When the facts don't fit, she goes to fantasy

BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE

THE ALWAYS TRASHY STEPHANIE MENCIMER AT THE LAUGHABLE MOTHER JONES HAS AN ARTICLE ABOUT MITT ROMNEY'S TAX RETURNS.  HAVING FAILED TO FIND ANYTHING IN THEM, THE FOCUS OF STEPHIE'S ARTICLE IS WHAT SHE HOPES MITT MIGHT BE DOING TO HIDE MONEY OFFSHORE.  IT'S ALL A BIT PATHETIC AND SAD, SORT OF LIKE PICTURING STEPHANIE ALONE IN HER BED YET AGAIN, FLIPPING THROUGH A FALLING APART PAPERBACK BY NANCY FRIDAY WITH ONE HAND AS SHE TRIES AND TRIES TO PLEASURE HERSELF WITH THE OTHER. 

STEPHIE, OF COURSE, WILL FOREVER BE INFAMOUS FOR HER ATTACK ON JAMIE LEIGH JONES.  IT TAKES A REAL PIECE OF TRASH TO BE A WHORE FOR HALIBURTON.  PEOPLE SHOULD KEEP THAT IN MIND WHEN READING ANYTHING BY THAT HUMAN PIECE OF CRAP STEPHANIE MENCIMER.


FROM THE TCI WIRE:

 

 

Fars News Agency reports, "The US consulate in Iraq's Northern city of Kirkuk was targeted by rocket attacks, a source in Kirkuk police announced on Tuesday." In the post-September 11, 2012 era of diplomacy, that attack may actually get noticed. The attack on the US Consulate in Libya resulted in the deaths of four Americans. Maybe Barack will just call today's attacks more "bumps in the road"? More than likely, he and the White House will just avoid mentioning it entirely. Maybe the White House will follow the State Dept's lead and just refuse to hold daily press breifings? There was no press briefing by the State Dept yesterday, there's none today. Is there something confusing about the term "daily press briefing"? Do they really think that Philippe Reines' nasty e-mails to Michael Hastings won't be a topic when they finally hold a press briefing? (For news of those e-mails, refer to Lucy Madison's report for CBS News which is work safe.)

 

 

Glen Doherty, Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith and Tyrone Woods died September 12th due to the attack on the US Consulate in Libya. Two weeks later, when another US consulate is attacked with rockets, you don't think that warrants a public response from the US State Dept? Other than both being attacked with rockets, there's nothing similar and, fortunately, no one was hurt in the attack today. But you don't think a rocket attack on a US Consulate merits a word or two from the State Dept?

 

 

Apparently not.

 

 

Four Americans died. Four. Each one was valued. They are devalued when you name the ambassador and render the others invisible. US President Barack Obama did that today at the United Nations.

 

 

That is outrageous. 18 sentences about the ambassador and Glen Doherty, Sean Smith and Tyrone Woods are reduced, by Barack, to "three of his colleagues." Is someone confused about the job they hold? Barack's not head of the US State Dept, he's President of the United States. Four Americans died, each life had value, each life had meaning, how dare he ramble on for 16 sentences about the ambassador and not even name the other three who died, not even name them.

 

 

This wasn't about honoring Chris Stevens, this was about creating a media moment, something that you knew would grab attention. The office of the President of the United States is supposed to be above media moments. Is there not one damn grown up in the administration?

 

 

Apparently not because Matt Compton's White House post is all about how "President Obama remembered Ambassador Chris Stevens" and how Stevens "was slain earlier this month in an attack" -- Compton never even does the insulting "three of his colleagues."

This is outrageous and insulting to the memories of Glen Doherty, Sean Smith and Tyrone Woods. These were prepared remarks. It was intended that Barack would name Chris Stevens and go on about him for 16 sentences. And that wouldn't be a problem if the other three had been so honored but they weren't. They were ignored. Not even named.

Only 14 days after the four died while serving the United States and three are disappeared, not even named, in a prepared speech? Where are the grown ups? What an insult to everyone who works for a US embassy or consulate -- which does include guarding one.

 

 

What an insult.

 

 

Unlike Doherty, Smith and Tyrone, Stevens has been the focal point of massive media accounts and that's the only reason his name was used in the speech, the hope that it would create a media moment for Barack to look caring and concerned. If you're caring and concerned, (a) you don't need to create that impression (people know) and (b) you don't render three of the dead in the same attack invisible.

 

 

 

All those pretty lies, pretty lies

When you gonna realize they're only pretty lies

Only pretty lies

Just pretty lies

-- "The Last Time I Saw Richard," written by Joni Mitchell, first appears on her album Blue

 

 

 

In the speech today, Barack noted the Arab Spring:

 

 

It has been less than two years since a vendor in Tunisia set himself on fire to protest the oppressive corruption in his country, and sparked what became known as the Arab Spring. And since then, the world has been captivated by the transformation that's taken place, and the United States has supported the forces of change.

We were inspired by the Tunisian protests that toppled a dictator, because we recognized our own beliefs in the aspiration of men and women who took to the streets.

