BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLECELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O WHORED OUT THE PEOPLE OF AMERICA TO BIG INSURANCE AND CALLED IT "HEALTH CARE."
NOW AS THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES HAVE ONLY -- HAVE JUST -- ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PONZI SCHEME, BARRY O AND HIS LITTLE WHORES
ARE FREAKING OUT.
ONE PIECE OF INSURANCE TRASH -- WHO WOULD PROBABLY BUST A NUT JUST DENYING YOUR INSURANCE CLAIM -- INSISTS THAT THE SUPREME COURT DOES NOT UNDERSTAND OBAMACARE.
FOR HOW MANY DAMN YEARS HAS THE WHORE BARRY O AND EVERYONE IN THE WHORE HOUSE ON PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE TOLD US THAT 'ONCE PEOPLE GET TO KNOW OBAMACARE, THEY'LL LOVE IT!'?
PEOPLE KNOW WHAT IT IS, THEY DON'T LIKE IT.
THE JUSTICES KNOW WHAT IT IS, IT RAISED CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS.
INSTEAD OF WHORING, BARRY O AND THE OTHER TRASH SHOULD HAVE TRIED TO PASS A LAW THAT WAS ACTUALLY LEGAL. IT'S ON THEM AND THEIR TRASHY ASSES.
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
This week,
Omar Ali (Liberation) notes A.N.S.W.E.R.'s San Francisco chapter held a teach-in the afternoon of March 25th at the First Unitarian Chuch on Franklin. The topic of the teach-in was the Iraq War. Speakers included Dr. Jess Ghannam, Nazila Bargshady, Dr. Henry Clark, former Attorney General Ramsey Clark, Richard Becker and Gloria La Riva. Ali notes, "The teach-in was well attended by progressives from many different movements and communities. The diversity of the attendees demonstrates the sense of unity of different strata of the working class of this country in opposition to the war against the Iraqi masses.
We're going to note a section of Iraq War veteran and
March Forward co-founder Mike Prysner's speech.
Mike Prysner: I am happy to see so many people here to talk about the real history of the Iraq War because now that it is perceived that for the most part the Iraq War as we knew it from 2003 until just recently has largely ended, a large number of troops, occupying troops, have gone and, of course with that, the US government is going to try to write the history of the war as they want it to be written. And that started not too long ago, actually started on the ninth anniversary of the war, the day that the invasion began, March 19th, President Obama made the day an official holiday to mark the anniversary. That day, March 19th, was now called The National Day of Honor. President Obama wrote in his declaration that soldiers fought block-by-block to help the Iraqi people sieze a chance for a better future, that the soldiers took new roles as diplomats and development experts to improve the communities where they served, that their strength toppled a tyrant and their valor helped build opportunity in oppression's place. Across the nearly nine years of conflict, the glory of their service always shone through. The language in this declaration is just gushing over the honor and heroism of US service members and the righteousness of the mission, the bravery, the glory, the valor the sacrfice, the success -- this is how they are writing the history of the war: A just, heoric mission with an unforseen evil resistance that was defeated only by our soldiers' determination to serve the United States of America. That's the history that they want to write. And they want to write the history that way because the reality is very different. The reality is that this government sent those soldiers that they are honoring with this holiday, sent them to a war against the will of the majority of the people both in the United States and in Iraq, that they lied and we can say now without any question that they lied about why they were sending those soldiers, that they ordered them to unleash the full might of the most powerful military machine in history against a people that had committed no crime nor posed any threat to our friends or family, that they gutted our schools, our communities, our healthcare services to pay for the war, that they laid waste to a beautiful, proud country and that when the war wasn't going well or going as they planned, they kept throwing bodies and more bodies and more bodies into the grinder. And in it's wake, it left every single person who is touched by that war destroyed and abandoned with no hope while the vultures on Wall Street cashed in. This is the real history of the war and what will -- for the time being anyway -- be etched into the calendars in the United States as a national day of honor, we know that it will be something very different for Iraq. It will be the day that they'll remember as a day of fear, as a day of pain, as