salience given thedecisions to use contractors in armed‐security and life‐support tasks for militaryunits.
Robert O'Harrow Jr. (Washington Post) observes of the report, "It's a sad reminder about just how bad the contracting system has been in recent years, and all the billions that have been wasted because of poor oversight, poor planning and plain old corruption." The report actually offers some blame as opposed to the usual pretend no one could have forseen the problems: "The Department of Defense has failed to provide enough staff to perform adequate contract oversight." US House Rep Stephen Lynch put it more bluntly today, "It's only happening because it's taxpayers' dollars." Exactly. The co-chairs of the Commission on Wartime Contracting, Michael Thibault and Chistopher Shays, appeared before the the US House Oversight and Government Reform's National Security Subcommittee and that's where Lynch made his remark. The co-chairs reviewed the report in their testimony and classified as an "immediate concern" the possibility that waste will take place as US forces draw down in Iraq as a result of lack of oversight and the handling and disposing of property. In Iraq, there is also a shortage of US government employees who posses the qualifications to monitor and supervise private security and this is on top of the fact that the 'security' is often ill trained and ignorant of the Rules for the Use of Force. US House Rep John F. Tierney chairs the committee. In his opening statements, he outlined potential problems (I'd say they were problems):
US House Rep John Tierney: It is also important that the Commission break new ground. There is no sense in creating an oversight entity that merely duplicates work that is on-going by Inspectors General or the Government Accountability Office. Congress already receives those reports. I look forward to hearing what the Commission is finding that we have not already heard about. In short, I expect our witnesses this morning to ensure us that our investment in their activities was a worthwhile decision. We in Congress --as the sponsors of the Commission -- need to hear about any challenges or hindrances the Commission faces in conducting its work. For example, I am concerned that the Commission will not be able to fulfill its mandate without a semi-permanent presence in theater. I would note that, according to the report, the Commission has only made two trips to date to Iraq and Afghanistan. I am also concerned that the current one year mandate of the Commission might allow responsible government officials and culpable contractors to wait it out. The Commission's charge is too important to suffer defeat at the hands of obstruction. Furthermore, I do not want to see a lack of subpoena power deter the Commission from going after recalcitrant parties.
Two trips? December '08 was the first trip according to Chris Shays testimony to the Subcommittee today. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee was just in Iraq last February (Feb. 26 through the first week of March). The Committee can send members there why can't the Commission? And why do their lengthy report seem to be a repeat of GAO reports? John Duncan pinned them down on the fact that they'd only visited three bases in Iraq. With no sense of awareness, let alone irony, Michael Thibault wanted to delcare that, "You have to spend the time in the country" to know what's going on in Iraq. Which leaves the Commission where?
Chair Tierney noted, "This Subcomittee stands ready to assist the Commission in this regard as appropriate." It's not as if the Commission is denied anything. But it really does appear to be a whitewash and an attempt to run out the clock. Jeff Flake, Ranking Member, would state in his opening remarks that "there's never too much oversight that can be done" and that may be true in theory but equally true is that the Comission was not set up to offer retreads of GAO reports. Tierney noted that the Committee points to suggestions that have not been enacted and pointed out that knowing why they weren't being implemented (legislation inaction, not enough hearings, etc) would be helpful. (Translation, Committee, that's your job.) Thibault noted there were 1200 plus recommendations and stated they do intend to trace each one, to start tracing each one. To start. Some day, I suppose. As The Mighty Mighty Bosstones once put it. Under questioning from Flake, Thibault admitted all the 1200 were from other bodies.
Along with the two co-chairs, Commission members Charles Tiefer and Grant S. Green also offered testimony on the first panel. Tierney had all the witnesses sworn in before any testimony was offered -- a detail many subcommittees and committees tend to skip (but shouldn't). Tiefer's response to the Subcommittee about wrapping things up as the US prepares to turn the lights off may go to the problems with the Commission. And it might help for someone to inform Tierney that the US will NOT be turning out the lights in Iraq when they leave (whenver that is) because Iraq is a country with its own population and Tiefer's remarks were as irritating as his deeply nasal voice.
"We're absolutely going to do that," said Tierney. About looking into contracts. They're going to do that. They're going to look into contracts. They're going to look into the recommendations and the status on each, they're going to . . . . What do they actually do? This wasn't a meeting to discuss projections, this was a hearing to discuss what they had done and what they'd learned and the reality was that they really had not done a great deal. And that may go to why so few members of the Subcomittee bothered to show up for the hearing.
Republican John Duncan noted that "very few people are willing to vote against anything the Defense Department wants" and that this reluctance appears to continue even in the face of revelations of contract abuse and more. And he is correct. He pointed out:
According to the Congressional Research Service, we're now spending, when we add in the regular budget, the supplemental bills and we're getting ready to vote on another supplemental bill here either this week or a few days and yet in the emergency appropriations and all the money that they throw into the omnibus -- according to the CRS -- we're spending more on defense than all the other nations in the world combined and it seems to me that a lot of it is generated because the defense contractors hire all the retired admirals and generals and then they caught the revolving door at the Pentagon. But somebody is going to have to -- I don't think we can just keep on wasting and blowing money in the way that we're doing.
Tierney also expressed puzzlement over why the report did not first go to the Subcommittee members and not released by the press until the hearing. AP had the report on Sunday.
On war spending, Perry Bacon Jr. (Washington Post) reports US Senator Lindsey Graham states he will block the supplemental if a non-related provision isn't in it. [Graham and US Senator Joe Lieberman are attempting to force in a measure which would allow Barry O to refuse to release torture photos.] Graham states he will block the bill. Graham is threatening, pay attention, to do what US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and US Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid claimed could not be done, claimed for the last two years could not be done. It could always be done. The Democrats could have blocked spending any time they wanted to.
Finally Alsumaria reports on allegations that the US is preventing corruption investigations in Iraq: "Head of the integrity commission Rahim Al Ugaili criticized US authorities for not assisting in the investigations of probable corruption by US officials and companies in the wake of 2003. Al Ugaili considered that US officials and contractors' immunity from Iraqi law has prevented the commission from investigating into the spending of Iraqi funds by the coalition power. He added that Iraq is cooperating with the US inspector in exchanging intelligence; yet, the cooperation is unilateral Iraqi wise."
Quickly, Gloria Feldt offers her thoughts on the assassination of Dr. George Tiller here. In addition, she's hosting a pre-Father's Day panel June 20th at Brooklyn Museum to discuss the women's movement and how it has changed men and women. The panel begins at 2:00 pm. Among those scheduled to participate on the panel is Susan Faludi. Amy Goodman (Democracy Now! -- watch, listen or read) spoke with abortion provider Dr. Warren Hern about Dr. Tiller today and about the assault on abortion rights, democracy and more. Maria Hinojosa will speak with Dr. Hern and with Dr. Leroy Carhart to discuss terrorism and abortion rights on this week's NOW on PBS (which begins airing Friday on most PBS stations, check local listings).
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Iraq's LGBT community still under attack, the SOFA vote moved back to January"
"Betraying the fallen"
"NOW on PBS looks at the food"
"Boston Globe"
"gordon brown tries to push, other parties ..."
"Guantanamo and Torture"
"Assessing CARES and the Future of VA's Health Infrastructure"
"LGBT"
"Barry O and the groupies who love him"
"Taliban grades Barry, Sunsara Taylor, Ava & C.I."
"ACLU on Torture and CIA"
"THIS JUST IN! BARRY O GOES TO THE STICKS!"
"He costs a lot, is he worth it?"
DAVID LETTERMAN FLASHED HIS AGE AND LACK OF WIT THIS WEEK BY 'JOKING' ABOUT ALASKA GOVERNOR SARAH PALIN AND HER 14 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER WILLOW GOING TO THE YANKEE GAME AND WILLOW GETTING "KNOCKED UP" BY ALEX RODRIGUEZ IN THE 7TH INNING.
REALIZING HOW OLD, TIRED AND TRASHY HE CAME OFF, DAVID LETTERMAN TONIGHT ATTEMPTED TO INSIST HE MEANT BRISTOL, PALIN'S 18 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER.
A) BRISTOL DIDN'T GO TO NEW YORK WITH HER MOTHER. B) THE 'JOKE' IS REALLY OFFENSIVE AND HE'S APPARENTLY NOW CLAIMING WHAT HE MEANT TO SAY WAS: "PREGNANT ONCE, EASY FOREVER MORE!" C) THERE WAS NEVER ANY REASON FOR THE JOKE. WILLOR OR BRISTOL, THERE WAS NO REASON FOR THE JOKE. WILLOW'S A CHILD AND BRISTOL HAD A BABY OUTSIDE OF MARRIAGE. SO WHAT?
THESE REPORTERS ASKED DAVID LETTERMAN IF HE WAS SAYING ANY WOMAN WHO HAD A BABY WITHOUT BEING MARRIED WAS A WHORE AND ADVISED HIM TO REMEMBER HIS CHILD WAS BORN WITHOUT ANY WEDDING BAND. AT WHICH POINT THE OLD MAN SAID, "I JUST WANT TO BE FUNNY." WE SUGGESTED HE TRY THAT AND INFORMED HIM THAT AMERICA WOULD ENJOY IT IF HE COULD BE FUNNY AGAIN BUT THAT SHIP SEEMED TO SAIL BACK IN 1995.