We insisted on change in Egypt, because our support for democracy ultimately put us on the side of the people.

We supported a transition of leadership in Yemen, because the interests of the people were no longer being served by a corrupt status quo.

We intervened in Libya alongside a broad coalition, and with the mandate of the United Nations Security Council, because we had the ability to stop the slaughter of innocents, and because we believed that the aspirations of the people were more powerful than a tyrant.

 

 

 

I'm sure some will emerge to point out that the toppled Tunisian, Yemen and Egyptian regimes were all supported by DC. I hope a few will point out that the Libyan War was illegal. But who will point out the obvious: Iraq.

 

 

Iraqis weren't supported. Iraqis took the street in January 2011 before the Arab Spring kicked off. They were protesting their loved ones disappearing into the 'justice' system. They weren't all young people so it didn't have the glossy blow and, of course, it wasn't in the KRG or in Baghdad when it kicked off so you didn't have the US and other foreign press around to cover it. But it did come to Baghdad and it did come to the Iraqi youth. And the US government -- which still had many troops in Iraq -- didn't help the Iraqi people. When Little Saddam Nouri al-Maliki began having his forces attack the protesters, the White House, the State Dept, the entire Barack Obama administration didn't say one damn word publicly.

Let's drop back to the February 28, 2011 snapshot and this will be a long excerpt but it's needed for the record:

 

 

Over the weekend, protesting continued in Iraq as it did on Friday's Day Of Rage. Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reported that protests continued Saturday with Samarra protesters defying a "curfew to attend the funerals of two people killed during protests" on Friday and that Iraqi forces opened fire on the protesters/mourners leaving eight injured while Basra also saw a funeral for a protester killed on Friday. On Sunday, BNO News reports, protests continued in Iraq with 27 protesters left wounded in Amara City by Iraqi forces. Today, at Baghdad's Tahrir Square, Alsumaria TV reports Iraqis turned out to demonstrate again.

Saturday, Wael Grace and Adam Youssef (Al Mada) reported the disturbing news that after Friday's Baghdad demonstration, four journalists who had been reporting on the protests were eating lunch when Iraqi security forces rushed into the restaurant and arrested them with eye witnesses noting that they brutal attacked the journalists inside the restaurant, cursing the journalists as they beat them with their rifle handles. One of the journalists was Hossam Serail who says that they left Tahrir Square with colleagues including journalists, writers intellectuals, filmmakers. They went into the restaurant where the Iraqi military barged in, beat and kicked them, hit them in the face and head with the handles of their rifles, cursed the press and journalists, put him the trunk of a Hummer. This is Nouri al-Maliki's Iraq -- the Iraq the US forces prop up at the command of the Barack Obama. Stephanie McCrummen (Washington Post) added that the journalists stated "they were handcuffed, blindfolded, beaten and threatened with execution by soldiers from an army intelligence unit" and quotes Hossam Serail (spelled Hussam al-Ssairi) stating, "It was like they were dealing with a bunch of al-Qaeda operatives, not a group of journalists. Yesterday was like a test, like a picture of the new democracy in Iraq."

In addition, Alsumaria TV adds, "Iraqi security forces released on Friday Alsumaria reporters Sanan Adnan and Idris Jawad in addition to cameraman Safaa' Hatem. Alsumaria reporters were arrested while covering the protests of Baghdad's Tahrir Square. Security forces attacked as well Alsumaria employees Ali Hamed and Muhannad Abdul Sattar who managed to escape." Stephanie McCrummen (Washington Post) reported Sunday, "Iraqi security forces detained about 300 people, including prominent journalists, artists and lawyers who took part in nationwide demonstrations Friday, in what some of them described as an operation to intimidate Baghdad intellectuals who hold sway over popular opinion." The Committee to Protect Journalists notes the above and other crackdowns on the press in Iraq (as well as in Yemen and Libya):

["]Security forces prohibited cameras from entering Baghdad's Tahrir Square, where there were thousands of people protesting, according to news reports and local journalists. Police confiscated tapes that reporters managed to shoot in the square, according to Al-Jazeera.

[. . .]

Anti-riot forces also raided the offices of Al-Diyar satellite TV station in Baghdad and detained 10 of its staff members for three hours, according to Al-Diyar's website. In the afternoon, anti-riot police stormed the office for a second time, prohibited the staff from entering the building, and detained at least three more employees.

Niyaz Abdulla, a correspondent for Radio Nawa and a volunteer for Metro Center, a local press freedom group, was assaulted today while covering demonstrations in Erbil. "I was on the air when a plainclothes security officer came and started threatening me," she told CPJ. The officer threatened to call over men to attack her, alluding to a potential sexual assault. "I stayed calm but it was very disturbing," Abdulla said. She added that two of her colleagues had their cameras confiscated while they were covering the demonstration.

In Karbala, anti-riot forces attacked Afaq and Al-Salam satellite channels crews, according to news reports. "They were beaten and cursed at while they were covering the march in Karbala," Jihad Jaafar, a correspondent for Afaq channel told Noun news website. He added that the tapes of the crews were confiscated. ["]

In addition, CPJ's Deputy Director Robert Mahoney is quoted stating, "We are particularly disturbed that a democratically elected government such as that of Iraq would attempt to quash coverage of political protests. We call on Baghdad to honor its commitments to respect media freedom."

