Cedric's Big Mix

Thursday, January 26, 2012

The battle of the speakers comes to a close

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

AFTER SEVERAL DAYS OF ATTEMPTING TO CONVINCE AMERICANS THAT SHE KNEW SOMETHING ABOUT NEWT GINGRICH, FORMER SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE NANCY PELOSI WENT ON THE RECORD TO DECLARE THAT SHE DID NOT KNOW ANYTHING.

REACHED FOR COMMENT, GINGRICH REPLIED, "THAT SOUNDS ABOUT RIGHT."

FROM THE TCI WIRE:

The Pentagon's US death toll for the Iraq War stands at 4487. That number doesn't include Staff Sgt Danielle Nienajadlo. Her service in Iraq included Balad Air Base. As Beth Hawkins (Mother Jones) reported two years ago, Danielle Nienajadlo quickly began suffering "headaches that kept her awake; unexplained bruises all over her body; an open sore on her back that wouldn't heal; vomiting and weight loss. In July 2008, after three miserable months, Nienajadlo checked into the base emergency room with a 104-degree fever." In a letter to Traveling Soldier in 2010, Danille's mother Lindsay Wiedman shared, "The Army still did not consider Danielle a Iraq casualty! And she was! Her very bosses that she went to while being very sick didn't believe her that she was sick. She suffered. SFC Addy was whom she went to and he said she was just trying to get out of Iraq! That was not who my daughter was. She valued her Army career, her family, me, her sister and would never not complete a hard days work. She could work Addy! Danielle died on the 20th. She would have completed her chemo the 21st. They were trying to get her to the stage of stem cell transplant. I miss her and am grieving! I blame Addy and Balad, Iraq. And I believe she should should have been considered a casualty! She deserved a big medal and the honors worth so more! I pray with time that Addy and her other bosses realize they helped kill my daughter." Along with her mother, BURNPITS 360 31-year-old Danielle's survivors include "3 sons Isaiah and Ian Jones and Titan Sanchez and her husband Jamie Nienajadlo." They note that on their Our Fallen Heroes page which also notes Ssg Steven Ochs -- dead at 32, Major Kevin E. Wilkins -- dead at 2, survived by wife Jill Wilkins and three children, Sgt Billy McKenna -- survived by wife Dine McKenna and their two daughters, and Jessica Sweet. Jeff Glor (CBS Evening News -- link is text and video) reported in June 2010, "Christopher Sweet blames his wife's leukemia on the burn pits she was exposed to in Afghanistan. Diagnosed in September 2008, Jessica Sweet died five months later." Sadly, it's very unlikely that those five will be the last.

Former-Senator Byron Dorgan explained November 6, 2009 when he chaired a Democratic Policy Committee hearing on burn pits, "Today we're going to have a discussion and have a hearing on how, as early as 2002, US military installations in Iraq and Afghanistan began relying on open-air burn pits -- disposing of waste materials in a very dangerous manner. And those burn pits included materials such as hazardous waste, medical waste, virtually all of the waste without segregation of the waste, put in burn pits. We'll hear how there were dire health warnings by Air Force officials about the dangers of burn pit smoke, the toxicity of that smoke, the danger for human health. We'll hear how the Department of Defense regulations in place said that burn pits should be used only in short-term emergency situations -- regulations that have now been codified. And we will hear how, despite all the warnings and all the regulations, the Army and the contractor in charge of this waste disposal, Kellogg Brown & Root, made frequent and unnecessary use of these burn pits and exposed thousands of US troops to toxic smoke." In addition, Disabled American Veterans notes:

In a 2006 memorandum to the Pentagon, Air Force Lt. Col. Darrin Curtis, who was in charge of assessing environmental health hazards at Balad Air Base in Iraq, raised serious concerns about toxic exposures from burn pits.
The letter, which was signed by Lt. Col. James R. Elliott, the Air Force's chief medical officer at Balad, confirmed the environmental dangers that open air burn pits posed to the soldiers and airmen who lived on one of the largest U.S. installations in Iraq.

Iraq War veteran Captain Leroy Torres is one of many Americans who knows the destruction and damage burn pits cause. He and his wife Rosie Torres have worked very hard to get the word out. In an attempt to explain the realities of life post-burn pit and to spur government action, Rosie Torres shares the following:

The barriers faced by those affected by toxic exposure stem from the various components that define the word Toxic Exposures and Burn Pits. It's those same barriers that for thousands of reservists and their families have left them financially, emotionally, and mentally broken. Our story is far too familiar for those that have been affected, so here is our story. I am the wife of Captain Leroy Torres, prior to his deployment I was working full time for the Department Of Veteran Affairs and he served a dual role in his community as both a full time State Trooper for the State of Texas and a U.S. Army Reservist. Our salaries combined placed us comfortably in the bracket of about $90,000 a year, but all that changed the day he stepped foot onto the airbase in Balad, Iraq. Camp Anaconda, the FOB with the largest Burn Pit in existence, the place where all of our dreams and hopes turned into toxic chemicals. The same chemicals that followed us home and have haunted us for the past 3 years.

For thousands of reservists the story goes like this, the soldier returns from war and immediately the effects of toxic exposure surface like the invisible wounds that they are. The soldier begins seeking treatment at various healthcare facilities only to discover that neither DOD nor VA is acknowledging toxic exposure from particulate matter or burn pits. The only option left if you happen to be blessed with the luxury of private insurance is to seek specialized healthcare in the private sector. Desperately seeking answers to the question of why this once active and healthy soldier can no longer function at the capacity that he/she once did. Why the once healthy father/mother, husband, wife, daughter, son can no longer breathe, why the diagnosis of cancer, why the white matter and the lesions in the brain, the fertility issues, the fatigue, the parasitic infections, the list goes on and on. The family spends their life savings traveling to access specialized healthcare from the physicians they call their heroes. The only healthcare providers brave enough to stand behind the truth of how toxic chemicals affect the body.