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
Today the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan released [PDF format warning] "At What Cost? Contingency Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan Interim Report June 2009" which found:
** Neither the military nor the federal civilian acquisition workforces haveexpanded to keep pace with recent years' enormous growth in the number andvalue of contingency contracts. ** Contracting agencies must provide better and more timely training foremployees who manage contracts and oversee contractors' performance. Inparticular, members of the military assigned to perform on‐site performanceoversight as contracting officer's representatives often do not learn of theassignment until their unit arrives in theater, and then find insufficient time andInternet access to complete necessary training. ** Contract auditors are not employed effectively in contingency contracting. ** Contracting officials make ineffective use of contract withhold provisionsrecommended by their auditors, and many contract audit findings andrecommendations are not properly resolved. ** The government still lacks clear standards and policy on inherentlygovernmental functions. This shortcoming has immediate salience given thedecisions to use contractors in armed‐security and life‐support tasks for militaryunits.
Robert O'Harrow Jr. (Washington Post) observes of the report, "It's a sad reminder about just how bad the contracting system has been in recent years, and all the billions that have been wasted because of poor oversight, poor planning and plain old corruption." The report actually offers some blame as opposed to the usual pretend no one could have forseen the problems: "The Department of Defense has failed to provide enough staff to perform adequate contract oversight." US House Rep Stephen Lynch put it more bluntly today, "It's only happening because it's taxpayers' dollars." Exactly. The co-chairs of the Commission on Wartime Contracting, Michael Thibault and Chistopher Shays, appeared before the the US House Oversight and Government Reform's National Security Subcommittee and that's where Lynch made his remark. The co-chairs reviewed the report in their testimony and classified as an "immediate concern" the possibility that waste will take place as US forces draw down in Iraq as a result of lack of oversight and the handling and disposing of property. In Iraq, there is also a shortage of US government employees who posses the qualifications to monitor and supervise private security and this is on top of the fact that the 'security' is often ill trained and ignorant of the Rules for the Use of Force. US House Rep John F. Tierney chairs the committee. In his opening statements, he outlined potential problems (I'd say they were problems):
US House Rep John Tierney: It is also important that the Commission break new ground. There is no sense in creating an oversight entity that merely duplicates work that is on-going by Inspectors General or the Government Accountability Office. Congress already receives those reports. I look forward to hearing what the Commission is finding that we have not already heard about. In short, I expect our witnesses this morning to ensure us that our investment in their activities was a worthwhile decision. We in Congress --as the sponsors of the Commission -- need to hear about any challenges or hindrances the Commission faces in conducting its work. For example, I am concerned that the Commission will not be able to fulfill its mandate without a semi-permanent presence in theater. I would note that, according to the report, the Commission has only made two trips to date to Iraq and Afghanistan. I am also concerned that the current one year mandate of the Commission might allow responsible government officials and culpable contractors to wait it out. The Commission's charge is too important to suffer defeat at the hands of obstruction. Furthermore, I do not want to see a lack of subpoena power deter the Commission from going after recalcitrant parties.
Two trips? December '08 was the first trip according to Chris Shays testimony to the Subcommittee today. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee was just in Iraq last February (Feb. 26 through the first week of March). The Committee can send members there why can't the Commission? And why do their lengthy report seem to be a repeat of GAO reports? John Duncan pinned them down on the fact that they'd only visited three bases in Iraq. With no sense of awareness, let alone irony, Michael Thibault wanted to delcare that, "You have to spend the time in the country" to know what's going on in Iraq. Which leaves the Commission where?
Chair Tierney noted, "This Subcomittee stands ready to assist the Commission in this regard as appropriate." It's not as if the Commission is denied anything. But it really does appear to be a whitewash and an attempt to run out the clock. Jeff Flake, Ranking Member, would state in his opening remarks that "there's never too much oversight that can be done" and that may be true in theory but equally true is that the Comission was not set up to offer retreads of GAO reports. Tierney noted that the Committee points to suggestions that have not been enacted and pointed out that knowing why they weren't being implemented (legislation inaction, not enough hearings, etc) would be helpful. (Translation, Committee, that's your job.) Thibault noted there were 1200 plus recommendations and stated they do intend to trace each one, to start tracing each one. To start. Some day, I suppose. As The Mighty Mighty Bosstones once put it. Under questioning from Flake, Thibault admitted all the 1200 were from other bodies.
Along with the two co-chairs, Commission members Charles Tiefer and Grant S. Green also offered testimony on the first panel. Tierney had all the witnesses sworn in before any testimony was offered -- a detail many subcommittees and committees tend to skip (but shouldn't). Tiefer's response to the Subcommittee about wrapping things up as the US prepares to turn the lights off may go to the problems with the Commission. And it might help for someone to inform Tierney that the US will NOT be turning out the lights in Iraq when they leave (whenver that is) because Iraq is a country with its own population and Tiefer's remarks were as irritating as his deeply nasal voice.
"We're absolutely going to do that," said Tierney. About looking into contracts. They're going to do that. They're going to look into contracts. They're going to look into the recommendations and the status on each, they're going to . . . . What do they actually do? This wasn't a meeting to discuss projections, this was a hearing to discuss what they had done and what they'd learned and the reality was that they really had not done a great deal. And that may go to why so few members of the Subcomittee bothered to show up for the hearing.
Republican John Duncan noted that "very few people are willing to vote against anything the Defense Department wants" and that this reluctance appears to continue even in the face of revelations of contract abuse and more. And he is correct. He pointed out:
According to the Congressional Research Service, we're now spending, when we add in the regular budget, the supplemental bills and we're getting ready to vote on another supplemental bill here either this week or a few days and yet in the emergency appropriations and all the money that they throw into the omnibus -- according to the CRS -- we're spending more on defense than all the other nations in the world combined and it seems to me that a lot of it is generated because the defense contractors hire all the retired admirals and generals and then they caught the revolving door at the Pentagon. But somebody is going to have to -- I don't think we can just keep on wasting and blowing money in the way that we're doing.
Tierney also expressed puzzlement over why the report did not first go to the Subcommittee members and not released by the press until the hearing. AP had the report on Sunday.
On war spending, Perry Bacon Jr. (Washington Post) reports US Senator Lindsey Graham states he will block the supplemental if a non-related provision isn't in it. [Graham and US Senator Joe Lieberman are attempting to force in a measure which would allow Barry O to refuse to release torture photos.] Graham states he will block the bill. Graham is threatening, pay attention, to do what US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and US Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid claimed could not be done, claimed for the last two years could not be done. It could always be done. The Democrats could have blocked spending any time they wanted to.
Finally Alsumaria reports on allegations that the US is preventing corruption investigations in Iraq: "Head of the integrity commission Rahim Al Ugaili criticized US authorities for not assisting in the investigations of probable corruption by US officials and companies in the wake of 2003. Al Ugaili considered that US officials and contractors' immunity from Iraqi law has prevented the commission from investigating into the spending of Iraqi funds by the coalition power. He added that Iraq is cooperating with the US inspector in exchanging intelligence; yet, the cooperation is unilateral Iraqi wise."
Quickly, Gloria Feldt offers her thoughts on the assassination of Dr. George Tiller here. In addition, she's hosting a pre-Father's Day panel June 20th at Brooklyn Museum to discuss the women's movement and how it has changed men and women. The panel begins at 2:00 pm. Among those scheduled to participate on the panel is Susan Faludi. Amy Goodman (Democracy Now! -- watch, listen or read) spoke with abortion provider Dr. Warren Hern about Dr. Tiller today and about the assault on abortion rights, democracy and more. Maria Hinojosa will speak with Dr. Hern and with Dr. Leroy Carhart to discuss terrorism and abortion rights on this week's NOW on PBS (which begins airing Friday on most PBS stations, check local listings).
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Iraq's LGBT community still under attack, the SOFA vote moved back to January"
"Betraying the fallen"
"NOW on PBS looks at the food"
"Boston Globe"
"gordon brown tries to push, other parties ..."
"Guantanamo and Torture"
"Assessing CARES and the Future of VA's Health Infrastructure"
"LGBT"
"Barry O and the groupies who love him"
"Taliban grades Barry, Sunsara Taylor, Ava & C.I."
"ACLU on Torture and CIA"
"THIS JUST IN! BARRY O GOES TO THE STICKS!"
"He costs a lot, is he worth it?"
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
He costs a lot, is he worth it?
BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE
CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY OBAMA WHINED AND POUTED BUT CELEBRITY TRAINER RAHM EMMANUEL TOLD HIM, "YOU'RE GOING TO THE HEARTLAND."
BARRY MOANED THAT HE HATED "THE STICKS!" THAT IT WAS HARD TO FIND A WHOLE FOODS AND THAT HE COULDN'T EAT HIS SOY BURGER WITHOUT ARUGALA AND GREY POUPON.
RAHM SNAPPED, "SUCK IT UP AND GIVE ME 20!"
SO NOW OFF BARRY HEADS TO WISCONSIN ("THE CHEESE STATE!" HE HUFFED) AND LUCKY LA CROSSE LEARNS THEY GET THE 'HONOR' OF SPENDING $30,000 -- IN A BAD ECONOMY -- ON OVERTIME TO PROTECT BARRY O.
MEANWHILE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT JUST WROTE A CHECK -- THAT WOULD BE YOUR TAX DOLLARS -- TO D.C. FOR $43 MILLION TO COVER THE COST OF BARRY'S BIG INAUGURATION.
"I'M A PRINCE," EXPLAINED BARRY O. "IT COSTS A LITTLE MORE BUT IT AIN'T MY MONEY BEING SPENT."