Over the weekend, a number of journalists were detained during and after their coverage of the mass demonstrations that took place in central Baghdad's al-Tahrir Square. Simone Vecchiator (International Press Institute) notes:

["]During a news conference held on Sunday, four journalists -- Hussam Saraie of Al-Sabah Al-Jadid newspaper, Ali Abdul Sada of the Al-Mada daily, Ali al-Mussawi of Sabah newspaper and Hadi al-Mehdi of Demozee radio -- reported being handcuffed, blindfolded, beaten and threatened by security forces. They also claimed they were held in custody for nine hours and forced to sign a document, the contents of which were not revealed to them.
Aswat al Iraq news agency reported that the journalists will file a court case against the executive authority in response to the alleged violations of their civil rights.
This episode is the latest in a series of repressive measures adopted by security forces in order to stifle media reports about the current political and social unrest.["]

Meanwhile Nasiriyah reports that Maj Gen Qassim Atta, the spokesperson for Baghdad Operations Command is insisting he has no idea about targeting of the media, specifically four journalists being arrested on Friday, and insists there will be an investigation. He's calling on witnesses to come forward . . . so they can be disappeared? This morning Kelly McEvers (NPR's Morning Edition) reported on the attacks on journalists and focused on Hadi Al Mahdi whose "leg is really swollen" and who was one of the four noted above stopped Friday afternoon while "eating lunch with other journalists when soldiers pulled up, blindfolded them, and whisked them away. Mahdi was beaten in the leg, eyes, and head. A solider tried to get him to admit he was being paid to topple the regime."

 

 

You may not know it because Iraq, by then, received so little coverage, but journalist Hadi al-Mahdi? He was assassinated September 8, 2011. He had been threatened and harassed by Nouri's goons. Though security tape from outside his apartment should have revealed the killer or killers, that tape vanished. And, of course, no one was ever punished. I don't doubt for a moment that Hadi was killed on the orders of Nouri al-Maliki. Assassinated in his own home.

 

 

The US government didn't encourage or support the Iraqi people. The US government did not condemn the attacks on the protesters. The US government did ask several news outlets not to cover the ongoing protests -- which lasted months. Those who ignored the request risked not only US government ire but also physical assault because not even Western reporters were safe covering the protests as summer 2011 rolled around.

Who was doing the attacking? Nouri's forces and Nouri's supporters. And they weren't called out. Some outlets were very helpful to the US government. The New York Times, for example, ignored most of the protests and cast aspertions on the protesters in their Saturday, February 26th report of the first massive Friday protest across Iraq. I suppose it's a shame that those working for both the New York Times and the US government were able to collect only one pay check.

 

 

The US government said nothing publicly when Hadi was murdered -- murdered because he believed in core human values and he acted on his beliefs. But the Barack Obama administration never wants to offend Nouri al-Maliki.

 

 

Last week, when Senator John Kerry rightly noted that the US has the ability to tie conditions to all the US taxpayer money that flows to Nouri, the State Dept, via Victoria Nuland, immediately shot down the idea. They never want to offend Little Saddam. They stroke Little Sadam, they encourage him, they encourage his efforts to snuff out freedom. Last Friday morning, we noted that the proposal by Senator John Kerry and others on the Senate Foreign Service Committee was correct. By Friday evening, you could already see some results from what John floated. In Monday's paper, the New York Times editorial board would observe, "[. . .] Senator John Kerry, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, was right to warn last week that American aid could be reconsidered if Iraq failed to change course."

 

 

This morning, John Barry's "'The Engame' Is A Well Researched, Highly Critical Look at U.S. Policy in Iraq" went up at The Daily Beast:

Washington has little political and no military influence over these developments. As Michael Gordon and Bernard Trainor charge in their ambitious new history of the Iraq war, The Endgame, Obama's administration sacrificed political influence by failing in 2010 to insist that the results of Iraq's first proper election be honored: "When the Obama administration acquiesced in the questionable judicial opinion that prevented Ayad Allawi's bloc, after it had won the most seats in 2010, from the first attempt at forming a new government, it undermined the prospects, however slim, for a compromise that might have led to a genuinely inclusive and cross-sectarian government."

 

 

 

Could we discuss the above? Judging by the comments left on the article, no. You have Bush-supporters blaming Barack and Barack-supporters blaming Bush. No one wants to allow their own personal savior might have led them astray.

 RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"State of Law says provincial elections postponed"
"The reason the Iraqi government is so messed up"
"High opinion of himself?"
"Thoughts re: probation"
"The economy"
"the 39 steps"
"The election"
"Visuals"
"Bumps in the road?"
"Emmys and more"
"Fashion Disaster"
"Isaiah, Afghanistan, Greenday, Third"
"America's Top Model"
"THIS JUST IN! DANDY'S SNIT FIT!"