The family exhausts all of their finances to gain answers, the soldier can no longer work due to multiple diagnosis and symptoms immediately forcing the once successful career person to give up their life-long dreams. The reservists files an LOD which can take up to two years, the veteran files a claim with the VA which will never grant a rating compensation because there is no category for toxic exposures. All of this forces the family into an abyss of darkness, mental stress, financial stress, and denial of acceptance to their new way of life. The once productive, healthy, and functioning military family is suddenly falling apart at the seams. The gap between VA and DOD for the reservist component of the military service members wounded must be bridged by identifying the needs of those affected immediately. Too many people are losing their homes, their life savings, and their hope, hope in a system that once promised to care for them once they returned.

As I watch my husband deteriorate before my eyes, I wonder what happened to that Captain that stood tall and strong, the father that ran 2 miles twice a week with his boys, the state police officer that served on the tactical squad, and the husband that could run circles around me but instead he is now a patient of doctors from every specialty, pulmonary, neurology, Gastroenterology, Infectious disease.

As I walked into the waiting room of the State Department of Human Services to ask for public assistance I thought to myself how can this be possible. What happened to the Captain's wife, to the once full time VA employee, why have we lost our medical tricare insurance for our children, why are we asking for help? My husband holds a masters degree and we are both educated professionals, what happened to our lives? The toxic exposures from the burn pits from war happened to our lives and to thousands of others coming home. It's only a matter of time.

The Torres family advocates for a national registry for the victims of burn pits and are active with BurnPits 360 (Rosie Torres is the executive director):

BurnPits360 is serving as a pathway of advocacy to assist veterans, their families, and civilian contractors who have been negatively affected by toxic burn pits. Contractors were assigned the task of properly disposing of any and all trash on military installations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other locations in the Middle East. Unfortunately, instead of using incinerators, the contractors disposed of the waste through toxic burn pits and now thousands of veterans have been put at serious risk.

BurnPits360 is inviting anyone that has been affected from exposure to toxic burn pits and environmental hazards to sign up on the registry. We are conducting a voluntary cohort anonymous study with Dr. Szema at Stony Brook University. The study simply requires self-reporting your information on the online registry, providing a proof of military service (DD-214), a signed legal consent form, and additional questionnaires. This study will help to provide vital information to doctors and researchers that will help properly diagnose and treat the vast array of medical complications arising from these exposures. It will provide the Department Of Defense and the Department Of Veteran Affairs with data that will allow them to develop a healthcare model for specialized healthcare specific to toxic exposures and environmental hazards.

The importance of this registry is to serve as a model for all military personnel, civilian contractors, and their families to self-report injuries and deaths from toxic exposure from burn pits and other environmental hazards. It will also assist in proving causation and the correlation between the exposure and the illness, as well as determine all areas of possible exposure. It will provide the VA with the data needed to develop legislative language for the development of a compensation and pension category specific to toxic exposures.

Most importantly, this study is completely anonymous. None of your personal information will be shared at any time. (In such cases where information would ever need to be made public, it would not be done so without the members written consent, whereas the veteran, contractor, and/or their family have the option to decline to participate at that time.)

Should you be interested in participating in the study, please contact Burn Pits 360 via email [burnpitadvocates@burnpits360.org] or by telephone [361-816-4015].

Daniel Meyer is a disabled veteran and activist alerting the country to the dangers of burn pits. Julie M. McKinnon (Toledo Blade) noted that Meyer attended the Statue of the Union speech Tuesay at the invitation of US House Rep Shelley Berkley who told the newspaper, "As a veteran of both Iraq and Afghanistan, Staff Sergeant Meyer proudly served our nation in time of war, and we salute his valor and recognize the bravery and sacrifice of all the men and women in America's armed forces, our veterans, and their families." Along with his work with BurnPit 360, he also makes a huge impact by sharing his story and raising issues and awareness at his website Daniel Meyer Blog.com. Despite the bravery he shows and the bravery of others, those suffering from burn pits repeatedly have to reinvent the wheel and re-educate the public and the Congress about the burn pits effects that they now live with, explain the need for a federal registry, explain the need for the VA to recognize and educate. The first Burn Pits Symposium takes place this month and we'll note that at the end of the snapshot.

Keep your hands to yourself, Barack Obama

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

YESTERDAY ON THE TARMAC, CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O THOUGHT HE WAS AT LONDON'S HEATHROW AIRPORT AND ACTED DA DIVA.

FACE TO FACE WITH GOVERNOR JAN BREWER, BARRY O GOT A LITTLE NASTY AND, AS MARCIA POINTED OUT ALREADY, SHOWED WHAT HE REALLY THOUGHT ABOUT WOMEN.

AND THE PRESS DID SO AS WELL.

POLITICO RAN A PHOTO. AN AP PHOTO. THEY CROPPED IT. AS DID MANY OUTLETS. WHY? MAYBE SO THAT THEY COULD RUN WITH "AT ONE POINT, SHE POINTED HER FINGER AT HIM."?

NYC'S ABC RAN THE UNCROPPED PHOTO.

WHEN YOU CAN SEE BELOW THE ELBOWS, WHAT DO YOU SEE?

WE SEE BREWSTER POINTING AT BARRY O. WE NOTICE HOW HE'S BENT FORWARD AND IN HER SPACE. WE NOTICE, MOST IMPORTANTLY, THAT HE'S GOT HIS HANDS ON HER. WHEN YOU'RE IN ARGUMENT WITH SOMEONE, YOU DON'T PUT YOUR HANDS ON THEM.

IT'S CUTE THE WAY THE PRESS COVERED FOR BARRY STARTING AN ARGUMENT WITH A WOMAN, GRABBING HER WITH HIS HAND BY HER UPPER ARM AND THEY TURN IT INTO 'SHE POINTED HER FINGER AT HIM!'

SHE SHOULD HAVE SLAPPED HIM.

AND WHEN BULLY BOY BUSH GOT INTO ANGELA MERKEL'S PERSONAL SPACE IN A NON-CONFRONTATIONAL MANNER, WE WERE ALL SMART ENOUGH TO SEE IT FOR THE POWER PLAY IT WAS AND CALL IT OUT.

BUT THE PRESS DOESN'T WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT BARRY O'S GOING AROUND STARTING FIGHTS WITH WOMEN AND GRABBING THEM SO THEY CAN'T GET AWAY FROM HIM!