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
At the United Nations Human Rights Council's General Debate yesterday, the General Federation of Iraqi Women's Entesar Araibai stated "that since the American occupation of 2003, the Iraqi people had been deprived of their basic civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. Civil infra-structure was completely destroyed and the Iraqi people faced losing their basic right to remain alive as disease spread due to the breakdown of the medical and basic clean drinking water system. Furthermore, there was the premeditated obliviousness by the Government which had nothing to do better than pilfering the immense wealth of Iraq into private accounts in countries that lectured about human rights. Recent United Nations statistics told of more that five million Iraqi refugees, dispersed either inside Iraq or somewhere else in the world, deprived of medical assistance and suffering extremely dangerous perils." During the General Debate, Iraqi government flack Faris al-Alani declared that lies, lies, were harming Iraq. He then went on to insist that Iraqi women had freedoms across Iraq, the education was solid in Iraq, that the press was free and that the number of orphans was inflated. It was all, you understand, a conspiracy against Iraq, a conspiracy against the truth. No word on whether or not, al-Alani next attempted to flap his arms and fly back to Iraq but, in the real world, Hoda Abdel-Hamid files a report (video only) for Aljazeera:
Hoda Abdel-Hamid: It's a miracle he's alive today. Four years ago Seif was traveling with his parents from Diyala to Baghdad. Their car was destroyed by a roadside bomb. His mother and father killed on the spot.
Seif Saleh: After the death of my parents, I was taken to an orphanage and then brought here. I have relatives but I don't want to stay with them. Everything is good here, I have many friends, they are like me, they lost their parents.
Hoda Abdel-Hamid: House of Safety is an orphanage in north Baghdad, home to 32 children, victims of the carnage that swept Iraq in the last six years. It's a safe where Seif can try to forget those horrific moments in which he lost his parents. Children here are given a second chance in life. Iraq has become a land populated by orphans. According to the Iraqi Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs, there are nearly five million orphans -- that's about 15% of the population who's lost at least either one or both parents. More than half-a-million children live on the streets. Seif and his friends are relatively lucky. They are among just 500 children to find a home in one of Iraq's 15 orphanages. Ahmad is not so lucky. At only 11, he has four sisters and a grandmother to take care of and feed. Faced with the burdens of an adult, he dropped out of school and is now making a living out of garbage collection. It earns him five dollars per day.
Ahmad Riyadh: It's not enough but I don't have any other alternatives. The work is not guaranteed and it's always risky. I don't have expectations for the future. I just live day by day.
Hoda Abdel-Hamid: Child experts say the situation has far more reaching consequences, ones that will effect Iraq's society for decades to come.
Dr. Haidar al Maliki: Those children have many problems like sleep disorder, educational problems, social problems with their peers. 70% of our children have what we call Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. 20% of them have psychological problems like depression and excited disorder, social phobia. Some of our children have neurosis, especially nocturnal neurosis, about 3 to 4%, and we have an increasing percentage of abuse.
Hoda Abdel-Hamid: Back at the House of Safety, Seif and his friends are facing an uncertain future. The government allocates $12 per child per month and the volunteers here have a hard time making ends meet. Now the owner of the house wants to evict them. With no where else to go, these children could end up on the streets.
Hisham Thahabi (Director of House of Safety): We need to take care of them. Otherwise they fall into terrorism, militias or organized gangs. They are vulnerable and could easily fall into the trap. They are the easy prey.
Hoda Abdel-Hamid: The US military has several times accused al Qaeda in Iraq of recruiting and training children. Many of these youngsters feel abandoned and belonging to a group -- any group -- is very attractive to them. In many ways, Iraq's orphans are the forgotten collateral damage of six years of war. Hoda Abdel-Hamid, Al Jazeera.
The Iraqi government -- which sits on billions -- allocates only $12 per month. That's shameful. So is the US contribution. Today the Public Library of Science released a study entitled "Tracking Official Development Assistance for Reproductive Health in Conflict-Affected Countries." Tan Ee Lyn and Sanjeer Miglani (Reuters) explain the report found: "Countries that are at war such as Afghanistan, Sudan and Iraq get only US $1.30 a person a year in aid to help prevent mothers dying from childbirth and children dying before they are five, a study has found."
As last month drew to an end, Ghassan Awad and Gao Shan (Xinhua) reported on Iraqi children such as six-year-old Jasim who becomes upset when he sees Iraqi or US troops having seen a US and Iraqi patrol kill someone outside of Baghdad and seven-year-old Kholood who saw her father shot dead in front of her, six-year-old Khalil Muhiee who saw his father saw a militia storm the family home and then discovered "his father beheaded".
These are among the realities missing from the speech at the center of Barry O Goes To Cairo. Ali Abunimah (Guardian) observes, "He dwelled on the 'enormous trauma' done to the US when almost 3,000 people were killed that day, but spoke not one word about the hundreds of thousands of orphans and widows left in Iraq -- those whom Muntazer al-Zaidi's flying shoe forced Americans to remember only for a few seconds last year. He ignored the dozens of civilians who die each week in the 'necessary' war in Afghanistan, or the millions of refugees fleeing the US-invoked escalation in Pakistan." Iraqi journalist Ahmed Habib (bigHead) offers:
We were mostly disappointed that we couldn't show the new president around. In the Kadhimiya Hospital, in the northern end of Baghdad, cancer patients withering away from depleted uranium crowning the tip of American munitions, couldn't wait to kiss Obama's feet before they left this god forsaken world. Students at decrepit schools throughout Iraq, part of an education system sold out to the World Bank, were planning to anxiously await the arrival of the new emperor and beg and plea for chalk, pencils, desks, and dignity. Widows and internally displaced refugees had a really cute event planned for Obama, and Ms. Clinton. They had organized a mass burn-in for the new eloquent Commander in Chief. Overpriced and scarce gasoline was going to be used to set millions of bodies alight in homage to the new emperor. The theme of the soiree was, "With nothing left, why bother to live?" Thousands of different sectors from our destroyed society were waiting in anticipation for the Barack Show. From persons disabled by war to millions of youth scouring the streets for crumbs, we had some pretty nifty ideas that we couldn't wait to put into action. One of my personal favorites was the planned "Thank you for Democracy" festival. Millions of Iraqis were planning to line the streets of Baghdad, with empty bags in hand, and ask Barack to bless them with the vomit of himself, and his entourage.
And Chris Hedges (Information Clearing House) raises the issues too many Americans refused to (and continue to refuse to raise):
Did they play Barack Obama's speech to the Muslim world in the prison corridors of Abu Ghraib, Bagram air base, Guantanamo or the dozens of secret sites where we hold thousands of Muslims around the world? Did it echo off the walls of the crowded morgues filled with the mutilated bodies of the Muslim dead in Baghdad or Kabul? Was it broadcast from the tops of minarets in the villages and towns decimated by U.S. iron fragmentation bombs? Was it heard in the squalid refugee camps of Gaza, where 1.5 million Palestinians live in the world's largest ghetto?What do words of peace and cooperation mean from us when we torture-yes, we still torture-only Muslims? What do these words mean when we sanction Israel's brutal air assaults on Lebanon and Gaza, assaults that demolished thousands of homes and left hundreds dead and injured? How does it look for Obama to call for democracy and human rights from Egypt, where we lavishly fund and support the despotic regime of Hosni Mubarak, one of the longest-reigning dictators in the Middle East? We may thrill to Obama's rhetoric, but very few of the 1.3 billion Muslims in the world are as deluded. They grasp that nothing so far has changed for Muslims in the Middle East under the Obama administration. The wars of occupation go on or have been expanded. Israel continues to flout international law, gobbling up more Palestinian land and carrying out egregious war crimes in Gaza. Calcified, repressive regimes in countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia are feted in Washington as allies. The speech at Cairo University, which usually has trucks filled with riot police outside the university gates and a heavy security presence on campus to control the student body, is an example of the facade. Student political groups, as everyone who joined in the standing ovation for the president knew, are prohibited. Faculty deans are chosen by the administration, rather than elected by professors, "as a way to combat Islamist influence on campus," according to the U.S. State Department's latest human rights report. And, as The Washington Post pointed out, students who use the Internet "as an outlet for their political or social views are on notice: One Cairo University student blogger was jailed for two months last summer for 'public agitation,' and another was kicked out of university housing for criticizing the government." The expanding imperial projects and tightening screws of repression lurch forward under Obama. We are not trying to end terror or promote democracy. We are ensuring that our corporate state has a steady supply of the cheap oil to which it is addicted. And the scarcer oil becomes, the more aggressive we become. This is the game playing out in the Muslim world.
With Laila Al-Arian, Chris Hedges co-authored Collateral Damage: America's War Against Iraqi Civilians. The collateral damage is the dead and wounded Iraqis. The US' collateral damage also includes the dead and wounded US forces. This morning the US House Veterans Affairs Health Subcommitee held a hearing entitled "Assessing CARES and the Future of VA's Health Infrastructure." "CARES" is Capital Asset Realignment for Enhanced Services. Subcommittee Chair Michael H. Michaud opened the hearing explaining, "The purpose of this hearing is to assess the VA's implementation of CARES and to investigate the effectiveness of CARES as a capital planning tool. In addition, today's hearing will explore whether CARES should continue in the future or if the VA should adopt an alternate capital planning mechanism."