a day that began a new nightmare -- one that would take the lives of over 1.3 million people, there would be 5 million homeless, 4 million orphans, a day when a foreign miltary invaded their soil in a war of aggression and would not leave and remained there for years to raid their homes, torture their parents and children, shred their identity and patrol their streets. That day, March 19, 2003, will forever be ingrained into the conscience of the Iraqi people not as a day to honor the US military but as the day when they saw its true face. I was one of those soldiers who marched into Iraq on the eve of the invasion in March of '03. I was 19-years-old. I wanted to go. I was willing to die for my country -- whatever that means, as President Obama has just honored us for. But I didn't know a lot of things then. I didn't know that when our commander-in-chief, my top military commanders, civilian advisors, and when they were telling us why we had to risk our lives, that they were lying and that they knew that they were lying. I didn't know that they lied because they couldn't tell the truth because the truth was so sinister. On the eve of the invasion, I didn't know that we would not be greeted with flowers and people cheering in the streets. I didn't know that for more than ten years prior, these people had arleady been dying at the hands of the US government. As we saw, they spent years bombing the food supply, water treatment plants, civilian infrastructure, hopsitals, that they intentionally starved Iraq, that they intentionally denied medicine so that hundreds of thousands of children would die as a result, that this was a calculated strategy. This is the government we're dealing with. I didn't know that I'd be a part of such an unparalleled loss of innocent life, such an unmatched level of destruction that it would constitute the greatest atrocity of the modern era. That's the real history of the Iraq War.
Today
W.G. Dunlop (AFP) reports, "Iraqis thought a better life was at hand when Saddam Hussain's regime fell in April 2003, but after nine years of violence and suffering, many are still waiting for their dreams to be realised. Iraq still faces major shortages in basic services such as electricity and water, the UN says some 1.3 million Iraqis are internally displaced, and though violence is down from its peak in 2006-2007, attacks remain common."
Also today, US Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice called to order a UN Security Council meeting noting, "The provisional agenda for this meeting is the situation in Iraq." Martin Kobler is the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon's Special Envoy to Iraq and he offered testimony as did the Iraqi Ambassador to the UN Hamid al-Bayati.
Kobler's opening remarks were confusing and not just for their spin. For example, he claimed, "The United States completed the withdrawal of its armed forces from Iraq on December 31, 2011." December 18, 2011 is generally seen as when the US military withdrew most of it troops. (Left behind? Trainers, Special Ops, Marines to protect the Embassy and Embassy staff, the CIA and the FBI as well as thousands of contractors working for the US State Dept.)
Kobler noted the political crisis, "The continued delays in convening the National Conference underscores the urgent need for Iraqi leaders to summon the political will and courage to work together to solve the country's problems through an inclusive dialogue. In this regard, UNAMI will continue to remain steadfast in its commitment in assisting the government and people of Iraq to address the major challenges facing their nation."
He spoke of "the need for conducting provincial elections in Kirkuk as soon as possible." The steps for this were outlined in Iraq's 2005 Constitution -- Article 140. Who refused to implement Article 140 by the end of 2007 as the Constitution required? Prime Minister and thug Nouri al-Maliki. Political Stalemate I followed the March 7, 2010 elections and lasted for 8 months as Nouri refused to allow anyone else to be named prime minister-designate (despite Nouri's State of Law coming in second to Iraqiya). He could dig in his heels because he had the backing of US President Barack Obama. In November 2010, the US-brokered Erbil Agreement ended Poltiical Stalemate I. The Erbil Agreement called for Nouri to get a second term as prime minister. In exchange for that, he had to guarantee certain things in the agreement including that Kirkuk would be resolved as outlined in the Constitution. Once he became Prime Minister (end of December 2010), he trashed the Erbil Agreement and that created Political Stalemate II which has now lasted approximately 16 months.