FROM THE TCI WIRE:

Sir Talks A Lot gave his State of the Union speech last night. A more accurate summary of the state of the union was delivered last Thursday in Harlem by Ralph Poynter.

Ralph Poynter: I want you to know that we all should have known better when Mr. Obama said that he was for change and peace. I want you to know that we should have known better when he started to run and he went to the Black Caucus to ask for their support. When they asked him why hadn't he supported the issues of the Black Caucus, his words were he did not want to be tainted by the Civil Rights Movement. We all know that Fannie Lou Hamer only wanted to vote. This is what Mr. Obama did not want to be tainted by; therefore, when we choose not to support Mr. Obama we want him to remember all of his words where he did not want to be tainted by the Civil Rights Movement, he said stop whimpering, stop whining, stop yammering. So we want to say to Mr. Obama when we don't show up to vote, stop whining! Stop whining, Mr. Obama! We no longer believe that you will stand for anything. You never stood for the First Amendment right of free speech. You never stood for the Fifth Amendment right to have an attorney. You never stood for anything that didn't support the corporations. We are standing for all of the people not the corporations. Mr. Obama, we are going to send you back home to Chicago where you helped destroy the projects. We need someone who stands for housing. We need someone who stands for jobs. We need someone who will be true to the words they say. Goodbye Mr. Obama.

Ralph, husband of political prisoner and legendary attorney Lynne Stewart, delivered the speech as a call and response with the over 400 gathered outside the Apollo Theater which was shut down for Barack's private fundraiser. On this week's. Black Agenda Radio, hosted by Glen Ford and Nellie Bailey, (airs each Monday at 4:00 pm EST on the Progressive Radio Network), they play the speech and report on the protest. We'll excerpt a section of co-host Nellie Bailey being interviewed by Don DeBar.

Nellie Bailey: This rally was called by Occupy Harlem along with a number of other sponsors and endorsers. And we're here to send a clear message to President Obama that he will not come to Harlem and not receive a scathing message of his service to the 1%.

Don DeBar: We just had the Dr. King holiday pass. I was listening to some of the things that were being played on the radio and one included 'the greatest purveyor to violence in the world today, my country.' That was when there was one war going on in Vietnam.

Nellie Bailey: And now we have three wars going on. Not only that, we have a military budget greater than all of the military budgets of the nation-states in the world combined. That is where we are. And we have seen the expansion of war under Obama than under President Bush. We have the National Defense Authorization Act under Obama, not under Republican Bush. We have NDAA that can be used by any sitting president including right-wing Republicans.

Don DeBar: And what is the NDAA, for people who aren't familiar with it?

Nellie Bailey: It is the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 that authorizes the indefinite detention, arrest without judicial review, charges of any American citizen on American soil at the behest of the president. Only the president of the United States can authorize this and we say that this is dangerous despite the fact that President Obama says that he would not authorize the use of NDAA but he has proven in so many instances that he does not tell the truth and we know that he can and will authorize the use of this bill. And we believe that this bill and the passage, particularly at the beginning of an election year, is to outflank the Republicans in terms of his right-of-center agenda and, secondly, to have a law that will crush any militant dissent and protest here in this country as the US plutocracy and oligarchy expand their illegal wars, occupation and military aggression against nation-states.

Nellie Bailey was one of the organizers of the successful protest. As Glen Ford notes here (link is text and audio) and as Nellie Bailey notes here (link is text), there has been a strong effort on the part of 'allies' to distort the protest in terms of number and who turned out. It was at least 400 strong and it was a success. On the National Defense Authorization Act, later in the program Glen Ford spoke to Chris Hedges about it. Excerpt.

Glen Ford: Veteran journalist Chris Hedges fears that anyone can be thrown into prison without trial under the preventive detention bill signed into law by President Obama so Hedges has sued the president. We asked Hedges how he decided to take on the White House.

Chris Hedges: It actually wasn't my idea. Carl Mayer who has been involved in lawsuits to defend the assaults against civil liberties including the ACLU lawsuit against the FISA reform act -- of which I am one of the plantiffs -- came to me and said, "Look, under this legislation, someone like you could be, potentially because of the nebulous language, charged. You've had direct, personal contact with groups that the state has defined as terrorist organizations. There are no provisions in this legislation to exempt journalists. Would you be willing to be a plantiff?" And I said yes.

Glen Ford: Particularly ominous in this legislation is the use of the term "substantial support," not material support.

Chris Hedges: Right.

Glen Ford: And most people think they understand what material support is --

Chris Hedges: Right.

Glen Ford: -- giving money, passing a gun, something, but substantial support?

Chris Hedges: Right and it could be substantial support for something called associated forces so it leaves open such a broad interpretation that there is no protection for someone like me under this law or I think for ultimately any kind of dissident because there has been a clear effort on the part of the security state to try and tar the Occupy Movement as a movement that's an enemy of American democracy. When you look at the list or the criteria by which the Attorney General's office can investigate people for terrorism, tossing in a couple of obstructionist tactics by the Occupy Movement isn't much of a stretch. I mean, people who are missing fingers on one hand, people who store over seven days of food and provisions, people who have weather proof ammunition. I mean, they're going to have to round up my entire family in rural parts of Maine.

Glen Ford: That's their profile of the potential terrorist.

Chris Hedges: Yeah, as 'worthy of investigation.' We know that there are at this point probably tens of millions of Americans who, because of the FISA reform act, whose e-mails, home messages, all of which are being monitored by the government

Glen Ford: In terms of substantial support, that could be interpreted as speech, giving aid and comfort to someone that they declare is the enemy.

Chris Hedges: Yeah, the way the law is written is, when you read it really closely, really terrifying because it's the whim of the security and surveillance state whoever they want to go after they can pretty much do so under this piece of legislation and then, of course, the way they do it is to use the military to carry out extraordinary rendition on American streets.