Michaud added a little to his prepared statement but otherwise stuck to reading it. His and other prepared statements from the hearing can be found here. Ranking Member Henry Brown added that CARES was established following a 1999 Government Accountability Office study which "found that VA was wasting a million dollars a day on the maintenance of outdated and underutilized health care facilities." This hearing was scheduled as part of Congress' ongoing oversight of the VA. As 2008 drew to a close, the GAO found that the Veterans Affairs had not conducted the needed and "meaningful" dicussions when seeking a contractor to construct an ambulatory care center. Today the GAO issued a [PDF format warning] review of the VA's CARES process which "drives VHA's capital planning efforts" and they found that Veterans Affairs is not "centrally tracking" the 34 CARES decisions that they implemented: "Our past work found that, while VA had over 100 performance measures to monitor other agency programs and activities, these measures either did not directly link to the CARES goals or VA did not use them to centrally monitor the implementation and impact of CARES decisions. Without this information, VA could not readily assess the implementation status of CARES decisions, determine the impact of such decisions, or be held accountable for achieving the intended results of CARES." The GAO's Mark L. Goldstein offered it as testimony today as a witness on the second panel. CARES has little oversight and few checks which is why it's important that Congress regularly provide oversight.
The first panel was composed of the American Legion's Joseph L. Wilson, Paralyzed Veterans of America's Carl Blake, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States' Dennis M. Cullian, Vietnam Veterans of America's Richard F. Weidman and Disabled American Veterans' Joy J. Ilem. Ilem walked through the CARES process and explained the problems being faced:
For nearly a decade, the IBVSOs have argued that the VA must be protected from deterioration of its health infrastructure and the consequent decline in VA's capital asset value. Year after year, we have urged Congress and the administration to ensure that appropriated funding is adequate in VA's capital budget so that VA can properly invest in its physical assets, proect their value and ensure health care in safe and functional facilities long into the future. Likewise, we have stressed that VA's facilities have an average age of more than 55 years, therefore, it is essential that funding be routinely dedicated to renovate, repair and replace VA's aging structures, capital and plant equipment system as needed. Mr. Chairman, unfortunately, the past decade of deferred and underfunded construction budgets has meant that VA has not adequately recapitalized its facilities -- now leaving the health care system with a large backlog of major contruction projects totaling between $6.5 billion to $10 billion with an accomanying urgency to deal with this growing dilemma.
When asked by Michaud, Richard Weidman stated he felt the process itself was the problem, "Unfortunately, good ideas are often given to the VA and they're like an 18-year-old who gets a hold of a bottle of whiskey and they run amuk. And the example would be so-called Project Hero where the Congress instructed VA to rationalize the contracting out and instead VA tried to turn it into a firesale of contracting out as opposed to increasing and strengthening the organizational capacity within the hospitals themselves."
"We believe it has to be more transparent," Joseph L. Wilson explained to the committee noting that a question recieves a supposed complete answer from the VA but it's really a general response and then the American Legion has to go through the process of tracking down the details that they were seeking from the beginning. "The bottom line," Wilson stated, "is the veteran's going to suffer if they're [the VA] trying to make the system look perfect." Richard Weidman agreed and stated that they have consistently "been able to find out a great deal more of what is going on by talking to union members around the country than we can find out by meeting with the Under Secrectary for Health. And this is not the kind of partnership that certainly the veterans' services organizations envisioned, nor the Hill, nor people that want to make this system work." Dennis Cullinan voiced the opinion that the process is not clear, referred to VFW being snowed under with CARES paperwork which seemed intentionally confusing and obsevered of proposed facilities that "something's going to be one thing, then it's going to be another and then it changes back again."
US House Rep Deborah Halvorson: Mrs. Ilem you mentioned in your testimony that some of the facilities are out dated. One of them you mentioned is near my district -- [Edward] Hines [Jr. VA Hospital] -- in Chicago. With the need and probably too much need basically to get it up to the 21st century needs, do you think that it might be better to put the money and the needs to expand more the CBOCs because as Mr. [US House Rep John] Boozman said we need to adapt to change and now people aren't spending as much time in hospitals and maybe we need to do more to the out patient clinics?
Ms. Ilem responded that what she gets told is that "it costs more to renovate a place than to build a new facility and because of the new types of equipment that are available today, the rewiring, the ceiling heights, I just mean there's a number of issues like that that come into play." Carl Blake noted that there's a spinal cord injury center at Hines and if it's work is distributed to various clinics it dilutes the work that can be done. And he and Weidman
US House Rep Deborah Halvorson: Well I have a tendancy to agree with that however and that's why I'm asking all of you is the future and where is it that we need to go? I have people calling me all day that are tired of going there and sitting there all day just to be turned away and what are we going to do about that? So we need to do something. Our veterans deserve the best care possible. So if we need to build them a new hospital then we need to do that. There's all kinds of things we can be doingfor them.
We're mainly noting the exchange because it was Halvorson's strongest performance on a VA committee or subcommittee since being sworn in at the start of the year. I'll make Little Debbie jokes as needed but none were needed today. Halvorson did a good job on the subcommittee today. Kat's grabbing 49% tonight. 49%? Read her later tonight.
This morning the New York Times' Alissa J. Rubin and Michael Gordon offered "U.S. Frees Suspect in Killing of 5 G.I.'s." Martin Chulov (Guardian) covered the same story, Kim Gamel (AP) reported on it, BBC offered "Kidnap hope after Shia's handover" and Deborah Haynes contributed "Hope for British hostages in Iraq after release of Shia militant" (Times of London). The basics of the story are this. 5 British citizens have been hostages since May 29, 2007. The US military had in their custody Laith al-Khazali. He is a member of Asa'ib al-Haq. He is also accused of murdering five US troops. The US military released him and allegedly did so because his organization was not going to release any of the five British hostages until he was released. This is a big story and the US military is attempting to state this is just diplomacy, has nothing to do with the British hostages and, besides, they just released him to Iraq. Sami al-askari told the New York Times, "This is a very sensitive topic because you know the position that the Iraqi government, the U.S. and British governments, and all the governments do not accept the idea of exchanging hostages for prisoners. So we put it in another format, and we told them that if they want to participate in the political process they cannot do so while they are holding hostages. And we mentioned to the American side that they cannot join the political process and release their hostages while their leaders are behind bars or imprisoned." In other words, a prisoner was traded for hostages and they attempted to not only make the trade but to lie to people about it. At the US State Dept, the tired and bored reporters were unable to even broach the subject. Poor declawed tabbies. Pentagon reporters did press the issue and got the standard line from the department's spokesperson, Bryan Whitman, that the US handed the prisoner to Iraq, the US didn't hand him over to any organization -- terrorist or otherwise. What Iraq did, Whitman wanted the press to know, was what Iraq did. A complete lie that really insults the intelligence of the American people. CNN reminds the five US soldiers killed "were: Capt. Brian S. Freeman, 31, of Temecula, California; 1st Lt. Jacob N. Fritz, 25, of Verdon, Nebraska; Spc. Johnathan B. Chism, 22, of Gonzales, Louisiana; Pfc. Shawn P. Falter, 25, of Cortland, New York; and Pfc. Johnathon M. Millican, 20, of Trafford, Alabama." Those are the five from January 2007 that al-Khazali and his brother Qais al-Khazali are supposed to be responsible for the deaths of. Qassim Abdul-Zahra and Robert H. Reid (AP) states that Jonathan B. Chism's father Danny Chism is outraged over the release and has declared, "They freed them? The American military did? Somebody needs to answer for it."
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Should the US have made the trade?"
"Cindy Sheehan protests (and scares the cowardly)"
"Journalists imprisoned in North Korea"
"Isaiah, Hillary Clinton"
"gordo brown begs for his political life"
"Hidden History"
"Ben Harper, NPR, Isaiah, Iraq"
"Rights"
"Free Speech Radio News and my rant"
"Isaiah, ACLU"
"Chris Hedges, Boston Globe, Isaiah, Third, FSRN"
"THIS JUST IN! SHE NEEDS TO BE DRESSED!"
"The fashion disaster"
CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY OBAMA WHINED AND POUTED BUT CELEBRITY TRAINER RAHM EMMANUEL TOLD HIM, "YOU'RE GOING TO THE HEARTLAND."
BARRY MOANED THAT HE HATED "THE STICKS!" THAT IT WAS HARD TO FIND A WHOLE FOODS AND THAT HE COULDN'T EAT HIS SOY BURGER WITHOUT ARUGALA AND GREY POUPON.
RAHM SNAPPED, "SUCK IT UP AND GIVE ME 20!"
SO NOW OFF BARRY HEADS TO WISCONSIN ("THE CHEESE STATE!" HE HUFFED) AND LUCKY LA CROSSE LEARNS THEY GET THE 'HONOR' OF SPENDING $30,000 -- IN A BAD ECONOMY -- ON OVERTIME TO PROTECT BARRY O.
MEANWHILE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT JUST WROTE A CHECK -- THAT WOULD BE YOUR TAX DOLLARS -- TO D.C. FOR $43 MILLION TO COVER THE COST OF BARRY'S BIG INAUGURATION.
"I'M A PRINCE," EXPLAINED BARRY O. "IT COSTS A LITTLE MORE BUT IT AIN'T MY MONEY BEING SPENT."