UN Special Envoy Martin Kobler: [. . .] the tensions that have arisen between the main party blocs in Iraq which have developed into a political impasse. I have therefore Iraqi political parties and leaders to work together in the spirit of partnership towards finding common ground that will resolve their differences. In this regard, Iraqiya's decision to end its boycott of the Council of Ministers and Council of Representatives was the right step. President [Jalal] Talabani suggested holding a National Conference as a way forward to bring about an end to the stalemate. Unfortunately, until today, there was no agreement on the agenda. An inclusive forum is needed, however, as a first step to end the political impasse. I call on all Iraqi leaders to sit together to address all their differences in a meaningful way. UNAMI stands ready to continue supporting these efforts. [. . .] I'm concerned that Iraq's political situation is heightening communal tensions in the country and leading to an increase in the number of attacks on civilians. Since my last briefing to the council, terrorist attacks have continued to target pilgrims and resulted in the killing and wounding of scores of defenseless people practicing their religion. Other attacks across the country have indiscriminately targeted civilians resulting in large numbers of deaths and injuries including children. In the first three months of 2012, a total of 613 civilians were killed and 1,800 were injured. This is slightly less than civilian casualties last year; however, every man, woman and child dying in terrorist attacks in the streets, markets or mosques of Iraq is one casualty too many. Such horrendous crimes against the Iraqi people need to stop and violence must end if Iraq is to achieve the prosperous and secure future its people deserve.
There is more on violence that we'll get to in a moment. But let's go to where things stand with the major blocs in Iraq today.
Al Mada notes that UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon states the political crisis needs to be addressed and regrets that the national conference was not held last Thursday as scheduled. (The National Conference is what Iraqi President Jalal Talabani and Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi have been calling for since December 21st to address the ongoing political crisis.) Nouri has resisted the conference since it was suggested. In February, his refusal began to be based on the Arab League Summit which was scheduled for March 29th. He argued that the conference would have to wait until then. The weekend before the conference, Talabani pushed Nouri's hand by announcing that the conference would take place April 5th. Nouri quickly touted that in public statements. But then the conference was cancelled at the last minute, less than 24 hours before it was to be held.
Dar Addustour notes that State of Law MP Mahmoud Hassan and Kurdish Alliance MP Bir Saz Shaaban got into a loud argument yesterday. These actions mirror the conflict between Nouri and the KRG which includes, most recently, the issue of oil contracts and more long-term the lack of an oil and gas law and the failure of Nouri to implement the agreed upon Erbil Agreement.
Florian Neuhof (The National) notes:
Baghdad is irked by ExxonMobil's decision late last year to explore six blocks in the Kurdistan region, following the lead of Tony Hayward, the former BP chief executive who is heading the investment company Vallares, along with numerous smaller oil companies.The central government has an informal policy of blacklisting oil companies active in the autonomous region from licensing rounds in the south of the country. But tough contracts and difficult conditions have made Kurdistan an attractive option for big operators over the rest of Iraq. The French oil major Total has hinted it may set up shop in the north.Al Mada reports that officials in both the central-government in Baghdad and the KRG government are stating that to prevent ExxonMobil from operating in Iraq would be a blow to Iraq's oil industry. Moqtada al-Sadr has waded into the issue.
Al Mada reports his online column this week responds to questions about the dispute and he states that the oil is not the centeral-government's oil or the KRG's oil but Iraqis' oil and belongs to all Iraqis. Asked of speaking with US President Barack Obama, al-Sadr states Barack needs to learn a lesson and floats that option that Barack, on a visit, could meet the same shoe treatment Bully Boy Bush did. He also states that Barack continues occupation and oppression of Muslims.