None of that reality made it into the State of the Union speech last night. David Swanson (War Is A Crime) observes of the speech:

In the news around the world and even in the United States on Tuesday was the anger among Iraqis at the failure of the United States to hold anyone seriously accountable for the 2005 massacre in Haditha. The story was a useful reminder of how the operations of the U.S. military over the past decade have fueled hostility toward our nation.
President Obama began his State of the Union speech Tuesday night by absurdly claiming the exact opposite, asserting that the war on Iraq has made us safer and -- I kid you not -- "more respected around the world." He later equated the war on Iraq to World War II, a surefire way to put anything beyond criticism in the United States, provided you can get people to fall for it.
Remember, this is the guy who won the Democratic Primary in 2008 by the simple fact of having not yet been in the Senate in 2003 and thus having avoided voting for the war that he funded to the hilt as a senator beginning in 2005. He had called it a dumb war. Now he says it made us safer. If it was dumb, was he dumber? What is he trying to say?
In the next breath, Obama says "some troops in Afghanistan have begun to come home." Never mind that there are three times as many U.S. troops in Afghanistan now as when Obama moved into the White House. The myth is that he's ending wars. Never mind that he was compelled to end the Iraq War, in so far as it has ended, by the treaty that Bush and Maliki created, and which Obama sought every possible way to violate. Never mind that Iraqi hostility toward U.S. criminals being granted immunity from prosecution was the primary reason that the Iraqi government insisted on the Bush-Maliki withdrawal date. A myth is a myth, and who will question it and still keep their job on U.S. television?

On Morning Edition (NPR -- link is text and audio), Elizabeth Shogren, Tom Gjelten, John Ydstie, David Wessel, David Welna and Claudio Sanchez provided facts checks on various sections of the State of the Union Speech. Susan (Random Notes) terms the speech "more neoliberal claptrap" and notes Patrick Martin (WSWS), "The State of the Union Speech delivered by Barack Obama Tuesday night was memorable only as a further milestone in the decay of American democracy." Mike took exception to 'religious' Barack telling Americans they needed to serve their country. Cedric and Wally objected exception to both the length of the speech and Barack's attempt to pass of recycled ideas as fresh. Betty questioned his "America's back" claim wondering, "From a bathroom break? Where did America go?" Mr. Pretty Words' pretty speech team was attempting to grab the Reagan luster. But, as Chrystler understood in the 80s, you say "the pride" is back, not America. It's assumed that America and Americans have remained strong regardless of the events and/or crisis -- be it a civil war or what have you. Only Barack and his speech writing team could manage to insult on a patriotic level while attempting to go jingoistic.

As noted yesterday, reality spoiled Barack's plans for self-stroking over Iraq in the State of the Union. As a result, last night Barack Iraq was only five sentences in the over one hour speech:

Last month, I went to Andrews Air Force Base and welcomed home some of our last troops to serve in Iraq. Together, we offered a final, proud salute to the colors under which more than a million of our fellow citizens fought -- and several thousand gave their lives. We gather tonight knowing that this generation of heroes has made the United States safer and more respected around the world. For the first time in nine years, there are no Americans fighting in Iraq. [. . .] Ending the Iraq war has allowed us to strike decisive blows against our enemies.

As noted this morning, what stood out in the speech was how inauthentic Barack was and how shocking that was since this was his fourth State of the Union speech:

It's partly because there's no speech writer in charge able to say, "Nice phrase, but it doesn't fit with the rest of the speech. It's clunky in its 'beauty' and causes people to notice it as opposed to noticing the point being made." So you get a variety of 'voices' in one speech. And Barack's not able to maintain consistency for more than seven minutes tops so that hour-plus performance last night was brutal, like watching Elizabeth Berkley struggle to breathe life into Nomi in Showgirls.

"Proud salute to the colors under which . . ." That's exactly the sort of phrase that stands out because one of the writers thought it was "beautiful" and they -- the writers -- horsetraded for their favorite moments. It's part of the reason Barack sounded like an idiot. One moment, 'Oh, I'm so serious and the economy and Congress must do this and without drama blah blah blah' and now I'm going to tell my milk joke ha ha. Now let me switch tone again and maybe they'll love me the way they loved Sally Field when she played Sybill!" It was awful and, for Brenda who wanted it included again, that includes his unnatural speech pattern which, as Ava and I observed several years ago, is ripe for parody:

We watched Monday in full as Barack uh-uh-uhed and spoke in that robotic manner that allows him to find more unnatural pauses than Estelle Parsons and Kim Stanley combined. "He's our Method president!" we quickly gasped while wishing we could have one president this decade capable of normal speech. If he gets any worse, he'll be Sandy Dennis.

Let's review the five sentences on Iraq.

1) Last month, I went to Andrews Air Force Base and welcomed home some of our last troops to serve in Iraq.

He knew to say "some" because military families have gotten very vocal about the fact that not everyone came home from the Gulf -- meaning not just the fallen but also the fact that US troops remain in Iraq -- Marines to guard the diplomatic sites, soldiers to be 'trainers' for weapons [which Al Arabiya points out Nouri al-Maliki noted today, "American soldiers in Iraq work as military trainers"] and Special-Ops -- and that thousands of troops have been repostured outside of Iraq in the surrounding region. Rowan Scarborough (Washington Times) reported Tuesday on all the troops being kept in the Gulf region:

About 50,000 U.S. military personnel are serving in and around the Gulf. Most are aboard ship or in Kuwait. News reports from the region say 15,000 U.S. troops are stationed in Kuwait as a check against a destabilizing situation in Iraq and the threat of aggression by Iran.
The aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln strike group sailed into the Gulf on Monday. Carrier contingents typically include a guided missile cruiser, two destroyers and an attack submarine.
In all, more than 30 U.S. ships and about 22,000 sailors are in the Gulf area.

"Some" may have been the most intelligent moment of the speech.

2) Together, we offered a final, proud salute to the colors under which more than a million of our fellow citizens fought -- and several thousand gave their lives.

This was the State of the Union. Why is it members of Congress are able to note the number but Barack can't. We pointed that out last month when he gave his Andrews Air Force Base speech. As commander in chief, he shouldn't be saying "thousands," he should know the number (his speech writers should) and he should state it. The Defense Dept's official count is at 4487 American military personnel died in the illegal war.

3) We gather tonight knowing that this generation of heroes has made the United States safer and more respected around the world.

He really lies.