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
At the United Nations Human Rights Council's General Debate yesterday, the General Federation of Iraqi Women's Entesar Araibai stated "that since the American occupation of 2003, the Iraqi people had been deprived of their basic civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. Civil infra-structure was completely destroyed and the Iraqi people faced losing their basic right to remain alive as disease spread due to the breakdown of the medical and basic clean drinking water system. Furthermore, there was the premeditated obliviousness by the Government which had nothing to do better than pilfering the immense wealth of Iraq into private accounts in countries that lectured about human rights. Recent United Nations statistics told of more that five million Iraqi refugees, dispersed either inside Iraq or somewhere else in the world, deprived of medical assistance and suffering extremely dangerous perils." During the General Debate, Iraqi government flack Faris al-Alani declared that lies, lies, were harming Iraq. He then went on to insist that Iraqi women had freedoms across Iraq, the education was solid in Iraq, that the press was free and that the number of orphans was inflated. It was all, you understand, a conspiracy against Iraq, a conspiracy against the truth. No word on whether or not, al-Alani next attempted to flap his arms and fly back to Iraq but, in the real world, Hoda Abdel-Hamid files a report (video only) for Aljazeera:
Hoda Abdel-Hamid: It's a miracle he's alive today. Four years ago Seif was traveling with his parents from Diyala to Baghdad. Their car was destroyed by a roadside bomb. His mother and father killed on the spot.
Seif Saleh: After the death of my parents, I was taken to an orphanage and then brought here. I have relatives but I don't want to stay with them. Everything is good here, I have many friends, they are like me, they lost their parents.
Hoda Abdel-Hamid: House of Safety is an orphanage in north Baghdad, home to 32 children, victims of the carnage that swept Iraq in the last six years. It's a safe where Seif can try to forget those horrific moments in which he lost his parents. Children here are given a second chance in life. Iraq has become a land populated by orphans. According to the Iraqi Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs, there are nearly five million orphans -- that's about 15% of the population who's lost at least either one or both parents. More than half-a-million children live on the streets. Seif and his friends are relatively lucky. They are among just 500 children to find a home in one of Iraq's 15 orphanages. Ahmad is not so lucky. At only 11, he has four sisters and a grandmother to take care of and feed. Faced with the burdens of an adult, he dropped out of school and is now making a living out of garbage collection. It earns him five dollars per day.
Ahmad Riyadh: It's not enough but I don't have any other alternatives. The work is not guaranteed and it's always risky. I don't have expectations for the future. I just live day by day.
Hoda Abdel-Hamid: Child experts say the situation has far more reaching consequences, ones that will effect Iraq's society for decades to come.
Dr. Haidar al Maliki: Those children have many problems like sleep disorder, educational problems, social problems with their peers. 70% of our children have what we call Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. 20% of them have psychological problems like depression and excited disorder, social phobia. Some of our children have neurosis, especially nocturnal neurosis, about 3 to 4%, and we have an increasing percentage of abuse.
Hoda Abdel-Hamid: Back at the House of Safety, Seif and his friends are facing an uncertain future. The government allocates $12 per child per month and the volunteers here have a hard time making ends meet. Now the owner of the house wants to evict them. With no where else to go, these children could end up on the streets.
Hisham Thahabi (Director of House of Safety): We need to take care of them. Otherwise they fall into terrorism, militias or organized gangs. They are vulnerable and could easily fall into the trap. They are the easy prey.
Hoda Abdel-Hamid: The US military has several times accused al Qaeda in Iraq of recruiting and training children. Many of these youngsters feel abandoned and belonging to a group -- any group -- is very attractive to them. In many ways, Iraq's orphans are the forgotten collateral damage of six years of war. Hoda Abdel-Hamid, Al Jazeera.
The Iraqi government -- which sits on billions -- allocates only $12 per month. That's shameful. So is the US contribution. Today the Public Library of Science released a study entitled "Tracking Official Development Assistance for Reproductive Health in Conflict-Affected Countries." Tan Ee Lyn and Sanjeer Miglani (Reuters) explain the report found: "Countries that are at war such as Afghanistan, Sudan and Iraq get only US $1.30 a person a year in aid to help prevent mothers dying from childbirth and children dying before they are five, a study has found."
As last month drew to an end, Ghassan Awad and Gao Shan (Xinhua) reported on Iraqi children such as six-year-old Jasim who becomes upset when he sees Iraqi or US troops having seen a US and Iraqi patrol kill someone outside of Baghdad and seven-year-old Kholood who saw her father shot dead in front of her, six-year-old Khalil Muhiee who saw his father saw a militia storm the family home and then discovered "his father beheaded".
These are among the realities missing from the speech at the center of Barry O Goes To Cairo. Ali Abunimah (Guardian) observes, "He dwelled on the 'enormous trauma' done to the US when almost 3,000 people were killed that day, but spoke not one word about the hundreds of thousands of orphans and widows left in Iraq -- those whom Muntazer al-Zaidi's flying shoe forced Americans to remember only for a few seconds last year. He ignored the dozens of civilians who die each week in the 'necessary' war in Afghanistan, or the millions of refugees fleeing the US-invoked escalation in Pakistan." Iraqi journalist Ahmed Habib (bigHead) offers:
We were mostly disappointed that we couldn't show the new president around. In the Kadhimiya Hospital, in the northern end of Baghdad, cancer patients withering away from depleted uranium crowning the tip of American munitions, couldn't wait to kiss Obama's feet before they left this god forsaken world. Students at decrepit schools throughout Iraq, part of an education system sold out to the World Bank, were planning to anxiously await the arrival of the new emperor and beg and plea for chalk, pencils, desks, and dignity. Widows and internally displaced refugees had a really cute event planned for Obama, and Ms. Clinton. They had organized a mass burn-in for the new eloquent Commander in Chief. Overpriced and scarce gasoline was going to be used to set millions of bodies alight in homage to the new emperor. The theme of the soiree was, "With nothing left, why bother to live?" Thousands of different sectors from our destroyed society were waiting in anticipation for the Barack Show. From persons disabled by war to millions of youth scouring the streets for crumbs, we had some pretty nifty ideas that we couldn't wait to put into action. One of my personal favorites was the planned "Thank you for Democracy" festival. Millions of Iraqis were planning to line the streets of Baghdad, with empty bags in hand, and ask Barack to bless them with the vomit of himself, and his entourage.
And Chris Hedges (Information Clearing House) raises the issues too many Americans refused to (and continue to refuse to raise):
Did they play Barack Obama's speech to the Muslim world in the prison corridors of Abu Ghraib, Bagram air base, Guantanamo or the dozens of secret sites where we hold thousands of Muslims around the world? Did it echo off the walls of the crowded morgues filled with the mutilated bodies of the Muslim dead in Baghdad or Kabul? Was it broadcast from the tops of minarets in the villages and towns decimated by U.S. iron fragmentation bombs? Was it heard in the squalid refugee camps of Gaza, where 1.5 million Palestinians live in the world's largest ghetto?What do words of peace and cooperation mean from us when we torture-yes, we still torture-only Muslims? What do these words mean when we sanction Israel's brutal air assaults on Lebanon and Gaza, assaults that demolished thousands of homes and left hundreds dead and injured? How does it look for Obama to call for democracy and human rights from Egypt, where we lavishly fund and support the despotic regime of Hosni Mubarak, one of the longest-reigning dictators in the Middle East? We may thrill to Obama's rhetoric, but very few of the 1.3 billion Muslims in the world are as deluded. They grasp that nothing so far has changed for Muslims in the Middle East under the Obama administration. The wars of occupation go on or have been expanded. Israel continues to flout international law, gobbling up more Palestinian land and carrying out egregious war crimes in Gaza. Calcified, repressive regimes in countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia are feted in Washington as allies. The speech at Cairo University, which usually has trucks filled with riot police outside the university gates and a heavy security presence on campus to control the student body, is an example of the facade. Student political groups, as everyone who joined in the standing ovation for the president knew, are prohibited. Faculty deans are chosen by the administration, rather than elected by professors, "as a way to combat Islamist influence on campus," according to the U.S. State Department's latest human rights report. And, as The Washington Post pointed out, students who use the Internet "as an outlet for their political or social views are on notice: One Cairo University student blogger was jailed for two months last summer for 'public agitation,' and another was kicked out of university housing for criticizing the government." The expanding imperial projects and tightening screws of repression lurch forward under Obama. We are not trying to end terror or promote democracy. We are ensuring that our corporate state has a steady supply of the cheap oil to which it is addicted. And the scarcer oil becomes, the more aggressive we become. This is the game playing out in the Muslim world.
With Laila Al-Arian, Chris Hedges co-authored Collateral Damage: America's War Against Iraqi Civilians. The collateral damage is the dead and wounded Iraqis. The US' collateral damage also includes the dead and wounded US forces. This morning the US House Veterans Affairs Health Subcommitee held a hearing entitled "Assessing CARES and the Future of VA's Health Infrastructure." "CARES" is Capital Asset Realignment for Enhanced Services. Subcommittee Chair Michael H. Michaud opened the hearing explaining, "The purpose of this hearing is to assess the VA's implementation of CARES and to investigate the effectiveness of CARES as a capital planning tool. In addition, today's hearing will explore whether CARES should continue in the future or if the VA should adopt an alternate capital planning mechanism."
Michaud added a little to his prepared statement but otherwise stuck to reading it. His and other prepared statements from the hearing can be found here. Ranking Member Henry Brown added that CARES was established following a 1999 Government Accountability Office study which "found that VA was wasting a million dollars a day on the maintenance of outdated and underutilized health care facilities." This hearing was scheduled as part of Congress' ongoing oversight of the VA. As 2008 drew to a close, the GAO found that the Veterans Affairs had not conducted the needed and "meaningful" dicussions when seeking a contractor to construct an ambulatory care center. Today the GAO issued a [PDF format warning] review of the VA's CARES process which "drives VHA's capital planning efforts" and they found that Veterans Affairs is not "centrally tracking" the 34 CARES decisions that they implemented: "Our past work found that, while VA had over 100 performance measures to monitor other agency programs and activities, these measures either did not directly link to the CARES goals or VA did not use them to centrally monitor the implementation and impact of CARES decisions. Without this information, VA could not readily assess the implementation status of CARES decisions, determine the impact of such decisions, or be held accountable for achieving the intended results of CARES." The GAO's Mark L. Goldstein offered it as testimony today as a witness on the second panel. CARES has little oversight and few checks which is why it's important that Congress regularly provide oversight.