KRG President Massoud Barzani met with Barack last week as he visited DC. For his speech Thursday at the
Washington Institute for Near East Policy see Thusday's "
Iraq snapshot" for his response to questions on the issue of Kirkuk see Friday's "
Iraq snapshot." He also spoke at an event for Kurds in the US and
Kani Xulam (Rudaw) covers that event:
There were other tidbits about little Kurdistan, but I am going to be picky for the purposes of this report. In America, he said, he was happy to meet with the likes of President Obama and conveyed to him our people's unswerving commitment to the constitution of Iraq, which recognizes Kurdistan as a federal state. But, he added, there were unmistakable signs of trouble in the city on the Tigris. The source of that concern was Nouri Maliki. He was concentrating power in his hands, he was like five ministers at once, and now, again, Mr. Barzani raised his voice: "He also wants to be head of the Central Bank of Iraq."The Kurds aren't the only ones in disagreement with Nouri.
John Glaser (Antiwar.com) writes of the ongoing political crisis:
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has demonstrated an increasingly authoritarian rule as he consolidates power over the country's institutions and security forces. He has marginalized his political opponents through force and coercion, which has stoked sectarian tensions and even threatened a break-up of the nation. And Obama is supporting all of it. Maliki, a Shiite, ordered the arrest of his Sunni Vice President Hashemi just as the last U.S. troops left Iraq. The U.S. ambassador to Iraq expressed approval in January of this quest to detain Iraq's vice president on trumped up terrorism charges, despite a virtual consensus that it was a blatant attempt to eliminate a political rival.
Tareq al-Hashemi is Sunni, he's also a member of Iraqiya which won the most votes in the March 7, 2010 elections.
Emre Peker (Bloomberg News) reports that Tareq al-Hashemi "arrived in Turkey last night". He's on a diplomatic tour and has already visited Qatar and Saudi Arabia.
AFP adds, "During his visit to the kingdom, Saudi officials said that Al Hashemi might remain in the kingdom until his political foe, Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, leaves office. But Hashemi's aides said he would not live in exile and would return to the autonomous Kurdish region in Iraq, where he has been sheltering since he was accused late last year of running a death squad."
Today's Zaman notes, "Al-Hashemi's visit to Turkey was his first trip to Turkey since the allegations were leveled against him."
Iraqiya's led by
Ayad Allawi who has penned a column for the Washington Times addressing Iraq's political crisis:
Of even greater concern is the increasing number of attempts to quash or take over institutions that are supposed to be independent, such as the elections, integrity and communication commissions and, most recently, the Central Bank. These, among other disturbing acts, are chilling reminders of the governance pattern established by dictatorship. More recently, Mr. al-Maliki stepped up his rhetoric against the government of the Kurdistan region. This was partly on the heels of Mr. al-Maliki's unconstitutional moves to target Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi and Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq immediately after he returned from a trip to the United States. This, in turn, brought Iraqis to make wrongful inferences about Washington's role in this series of events, in contradiction to the original vision of the United States to build a democratic state in Iraq with civil liberties, national reconciliation, an independent and fair judiciary, and pluralistic political and media systems.
Washington's evident disengagement gave Mr. al-Maliki the confidence to move even closer to his objective of achieving absolute power by blatantly avoiding the implementation of the power-sharing Erbil Agreement sponsored by Masoud Barzani and the White House. Eventually, the political momentum behind the agreement dissolved, allowing the country to drift back into sectarianism and autocratic rule instead of moving forward with reconciliation and reconstruction. The resulting disastrous state of affairs is fanning increasing disillusionment among Iraqis about the role of the United States and its efforts to create a stable democracy in Iraq.
With no obvious effort by Washington as the patron of the Erbil Agreement to break the current deadlock, Iraq surely will plunge into violence among Iraq's sects, ethnic groups and even political parties.
So that's where things stand in Iraq today. More or less, the same place they've stood for months now. This is Political Stalemate II -- or to use Martin Kobler's term "political impasse."
No comments:
Post a Comment