You lie too much

You lie too badly

You want everything for nothing

-- "The Windfall (Everything For Nothing)," written by Joni Mitchell, first appears on her Night Ride Home

The illegal war did not make America 'respected around the world.' There's a reason, and even Barack knows this, that in 2004, Americans in college, traveling abroad, were encouraged to keep a low profile, maybe even pretend to be Canadian. Yes, it sounds like a Simons' episode but it did happen, Steve Giegerich (Associated Press) reported on it. That was 2003. Four years later, Anne Applebaum (Slate) would offer this:

It isn't just that the Iraq war invigorated the anti-Americanism that has always been latent pretty much everywhere. Far worse is the fact that -- however it all comes out in the end, however successful Iraqi democracy becomes a decade from now -- our conduct of the war in Iraq has disillusioned our natural friends and supporters and thrown a lasting shadow over our military and political competence. However it all comes out, the price we've paid is too high.

Three years later, 2010, Peter Ennis (Dispatch Japan) would note another column by Applebaum and add to the discussion:

As is usual in Washington these days, there was no mention -- probably no consideration -- of Japan. But a strong case can be made that the Iraq war hurt America's reputation in Japan as much, if not more, than in any other allied country.

The consequences are evident today in the increasingly bitter dispute over a replacement for the US Marine Air Station Futenma, on Okinawa, which is scheduled to be closed. They are reflected in the broader calls in Japan these days for a "more equal" alliance relationship with the United States.

The Okinawa dispute predates the Iraq War, and the calls for more equality in the alliance were inevitable. But deep concerns and disappointment about American 'unilateralism' and haughty, heavy-handed diplomacy, prompted by the Iraq War, have made those sentiments more salient and intense.

No, it did not help the image of America.

4) For the first time in nine years, there are no Americans fighting in Iraq.

Well we really don't know what Special Ops is doing in Iraq or the CIA or the FBI. We do know all three are involved in 'terrorist' 'hunting' and that Special Ops continues to have the ability to operate throughout Iraq. We don't talk about it too much but we know it and it's even made it on air on network television. And, of course, many Iraqis have questions about the numerous Americans that have been arrested in the last two months in Iraq.

5) Ending the Iraq war has allowed us to strike decisive blows against our enemies.

And that may be the most disturbing statement in the speech.

Decisive blows against our enemies? Whatever happened to the peace that was supposed to follow a war? Barack claims the war has ended and then starts making vengeful statements that harken to a deliberate search for 'foreign adventures.' The laugh is, yet again, on the Nobel Peace Prize Committee who gave a peace award to Barack because they liked how he posed for magazines covers.

Barack tried to talk tough. al Qaeda in Mesopotamia -- created by the Iraq War, didn't exist until then -- knows a bit more about tough up close than a little prince who went to prep school in Hawaii -- and in what some will dub "the terrorist response," they issued a statement today. AP reports that they declare, "America has been defeated in Iraq. They pulled out because its economics and human losses were unbearable. America's bankruptcy and collapes is imminent. This is the real reason behind the withdrawal."

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Sir Talks A Lot and a Lot and a Lot and a Lot

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

HE WAS DUBBED SIR TALKS A LOT YESTERDAY EVENING AND GOODNESS DID HE PROVE IT LAST NIGHT. CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O BLATHERED ON FOR OVER AN HOUR LAST NIGHT APPARENTLY MISTAKENLY THINKING HE WAS CHANNELING ABE LINCOLN BUT COMING OFF MORE LIKE HOWARD STERN'S STUTTERING JOHN.

NEVER SAY BARRY O DOESN'T BELIEVE IN RECYCLING, AS A.P. NOTED BARRY O PRESENTED THE SAME PLANS HE'S PRESENTED OVER AND OVER AND ALSO LIED FREQUENTLY IN THE SPEECH. THE REVIEWS WERE NOT PRETTY.

THIS MORNING BARRY O ASKED THESE REPORTERS, "SHOULD I HAVE FLASHED A LITTLE MAN BOOB?"

FROM THE TCI WIRE:

Today bombs slammed Baghdad. Aswat al-Iraq states, "These explosions remind the people of the 2006-2007 events." Alsumaria TV quotes an unidentified police source stating of the aftermath of a Sadr City car bombing, "Ambulance cars rushed to the incident site and transported wounded to a nearby hospital for treatment and the corpse to the department of forensic medicine." Yasir Ghazi and Duraid Adnan (New York Times) quote bombing victim Emad Jasim asking, "Where are my legs? Tell me where my legs are. Why are they not there?" Peter Cave (Australia's ABC News) notes that in addition to the bombing in the Sadr City section of Baghdad, the capital saw three other bombings and quotes Ahmed Ali on the Sadr City bombing, "We were all standing waiting to earn our living and all of a sudden it was like a black storm and I felt myself thrown on the ground. I fainted for a while then I woke up and hurried to one of the cars to take me to the hospital." Press TV notes two Sadr City bombings, the first targeting workers, like Ahmed Ali, the second "outside a bakery half an hour later." Of the other two bombings in Baghdad, Al Manar explains that a Shula car bombing claimed 2 lives and left sixteen people dead and a Al-Hurriya bombing claimed 1 life and left thirteen people injured. BBC News adds, "Officials said a roadside bomb also exploded on the Muthanna airport road in central Baghdad, wounding at least six people."

In all of the Baghdad bombings, the Telegraph of London counts 14 dead. AP counts 11 dead in Sadr City. Sadr City is a Shi'ite neighborhood of Baghdad, often referred to by the press as "a slum," inhabited by followers of Moqtada al-Sadr. Reportedly approximately one million people live in Sadr City (Iraq has not had a census in decades). Reuters notes 14 dead and seventy-six injured. Dan Morse and Aziz Alwan (Washington Post) report that there was also a home invasion in the Abu Ghraib section of Baghdad, police Captain Hassan Abdulla al-Timinimi was killed and so was "his family."