The first panel was composed of the American Legion's Joseph L. Wilson, Paralyzed Veterans of America's Carl Blake, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States' Dennis M. Cullian, Vietnam Veterans of America's Richard F. Weidman and Disabled American Veterans' Joy J. Ilem. Ilem walked through the CARES process and explained the problems being faced:
For nearly a decade, the IBVSOs have argued that the VA must be protected from deterioration of its health infrastructure and the consequent decline in VA's capital asset value. Year after year, we have urged Congress and the administration to ensure that appropriated funding is adequate in VA's capital budget so that VA can properly invest in its physical assets, proect their value and ensure health care in safe and functional facilities long into the future. Likewise, we have stressed that VA's facilities have an average age of more than 55 years, therefore, it is essential that funding be routinely dedicated to renovate, repair and replace VA's aging structures, capital and plant equipment system as needed. Mr. Chairman, unfortunately, the past decade of deferred and underfunded construction budgets has meant that VA has not adequately recapitalized its facilities -- now leaving the health care system with a large backlog of major contruction projects totaling between $6.5 billion to $10 billion with an accomanying urgency to deal with this growing dilemma.
When asked by Michaud, Richard Weidman stated he felt the process itself was the problem, "Unfortunately, good ideas are often given to the VA and they're like an 18-year-old who gets a hold of a bottle of whiskey and they run amuk. And the example would be so-called Project Hero where the Congress instructed VA to rationalize the contracting out and instead VA tried to turn it into a firesale of contracting out as opposed to increasing and strengthening the organizational capacity within the hospitals themselves."
"We believe it has to be more transparent," Joseph L. Wilson explained to the committee noting that a question recieves a supposed complete answer from the VA but it's really a general response and then the American Legion has to go through the process of tracking down the details that they were seeking from the beginning. "The bottom line," Wilson stated, "is the veteran's going to suffer if they're [the VA] trying to make the system look perfect." Richard Weidman agreed and stated that they have consistently "been able to find out a great deal more of what is going on by talking to union members around the country than we can find out by meeting with the Under Secrectary for Health. And this is not the kind of partnership that certainly the veterans' services organizations envisioned, nor the Hill, nor people that want to make this system work." Dennis Cullinan voiced the opinion that the process is not clear, referred to VFW being snowed under with CARES paperwork which seemed intentionally confusing and obsevered of proposed facilities that "something's going to be one thing, then it's going to be another and then it changes back again."
US House Rep Deborah Halvorson: Mrs. Ilem you mentioned in your testimony that some of the facilities are out dated. One of them you mentioned is near my district -- [Edward] Hines [Jr. VA Hospital] -- in Chicago. With the need and probably too much need basically to get it up to the 21st century needs, do you think that it might be better to put the money and the needs to expand more the CBOCs because as Mr. [US House Rep John] Boozman said we need to adapt to change and now people aren't spending as much time in hospitals and maybe we need to do more to the out patient clinics?
Ms. Ilem responded that what she gets told is that "it costs more to renovate a place than to build a new facility and because of the new types of equipment that are available today, the rewiring, the ceiling heights, I just mean there's a number of issues like that that come into play." Carl Blake noted that there's a spinal cord injury center at Hines and if it's work is distributed to various clinics it dilutes the work that can be done. And he and Weidman
US House Rep Deborah Halvorson: Well I have a tendancy to agree with that however and that's why I'm asking all of you is the future and where is it that we need to go? I have people calling me all day that are tired of going there and sitting there all day just to be turned away and what are we going to do about that? So we need to do something. Our veterans deserve the best care possible. So if we need to build them a new hospital then we need to do that. There's all kinds of things we can be doingfor them.
We're mainly noting the exchange because it was Halvorson's strongest performance on a VA committee or subcommittee since being sworn in at the start of the year. I'll make Little Debbie jokes as needed but none were needed today. Halvorson did a good job on the subcommittee today. Kat's grabbing 49% tonight. 49%? Read her later tonight.
This morning the New York Times' Alissa J. Rubin and Michael Gordon offered "U.S. Frees Suspect in Killing of 5 G.I.'s." Martin Chulov (Guardian) covered the same story, Kim Gamel (AP) reported on it, BBC offered "Kidnap hope after Shia's handover" and Deborah Haynes contributed "Hope for British hostages in Iraq after release of Shia militant" (Times of London). The basics of the story are this. 5 British citizens have been hostages since May 29, 2007. The US military had in their custody Laith al-Khazali. He is a member of Asa'ib al-Haq. He is also accused of murdering five US troops. The US military released him and allegedly did so because his organization was not going to release any of the five British hostages until he was released. This is a big story and the US military is attempting to state this is just diplomacy, has nothing to do with the British hostages and, besides, they just released him to Iraq. Sami al-askari told the New York Times, "This is a very sensitive topic because you know the position that the Iraqi government, the U.S. and British governments, and all the governments do not accept the idea of exchanging hostages for prisoners. So we put it in another format, and we told them that if they want to participate in the political process they cannot do so while they are holding hostages. And we mentioned to the American side that they cannot join the political process and release their hostages while their leaders are behind bars or imprisoned." In other words, a prisoner was traded for hostages and they attempted to not only make the trade but to lie to people about it. At the US State Dept, the tired and bored reporters were unable to even broach the subject. Poor declawed tabbies. Pentagon reporters did press the issue and got the standard line from the department's spokesperson, Bryan Whitman, that the US handed the prisoner to Iraq, the US didn't hand him over to any organization -- terrorist or otherwise. What Iraq did, Whitman wanted the press to know, was what Iraq did. A complete lie that really insults the intelligence of the American people. CNN reminds the five US soldiers killed "were: Capt. Brian S. Freeman, 31, of Temecula, California; 1st Lt. Jacob N. Fritz, 25, of Verdon, Nebraska; Spc. Johnathan B. Chism, 22, of Gonzales, Louisiana; Pfc. Shawn P. Falter, 25, of Cortland, New York; and Pfc. Johnathon M. Millican, 20, of Trafford, Alabama." Those are the five from January 2007 that al-Khazali and his brother Qais al-Khazali are supposed to be responsible for the deaths of. Qassim Abdul-Zahra and Robert H. Reid (AP) states that Jonathan B. Chism's father Danny Chism is outraged over the release and has declared, "They freed them? The American military did? Somebody needs to answer for it."
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Should the US have made the trade?"
"Cindy Sheehan protests (and scares the cowardly)"
"Journalists imprisoned in North Korea"
"Isaiah, Hillary Clinton"
"gordo brown begs for his political life"
"Hidden History"
"Ben Harper, NPR, Isaiah, Iraq"
"Rights"
"Free Speech Radio News and my rant"
"Isaiah, ACLU"
"Chris Hedges, Boston Globe, Isaiah, Third, FSRN"
"THIS JUST IN! SHE NEEDS TO BE DRESSED!"
"The fashion disaster"
Monday, June 08, 2009
The fashion disaster
BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE
WHETHER DRESSING UP IN HER FAVORITE PEG BUNDY OUTFIT AS IN THE PHOTO ABOVE OR TRYING TO BE INTERNATIONALLY STYLISH, MICHELLE OBAMA IS ALWAYS A FASHION FAILURE. WITH HER THICK GUT, SHE BELTED DIRECLY BELOW THE BOOBS FOR HER TACKY D-DAY NUMBER THAT DISRESPECTED THE DEAD.
NO WORD ON WHETHER SHE PICKED AT HER ASS ALL THROUGH THE D-DAY CEREMONY THE WAY SHE DID ON NBC LAST WEEK.
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
On KPFA yesterday, Flashpoints Nora Barrows Friedman filled in for Andrea Lewis on Sunday Sedition and her guests included Iraqi journalist Ahmed Habib
Nora Barrows Friedman: . . . Ahmed, you know just about 20 minutes ago we got a call from someone who was pointing out the fact that there has been all this redirecting of Iraq's natural resources of gas and oil out into the western markets. Talk about this ongoing theft of natural resources in your country, in Iraq, and across the region -- how that kind of fits into this neocolonialism and of course neoliberalism standpoint of what's going on right now to your country in particular.
Ahmed Habib: In our country of course we are all one people that are bound together by our struggle. and I mean wasn't that the idea in the first place the systematic theft of Iraq, the creation of a new colony there where cheap labor and cheap products can compliment the global economic system. Of course since the occupation in 2003 there has yet to be a safe and steady monitoring system that's put into place and also out of the southern most point of Iraq that is of course where most of the oil exports come out of through the gulf. Only recently we saw that the Kurdish government has been allowed to sell oil through the pipeline leading through Turkey in a perverse sort of selling out of their national struggle as the Turkish army continues to try to oppress Kurdish liberation fighters [PKK] in the mountains through waging a sort of war on terror again. There the Kurdish government, rife with corruption, in conjunction with the Iraqi central government in the Green Zone has found a way to funnel off Iraqi oil. The sad part about all of this, Norah, is that the despite the fact that Iraq has the potential to be producing 7 million barrels a day which is an astounding number, none of the resource profits are being seen on the streets of Baghdad. We still see deplorable conditions in health care very much similar to how they were during the sanctions. Electricity and water are still a scarce resource. But it's interesting to see how the economic restructuring and engineering of post-occupation Iraq has really been indicative of how America envisions the rest of the world and Obama really hasn't made any effort to change that. We see that in Iraq. There's been a major selling off of the major industries in the country or rather the most major sectors turned into industries -- such as energy, such as health care, such as anything related with the most fundamental elements of the infrastructure of the country. We also see some sort of perverse manipulation of economic activity in Iraq. I know that I've shared this before but it's a really excellent metaphor that really encapsulates what's happening in Iraq is that Iraqi farmers who in fact were some of the first in history to implement systems of modern irrigation and were some of the first to make scientific advancements in farming are now being told that they should farm wheat only using grains, self-terminating grains, that are being sold by American corporations. And those grains are in fact best used for the [. . . 95?] string of pasta and for anybody who's had the opportunity to dive into the beauty of Arabic food they'll now that pasta isn't a main staple in our diet. So it's clear that Iraq is being set up as a place for exports. We see countries that have had happen to them throughout history. We see the Philippines -- another country that has been destroyed economically. There's tremendous poverty, there's a lack of infrastructure, there's a corrupt government. We see this in Mexico. I know that coming up next you have a guest who's going to be talking about the murder of indigenous activists in Peru and of course in that country things are very similar as well with many of the natural resources being -- minerals and what not -- being extracted at the cost of the indigenous people there. So what's happening in Iraq unfortunately despite the magnanimous scale of the calamity that's facing people we know that there's more than 700,000 people that have been confirmed dead as a result of the violence of the occupation, as many as five million people have been forced to flee their country. What's happening in Iraq isn't really unique to the country and within the microcosm of the Arab world it's very much tied to the continuing apartheid regime in Israel and throughout the rest of the world. It's very much tied to the neoliberal extraction and exploitation that indigenous people are facing everywhere.
The Iraq War continues, it has not ended. Comedy Central's Stephen Colbert grasps it, even if others don't. Campbell Robertson (New York Times) writes about Colbert taping his show in Iraq and how "soldiers there" feel "that Americans have largely tuned the war out, that the economy had vacuumed up all the attention even though there are around 135,000 troops still here and still doing dangerous work. . . . Soldiers here are all too aware of America's attention span about this war, several of them at the taping said." Jon Kreig (Des Moines Register) knows the war hasn't ended: "The United States is digging in for more warfare, rather than planning to get out. Indeed, the deadline for U.S. troops to leave Iraqi cities has passed. Gen. George W. Casey Jr., Army chief of staff, said the Pentagon must plan for extended U.S. combat and stability operations in two wars -- up to 10 more years in Iraq. Meanwhile, a new report from the Pentagon indicated that there were now 250,000 private security contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is fair to call these people mercenaries since they do the jobs that service members did in Vietnam and other wars." Lez Get Real notes a report by Russia Today (text and vido):
Alice Hibbert: It's been revealed that the number of private security contractors working for the US war effort in Iraq and Afghanistan has greatly increased. While troops are being pulled out a Pentagon report says that the number of contractors working for the US Defense Department has increased by up to 30% since President Obama came to office. This figure has now swelled to some 250,000 working for companies such as Blackwater and Triple Canopy.
In related news, today the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute announced:Worldwide military expenditure in 2008 totalled an estimatedUS$1464 billion, according to new figures released today by Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). This represents an increase of 4 per cent in real terms compared to 2007, and an increase of 45 per cent since 1999. SIPRI today launched the 2009 edition of its Yearbook on Armaments, Disarmament and International Security.The Yearbook shows that the USA accounted for the majority (58%) of the global increase between 1999 and 2008, with its military spending growing by $219 billion in constant 2005 prices over the period. Even so, it was far from the only country to pursue such a course. China and Russia, with absolute increases of $42 billion and $24 billion respectively, both nearly tripled their military expenditure over the decade. Other regional powers -- particularly India, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Israel, Brazil, South Korea, Algeria and the UK -- also made substantial contributions to the total increase.'The idea of the "war on terror" has encouraged many countries to see their problems through a highly militarized lens, using this to justify high military spending,' comments Dr Sam Perlo-Freeman, Head of the Military Expenditure Project at SIPRI. 'Meanwhile, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost $903 billion in additional military spending by the USA alone.'
The illegal war's not ending. Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) reported yesterday on a sinkhole for millions of US tax payer dollars to fund and operate Baghdad Now -- a piece of propaganda put together: "That the paper has no publicly known editor, no bylines and no ads is no mistake. It is part of America's huge psychological warfare campaign to influence Iraqis' behavior and attitudes." Iraqis do not take Baghdad Now seriously but it's a US military 'news' outlet "produced by an Army psychological operation unit and distributed for free by soldiers. Piles of it are left at entrances to the Green Zone for passerbys to pick up." Since these operations don't appall or get coverage from US media, let's grasp that the military is always testing. They've used every battlefield to test new weapons and to test new techniques. Don't be surprised if at some point Baghdad Now becomes DC Now or if we find out that the military is embedded again at CNN. The military does not go to other fields to fight for freedom. Troops are sent to battlefields to test new forms of war fare. That's the reality.
On the diplomated front the Tehran Times reported Jalal Talabani, Iraq's president, met with Hassan Kazemi Quomi, Iranian Ambassador to Iraq, about increasing the ties between the two countries. In addition, Nouri al-Maliki made his pilgrimage to meet up with Sayyed Abdul Aziz al-Hakim -- Dick Cheney's friend, Iraqi exile who returned after the invasion and presumed to be deathly ill -- in Iran. UPI reports Jalal Talabani went to Iran Sunday to visit al-Hakim. Meanwhile Alsumaria is reporting whispers of what would be a significant change in governing in the Kurdistan Regional Government and have implications throughout Iraq: Barham Saleh, the current deputy prime minister, will reportedly resign his post to take over as Prime Minister of the KRG while Hurriyet reports that Turkey sent four to six airplanes to bomb northern Iraq Saturday in assaults on the PKK.
Over the weekend, arrests were announced. Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) reported that five US contractors were arrested by Iraqi forces in the death of a US citizen Jim Kitterman murdered in the Green Zone last month and has the name of two of them -- Donald Feeney Jr., Donald Feeney II -- from the son of Feeney Jr., John Feeney, who states his father and brother are innocent and were friends with Kitterman. John Feeney tells CNN, "We're pretty sure they will be questioned there in the next couple of days and released with no charges." BBC adds that "the US embassy in Iraq has not confirmed who they are and says no charges have yet been laid." Waleed Ibrahim (Reuters) speaks with an unnamed US embassy spokesperson who states, "Embassy consular officials have visited the five and ensured they are being afforded their rights under Iraqi law. The men appeared well." Alissa J. Rubin and Marc Santora (New York Times) cover the arrest and note, "Under Iraqi law, charges are not made until a court appearance. For a person to be detained there must be sufficient evidence for a judge to issue an arrest warrant." Alsumaria adds, "Cabinet spokesman Ali Al Dabbagh told the AFP that five US security contractors were arrested on Friday in a joint Iraqi-US crackdown in the green zone as part of investigations in the murder of an American. Al Dabbagh noted that Americans are investigating detainees who if convicted will be transferred to Iraq judiciary for trial." But Qassim Abdul-Zahra (AP) reports the same spokesperson, Ali al-Dabbagh, is now insisting 4 Americans, not 5, were arrested. In other contracting news, AP reports they have an unreleased report from the Wartime Contracting Commission that has found more corruption including problems "with a $30 million dining facility at a U.S. base in Iraq".
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"At least 7 dead in Baghdad bombings, 24 injured"
"A minor draw down, a huge increase in contractors equals continued illegal war"
Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Lowering the Brand"
"And the war drags on . . ."
"Kat's Korner: Ben Harper"
"An outpost may close"
"NYT covers fashion""The House Committee on Veterans Affairs"
"House Committe on Veterans' Affairs' Subcommitte on Health"
Truest statement of the Week
A note to our readers
Editorial: Iraq takes a backseat to state propaganda
TV: Who listens, who hears?
TV: State propaganda
Roundtable
A film classic
The Dallas Peace Clique
Who's duping who?
Iraq's LGBT community
House testimony on veternas
Highlights
"THIS JUST IN! BARACK & THOSE CROOKED NOMINEES "
"Tax cheats and torture czars"
WHETHER DRESSING UP IN HER FAVORITE PEG BUNDY OUTFIT AS IN THE PHOTO ABOVE OR TRYING TO BE INTERNATIONALLY STYLISH, MICHELLE OBAMA IS ALWAYS A FASHION FAILURE. WITH HER THICK GUT, SHE BELTED DIRECLY BELOW THE BOOBS FOR HER TACKY D-DAY NUMBER THAT DISRESPECTED THE DEAD.
NO WORD ON WHETHER SHE PICKED AT HER ASS ALL THROUGH THE D-DAY CEREMONY THE WAY SHE DID ON NBC LAST WEEK.
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
On KPFA yesterday, Flashpoints Nora Barrows Friedman filled in for Andrea Lewis on Sunday Sedition and her guests included Iraqi journalist Ahmed Habib
Nora Barrows Friedman: . . . Ahmed, you know just about 20 minutes ago we got a call from someone who was pointing out the fact that there has been all this redirecting of Iraq's natural resources of gas and oil out into the western markets. Talk about this ongoing theft of natural resources in your country, in Iraq, and across the region -- how that kind of fits into this neocolonialism and of course neoliberalism standpoint of what's going on right now to your country in particular.
Ahmed Habib: In our country of course we are all one people that are bound together by our struggle. and I mean wasn't that the idea in the first place the systematic theft of Iraq, the creation of a new colony there where cheap labor and cheap products can compliment the global economic system. Of course since the occupation in 2003 there has yet to be a safe and steady monitoring system that's put into place and also out of the southern most point of Iraq that is of course where most of the oil exports come out of through the gulf. Only recently we saw that the Kurdish government has been allowed to sell oil through the pipeline leading through Turkey in a perverse sort of selling out of their national struggle as the Turkish army continues to try to oppress Kurdish liberation fighters [PKK] in the mountains through waging a sort of war on terror again. There the Kurdish government, rife with corruption, in conjunction with the Iraqi central government in the Green Zone has found a way to funnel off Iraqi oil. The sad part about all of this, Norah, is that the despite the fact that Iraq has the potential to be producing 7 million barrels a day which is an astounding number, none of the resource profits are being seen on the streets of Baghdad. We still see deplorable conditions in health care very much similar to how they were during the sanctions. Electricity and water are still a scarce resource. But it's interesting to see how the economic restructuring and engineering of post-occupation Iraq has really been indicative of how America envisions the rest of the world and Obama really hasn't made any effort to change that. We see that in Iraq. There's been a major selling off of the major industries in the country or rather the most major sectors turned into industries -- such as energy, such as health care, such as anything related with the most fundamental elements of the infrastructure of the country. We also see some sort of perverse manipulation of economic activity in Iraq. I know that I've shared this before but it's a really excellent metaphor that really encapsulates what's happening in Iraq is that Iraqi farmers who in fact were some of the first in history to implement systems of modern irrigation and were some of the first to make scientific advancements in farming are now being told that they should farm wheat only using grains, self-terminating grains, that are being sold by American corporations. And those grains are in fact best used for the [. . . 95?] string of pasta and for anybody who's had the opportunity to dive into the beauty of Arabic food they'll now that pasta isn't a main staple in our diet. So it's clear that Iraq is being set up as a place for exports. We see countries that have had happen to them throughout history. We see the Philippines -- another country that has been destroyed economically. There's tremendous poverty, there's a lack of infrastructure, there's a corrupt government. We see this in Mexico. I know that coming up next you have a guest who's going to be talking about the murder of indigenous activists in Peru and of course in that country things are very similar as well with many of the natural resources being -- minerals and what not -- being extracted at the cost of the indigenous people there. So what's happening in Iraq unfortunately despite the magnanimous scale of the calamity that's facing people we know that there's more than 700,000 people that have been confirmed dead as a result of the violence of the occupation, as many as five million people have been forced to flee their country. What's happening in Iraq isn't really unique to the country and within the microcosm of the Arab world it's very much tied to the continuing apartheid regime in Israel and throughout the rest of the world. It's very much tied to the neoliberal extraction and exploitation that indigenous people are facing everywhere.
The Iraq War continues, it has not ended. Comedy Central's Stephen Colbert grasps it, even if others don't. Campbell Robertson (New York Times) writes about Colbert taping his show in Iraq and how "soldiers there" feel "that Americans have largely tuned the war out, that the economy had vacuumed up all the attention even though there are around 135,000 troops still here and still doing dangerous work. . . . Soldiers here are all too aware of America's attention span about this war, several of them at the taping said." Jon Kreig (Des Moines Register) knows the war hasn't ended: "The United States is digging in for more warfare, rather than planning to get out. Indeed, the deadline for U.S. troops to leave Iraqi cities has passed. Gen. George W. Casey Jr., Army chief of staff, said the Pentagon must plan for extended U.S. combat and stability operations in two wars -- up to 10 more years in Iraq. Meanwhile, a new report from the Pentagon indicated that there were now 250,000 private security contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is fair to call these people mercenaries since they do the jobs that service members did in Vietnam and other wars." Lez Get Real notes a report by Russia Today (text and vido):
Alice Hibbert: It's been revealed that the number of private security contractors working for the US war effort in Iraq and Afghanistan has greatly increased. While troops are being pulled out a Pentagon report says that the number of contractors working for the US Defense Department has increased by up to 30% since President Obama came to office. This figure has now swelled to some 250,000 working for companies such as Blackwater and Triple Canopy.
In related news, today the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute announced:Worldwide military expenditure in 2008 totalled an estimatedUS$1464 billion, according to new figures released today by Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). This represents an increase of 4 per cent in real terms compared to 2007, and an increase of 45 per cent since 1999. SIPRI today launched the 2009 edition of its Yearbook on Armaments, Disarmament and International Security.The Yearbook shows that the USA accounted for the majority (58%) of the global increase between 1999 and 2008, with its military spending growing by $219 billion in constant 2005 prices over the period. Even so, it was far from the only country to pursue such a course. China and Russia, with absolute increases of $42 billion and $24 billion respectively, both nearly tripled their military expenditure over the decade. Other regional powers -- particularly India, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Israel, Brazil, South Korea, Algeria and the UK -- also made substantial contributions to the total increase.'The idea of the "war on terror" has encouraged many countries to see their problems through a highly militarized lens, using this to justify high military spending,' comments Dr Sam Perlo-Freeman, Head of the Military Expenditure Project at SIPRI. 'Meanwhile, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost $903 billion in additional military spending by the USA alone.'
The illegal war's not ending. Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) reported yesterday on a sinkhole for millions of US tax payer dollars to fund and operate Baghdad Now -- a piece of propaganda put together: "That the paper has no publicly known editor, no bylines and no ads is no mistake. It is part of America's huge psychological warfare campaign to influence Iraqis' behavior and attitudes." Iraqis do not take Baghdad Now seriously but it's a US military 'news' outlet "produced by an Army psychological operation unit and distributed for free by soldiers. Piles of it are left at entrances to the Green Zone for passerbys to pick up." Since these operations don't appall or get coverage from US media, let's grasp that the military is always testing. They've used every battlefield to test new weapons and to test new techniques. Don't be surprised if at some point Baghdad Now becomes DC Now or if we find out that the military is embedded again at CNN. The military does not go to other fields to fight for freedom. Troops are sent to battlefields to test new forms of war fare. That's the reality.
On the diplomated front the Tehran Times reported Jalal Talabani, Iraq's president, met with Hassan Kazemi Quomi, Iranian Ambassador to Iraq, about increasing the ties between the two countries. In addition, Nouri al-Maliki made his pilgrimage to meet up with Sayyed Abdul Aziz al-Hakim -- Dick Cheney's friend, Iraqi exile who returned after the invasion and presumed to be deathly ill -- in Iran. UPI reports Jalal Talabani went to Iran Sunday to visit al-Hakim. Meanwhile Alsumaria is reporting whispers of what would be a significant change in governing in the Kurdistan Regional Government and have implications throughout Iraq: Barham Saleh, the current deputy prime minister, will reportedly resign his post to take over as Prime Minister of the KRG while Hurriyet reports that Turkey sent four to six airplanes to bomb northern Iraq Saturday in assaults on the PKK.
Over the weekend, arrests were announced. Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) reported that five US contractors were arrested by Iraqi forces in the death of a US citizen Jim Kitterman murdered in the Green Zone last month and has the name of two of them -- Donald Feeney Jr., Donald Feeney II -- from the son of Feeney Jr., John Feeney, who states his father and brother are innocent and were friends with Kitterman. John Feeney tells CNN, "We're pretty sure they will be questioned there in the next couple of days and released with no charges." BBC adds that "the US embassy in Iraq has not confirmed who they are and says no charges have yet been laid." Waleed Ibrahim (Reuters) speaks with an unnamed US embassy spokesperson who states, "Embassy consular officials have visited the five and ensured they are being afforded their rights under Iraqi law. The men appeared well." Alissa J. Rubin and Marc Santora (New York Times) cover the arrest and note, "Under Iraqi law, charges are not made until a court appearance. For a person to be detained there must be sufficient evidence for a judge to issue an arrest warrant." Alsumaria adds, "Cabinet spokesman Ali Al Dabbagh told the AFP that five US security contractors were arrested on Friday in a joint Iraqi-US crackdown in the green zone as part of investigations in the murder of an American. Al Dabbagh noted that Americans are investigating detainees who if convicted will be transferred to Iraq judiciary for trial." But Qassim Abdul-Zahra (AP) reports the same spokesperson, Ali al-Dabbagh, is now insisting 4 Americans, not 5, were arrested. In other contracting news, AP reports they have an unreleased report from the Wartime Contracting Commission that has found more corruption including problems "with a $30 million dining facility at a U.S. base in Iraq".
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"At least 7 dead in Baghdad bombings, 24 injured"
"A minor draw down, a huge increase in contractors equals continued illegal war"
Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Lowering the Brand"
"And the war drags on . . ."
"Kat's Korner: Ben Harper"
"An outpost may close"
"NYT covers fashion""The House Committee on Veterans Affairs"
"House Committe on Veterans' Affairs' Subcommitte on Health"
Truest statement of the Week
A note to our readers
Editorial: Iraq takes a backseat to state propaganda
TV: Who listens, who hears?
TV: State propaganda
Roundtable
A film classic
The Dallas Peace Clique
Who's duping who?
Iraq's LGBT community
House testimony on veternas
Highlights
"THIS JUST IN! BARACK & THOSE CROOKED NOMINEES "
"Tax cheats and torture czars"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)