Outside of Baghdad, Reuters notes a Ramadi roadside bombing which claimed 2 lives and left three people injured, a Shirqat roadside bombing claimed 1 life and left another person injured, 1 person was shot dead in a barber shop and the owner was left injured, 1 corpse was discovered in Mosul, a Mosul roadside bombing injured one person, a Kirkuk sticky bombing left two police officers injured and, dropping back to last night for the rest, a Jalawla sticky bombing left one police officer injured, a Baquba mortar attack injured one child and a Tuz Khurmto sticky bombing claimed the life of 1 Sahwa.

This and other recent violence is said to have spoiled plans for Iraq to be a heavy point in tonight's State of the Union address so Sir Talks A Lot will have to find something else to spin. But not everyone's silent on Iraq. "Far from being 'too soon'," argues Phyllis Bennis, "the U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq came more than eight years too late -- and still, the war isn't over. This war should never have been launched, so it can't be ended soon enough." Bennis was part of Monday's Debate Club at US News & World Report. Michele Dunne argues that the US military left too soon (the US military remains in Iraq, Marines with the State Dept, soldiers as 'trainers,' Special Ops, etc.). She insists that the country was not stable enough for the US to leave, "Knowing that Americans would expect Iraq to become a success within a few years -- and that this most likely would not happen -- was one reason why I was not in favor of the 2003 invasion. But invade we did, and the question at hand now is whether US forces staying longer than eight years would have made a difference in how stable, peaceful, and democratic Iraq ultimately will be." Also arguing yes is Helle Dale: "For the Iraqi people, the consequences of the premature American withdrawal will be instability, resurgence of terrorism and an uncertain future for Iraq's fledgling democracy. On December 22, a wave of violent, coordinated attacks killed at least 57 people, and just days after the December 15th withdrawal ceremony, the dominantly Shiite government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki purged many Sunni Arab leaders. Political instability is sure to follow. The Iraqi army and air force training will suffer as will air operations, the Iraqi air force having few helicopters and planes." Danielle Pletka is another on the it was a mistake to pull troops, "Here's what success in Iraq looks like: democratic elections, sectarian comity, independence in foreign policy, al Qaeda stymied, cooperating with the United States, and self-sufficiency. Iraq didn't look completely like that in early 2011, but it was headed in the right direction. Here's what Iraq looks like now: en route to Shia autocracy, sectarian fighting, substantial and rising Iranian influence, al Qaeda resurgent, and an almost certain economic downturn rooted in instability." Like Bennis, Christopher Preble argues the US should have left sooner (and argues the US should never have invaded), "No amount of additional sacrifice by our brave men and women in uniform would change the final fundamental truth about Iraq: The Iraqis wanted their country back. Now they have it. I wish them well." US House Rep Dennis Kucinich agrees with Bennis and Preble and Kucinich notes the financial costs and the costs in lives (including over a million Iraqis killed) before concluding with this, "The war was supposed to last only a few months. Nearly nine years later, it still isn't over, as weapons are now wielded by a different agency and private contractors. Because there has been no accountability for the lies that killed millions, it is now easier than ever for America to start wars for spurious reasons. The war in Iraq should never have happened." That's six arguments -- three for, three against -- and the Debate features 12 arguments. You can also vote on your favorite argument. Currently Phyllis Bennis is at number one with 42 votes in favor of her argument. (All women making arguments were feature in the above excerpts. This isn't NPR where they disappear women from their live primary coverage. Had there been six women, as a tonic to NPR, the six excerpted would have all been women.) Congratulations to US News & World Reports for hosting a serious discussion on the Iraq War.

Back to Iraq and back to violence, Navi Pillay, the United Nations' High Commissioner for Human Rights registered her dismay today over learning that Thursday, January 19th, Iraq executed 32 men and 2 women. She stated, "Even if the most scrupulous fair trial standards were observed, this would be a terrifying number of executions to take place in a single day. Given the lack of transparency in court proceedings, major concerns about due process and fairness of trials, and the very wide range of offences for which the death penalty can be imposed in Iraq, it is a truly shocking figure." The UN notes that in the last seven years, Iraq is thought to have executed 1,200 people. Pillay stated, "Most disturbingly, we do not have a single report of anyone on death row being pardoned, despite the fact there are well documented cases of confessions being extracted under duress. I call on the Government of Iraq to implement an immediate moratorium on the institution of death penalty." Iraq is among a number of other countries that carry out executions. (The United States also carries out executions.) Amnesty International notes, "The worldwide trend towards abolition of the death penalty recorded further progress in 2010. One more country, Gabon, abolished the death penalty for all crimes and the President of Mongolia established an official moratorium on executions. For the third time, the UN General Assembly adopted with more support than ever before a resolution on a moratorium on the use of the death penalty. In 2010, 23 countries carried out executions and 67 imposed death sentences in 2010. Methods of execution in 2010 included beheading, electrocution, hanging, lethal injection and shooting. Countries that retain the death penalty defended their position by claiming that their use of the death penalty is consistent with international human rights law. Their actions blatantly contradicted these claims."

You might think violence like the above would get Nouri focused on nominating people to head the security ministries or addressing the political crisis, but you would be wrong. When violence rises in Iraq, Nouri sees the answer as attacking neighbors. Nouri's again creating problems with Turkey.

Again? From the January 13th snapshot:

In Iraq, the political crisis continues. Nouri started it and now he wants to expand it, apparently, to go beyond Iraq's borders. How else to explain his attacks today on the Prime Minister of Turkey? Today's Zaman reports, "Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has harshly criticized Turkey for its what he said 'surprise interference' in his country's internal affair, claiming that Turkey's role could bring disaster and civil war to the region -- something Turkey will itself suffer." Interfere? Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has cautioned that the political crisis could lead to a civil war in Iraq and has called on parties to start a real dialogue to resolve the issues. That's really not "interfering." But what has Nouri so ticked off is that Erdogan also stated the very plain fact that Nouri started the political crisis. It's a fact, Nouri doesn't like facts, but that doesn't change the status. AFP quotes Nouri stating, "Recently, we noticed their surprise interventions with statements, as if Iraq is controlled or run by them. Their latest statements interfered in domestic Iraqi affairs . . . and we do not allow that absolutely. If it is acceptable to talk about our judicial authority, then we can talk about theirs, and if they talk about our disputes, we can talk about theirs. Turkey is playing a role that might bring disaster and civil war to the region, and Turkey itself will suffer because it has different sects and ethnicities." It's always funny when Nouri unleashes his crazy in public. That was what bothered the French government the most about the White House backing Nouri in 2010, that Nouri was clearly unstable and that's who Barack wanted to rule Iraq? Crazy Nouri. KUNA reports Nouri and Erdogan were on the phone Thursday discussing the situation in Iraq. And now, today, Nouri's parading the crazy. At this rate, the bullet to the head so many observers feel is in Nouri's immediate future just may come from his own gun.

While Nouri was showing the world how unhinged he is, the Turkish Press reports that Erdogan was speaking on the phone with US Vice President Joe Biden about Iraq: "Reportedly, Erdogan said to Biden that if Iraq distances itself from the culture of democracy, efforts previously exerted for peace and stability will be wasted. Sources added that Erdogan and Biden also indicated that authoritarian and sectarian policies will never benefit Iraq and that Turkey and the US consider benefit in holding dialogue and consultations regarding the developments in Iraq."

The war of words continued. From January 15th:

Not content at lashing out at politicians in his own country, Nouri appears determined to expand the political crisis into the entire region. Al Mada notes that Nouri is stating the remarks of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan will cause a catastrophe. Hyperbole's always been a part of Nouri's make up. Kitabat also notes Nouri's attack on Erdogan and how he accuses Erdogan's call for Iraq to resolve the political crisis as Turkey interfering in Iraq's domestic affairs. You've heard of a pep squad? Well Nouri has a thug squad. And Al Mada reports that State of Law, on Saturday, joined Nouri in attacking Edrogan and the country of Turkey.

Following days of those public and bullying remarks, Nouri's thugs decided to grab the rocket launchers. Wednesday the Turkish Embassy in Baghdad was attacked. Though Nouri could and did bully, he had no public remarks to make on the embassy being attacked.

World Bulletin explains Turkey's Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan declared today, "The idea that 'Turkey is interfering in our domestic affairs' is a very ugly and unfortunate one. Mr. Maliki should know very well that if you initiate a period of clashes in Iraq based on sectarian strife, it is impossible for us to remain silent." He also stated, "We expect the administration in Iraq to display a responsible stance that will stem sectarian clashes." Thus began today's call in response, what AGI terms the "war of words." Jonathon Birch (Reuters) quotes Nouri's official statement, "This is not acceptable in the dealings between officials or different states and especially from heads of state. Mr. Erdogan has to be more careful in handling the usual protocols in internationl relations." Catherine Cheney (World Politics Review) offers, "According to Henri Barkey, a Turkey expert at Lehigh University, the recent escalation in tensions is simply the latest and most pointed in a series of diplomatic divergences between Turkey and Iraq, which have found themselves on opposite sides of a growing number of issues since the beginning of the Arab Spring."

Sammy Ketz (AFP) reminds, "At the weekend, Iraq said that Turkey, Iran and unnamed Arab countries were trying to 'intervene' in Baghdad's month-long political crisis and not respecting its sovereignty." Saturday, Saud al-Zahid (Al Arabiya) reported, "Commander of Iraqn's Quds Force, Brig. Gen. Qasem Soleimani has said that the Islamic Republic controls 'one way or another' over Iraq and south Lebanon and that Tehran is capable of influencing the advent of Islamist governments in order to fight 'arrogant' powers, ISNA student agency reported on Thursday." Following that announcement, there were four responses. Alsumaria TV reported, "Iraqi Sadr Movement headed by Cleric Sayyed Muqtada Al Sadr rebuked, on Friday, Iranian Quds Forces Commander Qassim Suleimani for declaring that Iraq is subject to Iran's will and that there is a potential to form an Islamic government in Iraq. These statements are unacceptable, Sadr Movement argued assuring that it doesn't allow any pretext to interfere in Iraqi internal affairs." KUNA noted that Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari released a statement which includes, "Iraq has not and will never be affiliated to anyone and will not be a toy in others' game or a place to settle scores between different parties." Alsumaria TV also noted Kurdistan Alliance MP Mahmoud Othman objecting to the statements and terming them "a blatant interference in the affairs of Iraq." And Aswat al-Iraq reported: the Iraqiya's spokesperson Maysoon al-Damalouji condemned the statement and called for the Iraqi government to officially respond to it. But Nouri had no statement on Saturday or since. However, he has managed to pick a fight with Turkey repeatedly in the last two weeks.

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

Tim Thomas says no to a political photo-op

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

THE BOSTON BRUINS' TIM THOMAS REFUSED TO BE A POLITICAL PROP YESTERDAY BY SUBMITTING TO A PHOTO OP WITH CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O AND NOTED THAT "I BELIEVE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS GROWN OUT OF CONTROL, THREATENING THE RIGHTS, LIBERTIES, AND PROPERTY OF THE PEOPLE." THE RESPONSE?

THE OWNERS RESPONDED LIKE DAINTY OLD WOMEN -- MAYBE HOCKEY'S NOT THE SPORT FOR THEM -- BY CLUTCHING THE PEARLS AND EXPRESSING SHOCK AND DISMAY. AND ESPN REFUSED TO PUT TIM'S FULL STATEMENT ON AIR.

TIM THOMAS REFUSED TO BE A DANCING MONKEY FOR A POLITICIAN'S PHOTO-OP, ESPN AND THE OWNERSHIP OF THE BRUINS DEMONSTRATED THEY'RE ALL ABOUT SUCKING UP TO POLITICIANS. HERE'S TIM THOMAS' STATEMENT IN FULL:

"I believe the Federal government has grown out of control, threatening the Rights, Liberties, and Property of the People. This is being done at the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial level. This is in direct opposition to the Constitution and the Founding Fathers vision for the Federal government. Because I believe this, today I exercised my right as a Free Citizen, and did not visit the White House. This was not about politics or party, as in my opinion both parties are responsible for the situation we are in as a country. This was about a choice I had to make as an INDIVIDUAL."

FROM THE TCI WIRE:

Actions do have consequences and the decision by the White House to back Nouri al-Maliki as prime minister in 2010 has had very serious consequences for Iraq and that becomes more obvious each day. Along with the ongoing political crisis, now there's a new report with observations on Iraq was issued. The Associated Press quoted Human Rights Watch's Sarah Leah Whitson stating, 'Iraq is quickly slipping back into authoritarianism. Despite U.S. government assurances that it helped create a stable democracy (in Iraq), the reality is that it left behind a budding police state'." She was referring to what Human Rights Watch found and documented in their [PDF format warning] World Report: 2012. We'll emphasize the focus on Baghdad protests:

On February 21, Iraqi police stood by as dozens of assailants, some wielding knives and clubs, stabbed and beat at least 20 protesters intending to camp in Tahrir Square in Baghdad, the capital. During nationwide demonstrations on February 25, security forces killed at least 12 protesters across the country and injured more than 100. Baghdad security forces beat unarmed journalists and protesters that day, smashing cameras and confiscating memory cards.

[. . .]

On June 10 in Baghdad government-backed thugs armed with wooden planks, knives, iron pipes, and other weapons beat and stabbed peaceful protesters and sexually molested female demonstrators as security forces stood by and watched, sometimes laughing at the victims.

Authorities also used legal means to curtail protests. On April 13, Iraqi officials issued a new regulations barring street protests and allowing them only at three soccer (football) stadiums, although they have not enforced the regulations. In May the Council of Ministers approved a "Law on the Freedom of Expression of Opinion, Assembly, and Peaceful Demonstrations" that authorizes officials to restrict freedom of assembly to protect "the public interest" and in the interest of "general order or public morals." At this writing the law still awaited parliamentary approval.

[. . .]

On September 8 an unknown assailant shot to death Hadi al-Mahdi, a popular radio journalist often critical of government corruption and social inequality, at his Baghdad home. The Ministry of Interior said it would investigate his death, but at this writing no one has been charged. Immediately prior to his death al-Mahdi received several phone and text message threats not to return to Tahrir Square. Earlier, after attending the February 25 "Day of Anger" mass demonstration in Baghdad, security forces arrested, blindfolded, and severely beat him along with three other journalists during their subsequent interrogation.

In addition, Human Rights Watch notes in a press release:

In January 2012, Human Rights Watch observed that Iraqi authorities had successfully curtailed the Tahrir Square anti-government demonstrations by flooding the weekly protests with pro-government supporters and undercover security agents. Dissenting activists and independent journalists for the most part said that they no longer felt safe attending the demonstrations.
"After more than six years of democratic rule, Iraqis who publicly express their views still do so at great peril," Whitson said. "Al-Mahdi's killing highlights what a deadly profession journalism remains in Iraq."

Dan Morse (Washington Post) reports on the report and also carries a response from Nouri al-Maliki's spokesperson including this statement, "Their number [Baghdad protesters] is gradually decreasing and they do not reflect strong opposition to the government." The denial might be more convincing were there not so many reports which already demonstrate Nouri's thugs are shutting down protest and attempting to intimidate free speech. Yesterday Jane Arraf (Al Jazeera -- link is video) reported on the ever-closing society in Iraq.

Jane Arraf: These days at Baghdad's Liberation Square, there are more soldiers and police than protesters. Not just these but dozens of riot police waiting just under the grid. But they won't have any trouble from these demonstrators. With the killings and arrests of anti-government protesters, these young men chanting support for Nouri al-Maliki have taken over the square. A few won't give up.

Iraqi female protester: I can talk freely, right? This is Tahrir Square. And it's about freedom.

Jane Arraf: But it's not. These men drown her out when she starts criticizing Maliki. They won't give their names. Here at Radio al Mahaba, an independent women's radio station, the staff used to see all their friends at the Friday protests. That's until Hadi al-Mahdi, a controversial radio host, was arrested and badly beaten and then killed at home. And before the first set in the station's cafeteria last fall.

Kamal Jabar (showing the remains of the bombing): This was an in door.

Jane Arraf: One of the founders of the station who was beaten up after a protest last year says they've had enough.

Kamal Jabar: And we got the message. We are moving out of here. I don't feel secure. I don't want to be responsible for any death or injury or harm to any of the staff.

Jane Arraf: There were high hopes for the democracy meant to take root in Iraq after Saddam Hussein was toppled. But in between the fall of Saddam and an increasingly authoritarian government, the freedom to say what you want has been shrinking. Hundreds of activists have either left the country or gone underground. While some of the radio staff have quit, Ahlam al-Daraji wants to continue her show at a new, safer location.

Ahlam al-Daraji: Life is meaningless if you remain afraid and worried all the time. And if I say, "I can't say this because someone might object"? If that's the case, why are we living? Maybe I should leave Iraq?

Jane Arraf: They're staying for now. With fewer voices left, they believe they need to speak up for the rest. Jane Arraf, Al Jazeera, Baghdad.

January 10th, Jomana Karadsheh (CNN -- link is video) reported:

Jomana Karadsheh: Last month, Oday al-Zaidy and a small group of people gathered in a Baghdad square to celebrate the US media withdrawal planning to burn the US flag. But more than 200 security forces swarmed around them, banned us from filming and stopped the protests because they said the group had not obtained a permit. But they still managed to burn the flag. Oday and others were beaten up and detained for a day. Security officials say, they assaulted policemen, something the group denies. "Democracy in Iraq is an illusion," Oday says. "An American illusion and an American lie. Whoever wants to see that for themselves, should come and see what's been happening in Iraq since February 25th." That's when thousands of Iraqis -- partly influenced by the Arab Spring -- took to the streets of cities across the country protesting against corruption and a lack of basic services. [Gun shots are heard and security forces move in.] But from the start, they were met by a fierce crackdown. The government denies an orchestrated effort to put down protests, saying there were just minor violations committed by to put down protests by individual security officers. Activists groups disagree. Human Rights Watch says the violations have been systematic and ongoing documenting dozens of cases where protesters were beaten up, detained and, in some cases, even tortured.

Human Rights Watch's Samer Muscati: People are afraid to go to demonstrations, are afraid of being rounded up, of being assaulted, of being beat up, of being followed to their own homes.

And we can drop back to December 30th when Jomana Karadsheh captured a Friday Baghdad protest in a series of Tweets: