No one wants to see MSNBC

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

BOTTOM BOY BITCH RONAN FARROW HAS BEEN SLAMMED YET AGAIN BY RATINGS OR RATHER BY LACK OF RATINGS.

NO ONE WANTS TO WATCH MSNBC MUCH THESE DAYS BUT THEY ESPECIALLY DO NOT WANT TO WATCH MIA FARROW'S LITTLE BOY WHO ONCE WANTED TO BE A GIRL.

IF THIS TREND CONTINUES EVEN EYE SORE RACHEL MADDOW MAY BE SENT PACKING AND WHAT AWAITS THE FAILED RADIO BROADCASTER IF TV ALSO REJECTS HER?

A COWGIRL RECREATIONAL DUDE-ETTE RANCH IN ARIZONA?


FROM THE TCI WIRE:




Remember when the media used to mock the way Sarah Palin spoke when answering questions?


"And to -- uh I-I-I think the uh-uh-uh the-the strategy connects, ends and means -- and our ends with respect to uh  ISIL needs to be it's lasting defeat.  Uh,  I say lasting because it's important when they get defeated and they stay defeated.  Uh, and, uh, that is why it's important that, uh, we have, uh, those on the ground there who will ensure they stay defeated once  defeated."


And to really underscore that statement by Ashton Carter, let's note that it was in response to this question from Senator John McCain, "What do you understand the strategy to be?"


Again, the answer was:




And to -- uh I-I-I think the uh-uh-uh the-the strategy connects, ends and means -- and our ends with respect to uh  ISIL needs to be it's lasting defeat.  Uh,  I say lasting because it's important when they get defeated and they stay defeated.  Uh, and, uh, that is why it's important that, uh, we have, uh, those on the ground there who will ensure they stay defeated once  defeated.


This morning the Senate Armed Services Committee held a hearing.  Senator John McCain is the Committee Chair and Senator Jack Reed is the Ranking Member.  They heard from only one witness:  Ashton Carter,  the nominee to be the next Secretary of Defense.

Yes, it's time for a new Secretary of Defense.

It's the start of year seven of Barack's eight years as president and that means a new Secretary of Defense, apparently.

Already, his tenure has seen Robert Gates, Leon Panetta and Chuck Hagel serve as Secretary of Defense.

So, if confirmed, Ashton Carter will be the fourth Secretary of Defense in the administration.


For context, let's turn to Bill Clinton's terms.

Bill was elected president twice (1992 and 1996).

In his eight years, he had three Defense Secretaries: Les Aspin, William Perry and William Cohen.


Aspin was a mistake.  He had health issues which got worse in his brief tenure and he also had a highly embarrassing public moment (the Mogadishu attack which left eighteen US service members dead and over seventy injured) which led Bill to ask for Aspin's resignation.


Barack's asked for no resignations (as far as we know) from Gates, Panetta or Hagel.  He just can't seem to keep them.  Maybe he should be singing "Shake It Off"?


I go on too many dates
But I can't make them stay
That's what people say
-- "Shake It Off," written by Taylor Swift, first appears on her 1989.


Carter's biography at DoD is as follows:


Ashton B. Carter served as the Deputy Secretary of Defense from October 2011 to December 2013.
Previously, Dr. Carter served as Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics from April 2009 until October 2011.  As Under Secretary, Dr. Carter led the Department’s efforts to accelerate the fulfillment of urgent operational needs; increase the Department’s buying power; and strengthen the nation¹s defenses against emerging threats.
Over the course of his career in public service, Dr. Carter has four times been awarded the Department of Defense Distinguished Service Medal.  For his contributions to intelligence, Dr. Carter was awarded the Defense Intelligence Medal.
Dr. Carter earned bachelor's degrees in physics and in medieval history from Yale University, summa cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa, and received his doctorate in theoretical physics from Oxford University, where he was a Rhodes Scholar. 
Prior to his most recent government service, Dr. Carter was chair of the International and Global Affairs faculty at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government and Co-Director of the Preventive Defense Project.   Dr. Carter was also Senior Partner at Global Technology Partners, a member of the Aspen Strategy Group, a member of the Board of Trustees of the MITRE Corporation and the Advisory Boards of MIT’s Lincoln Laboratories and the Draper Laboratory, and an advisor to Goldman Sachs.
During the Clinton Administration, Dr. Carter was Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy.  From 1990 until 1993, Dr. Carter was Director of the Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, and Chairman of the Editorial Board of International Security.  Previously, he held positions at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment, and Rockefeller University.
Dr. Carter is a member of the President’s Management Council and the National Council on Federal-Labor-Management Relations. He has previously served on the White House Government Accountability and Transparency Board, the Defense Science Board, the Defense Policy Board, the Secretary of State’s International Security Advisory Board, and the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States.  
Dr. Carter is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and the American Academy of Diplomacy and is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the American Physical Society.
In addition to authoring articles, scientific publications, government studies, and Congressional testimonies, Dr. Carter has co-edited and co-authored eleven books.

Dr. Carter is married to Stephanie Carter and has two grown children.




His wife Stephanie sat behind him this morning and fidgeted throughout the (very long) hearing.



Various issues came up throughout the hearing.  We'll note this exchange on Iraq.




Ranking Member Jack Reed: So, the Middle East, do you believe the most immediate threat there to US interests in the region is ISIL?

Ashton Carter: Uh, uh-uh-uh-uh, I hesitate to, uh-uh-uh, ISIL only because in the back of my mind is Iran as well.  Uh-uh-uh, so I think that we have two immediate, substantial dangers, uh, in the Middle East.  Uh, one is ISIL and one is Iran.

Ranking Member Jack Reed: In terms of our current military operations, they are clearly directed at ISIL is that --

Ashton Carter:  That's true.

Ranking Member Jack Reed: -- the appropriate response at this moment to the threats in the region.

Ashton Carter:  It is. 

Ranking Member Jack Reed: And as you point out, there are two theaters.  One is Iraq where we have more traction and the other is Syria.  So you would think in terms of responding to the threat that our actions or our vigorous support of the current Iraqi government is appropriate in responding to this ISIL threat?

Ashton Carter:  It is appropriate if I -- as I said -- if I -- if, uh, -- whether and how to improve it will be my first job if I'm confirmed as Secretary of Defense.

Ranking Member Jack Reed: One of the issues  -- particular with respect to Iraq --  is that not only  improvement as you suggest in your comments, the longterm defeat, uh, of ISIL rests not just on military operations but on political arrangements.  And what we've witnessed in Iraq particularly was a political arrangement that consciously and deliberately degraded the Sunni population.  At least, that's there perception.  And it gave rise.  So would you acknowledge that part of a strategy has to be constituting an Iraqi government that is perceived by its own people as being a bit fairer and inclusive?


Ashton Carter: Absolutely.  That's what the previous government of Iraq did not do and that was instrumental in their military collapse.

Ranking Member Jack Reed: And one of the issues that complicates, you've pointed out, in terms of Iran being a strategic issue for the United States in the region is their relative influence in Iraq and throughout the region was enhanced over the last several years by the government in Iraq, by the [Nouri al-] Maliki government.  Is that accurate?

Ashton Carter:  That is accurate, yes.

Ranking Member Jack Reed:  So we are now in a position of.trying to essentially contain the regional ambitions of the Iranians and kinetically defeat the Sunni radical Islamists.  Is that the strategy?

Ashton Carter: Yes, that sounds right.

Ranking Member Jack Reed:  And you understand that?  And that to you is a coherent strategy?

Ashton Carter: It is, uh, yes.

Ranking Member Jack Reed: Uh, now that means that your prioritizing -- or the administration is prioritizing these actions you've talked about in building, uh, over time, capability in Syria. Uh, in terms of using US resources in addressing the most serious threats, is that a coherent response in your mind?

Ashton Carter: Uh, I think it is the beginning of a, uh, strategic response.  Uh, I think that, uh, as I noted on the, uh, Syrian side of the border, the, uh, assembling of the force that is going to keep ISIL defeated. Uh, there is, uh -- We're in the early stage of trying to build that force.  We're participating in the uh-uh building of that force, I think it's fair to say that we're at an earlier stage there.  On the Iraqi side, we have the existing Iraqi force.

Senator Jack Reed:  Let me --

Ashton Carter:  Uh, uh, mister, uh, Senator Reed -- 

Senator Jack Reed:  Please.

Ashton Carter:  Let me add one other thing.  Maybe it's something I missed in your, uh, line of uh-uh questioning.  There is, uh, an issue, uh-uh, looming over this which is Iraq in the region.  I mean Iran in the whole region.  That is why I pointed it out at the beginning.  That is a serious complication. 



There are other moments I'd like to note about the hearing.

I'm not really concerned with his position on the Ukraine -- but then I'm not selling war on the Ukraine.

The US press corps is which is why they ran like crazy with that aspect of the hearing.

They can't stop beating off and fingering themselves to the thought of a full blown US invasion of Ukraine.  They're that sick and that nutty.

Carter insisted that he did support sending arms to the so-called 'rebels' in Ukraine and, in one exchange, he added "lethal arms" at that.

If they were less hot and bothered over war on Ukraine, they might have wondered about his wording and if that reflected on his competency?

I have no idea if it does or not.

People can get flustered speaking off the top of their heads and clearly Ashton Carter was flustered throughout the hearing.

But if someone's going to be over the Defense Dept, I kind of expect that they would grasp that any arms sent to be used in battle would be "lethal arms."

Or is Carter proposing water guns and super soaker water blasters be sent to the CIA-backed 'rebels' in the Ukraine?

Equally true, it doesn't matter what Carter thinks.

US policy in terms of whether to go to war will continue to be decided by the president and the national security advisor and others -- the others and the national security advisor were, of course, neither elected nor confirmed by an elected body.

The American people had no say in them.

That's not how it's supposed to be in a democracy.

And careful readers of Robert Gates and Leon Panetta's recent autobiographies caught what the press refused to explore: how little the Secretary of Defense can impact foreign policy.





RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"VETERANS: Murray Votes to Pass Clay Hunt Veterans ..."
"When will Brookings have Kenneth Pollack committed.."
"The CIA and the press"
"Salon's a sewer"
"The press can't stop lying"
"Sir Martin Gilbert 1936-2015"
"Why is The Progressive still publishing?"
"That still not published Iraq Inquiry report"
"Best e-mail"
"Net Neutrality"
"who does charles pierce work for?"
"That disguting Johnny Depp"
"It takes him a little while -- and then some"
"THIS JUST IN! STILL LEARNING ON THE JOB!"

 

It takes him a little while -- and then some

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

AS CRITICISM CONTINUES TO MOUNT OVER FADED CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O'S LACK OF PLANS TO ADDRESS THE ISLAMIC STATE 8 MONTHS AFTER HE BEGAN BOMBING IRAQ, THE WHITE HOUSE IS ON THE DEFENSIVE.

SPOKESPERSON JOSH EARNEST FACED THE PRESS TODAY AND SWEATED LIKE A STUCK PIG.

AFTERWARDS, HE TOLD THESE REPORTERS, "THE PRESS NEEDS TO GIVE THE BIG O A BREAK.  HE ONLY STARTED BOMBING IN AUGUST AND IT TOOK US UNTIL JANUARY TO CONVINCE HIM THAT ISIS WASN'T A SATURDAY MORNING SUPER HERO SHOW."

WIPING HIS BROW, EARNEST EXPLAINED, "EVERY TIME WE'D TELL HIM HE HAD TO DEAL WITH ISIS, HE'D LAUGH AND SAY, 'YEAH, YEAH, RIGHT AFTER I SEND CAPTAIN CAVEMAN TO TAKE OUT THE ANT HILL MOB.'

FROM THE TCI WIRE:


Yesterday, Holly Williams (CBS News -- link is text and video) reported on the Bard Brigade -- Shi'ite thugs fighting in Iraq -- fighting the Islamic State and fighting any Sunni civilians they can get near.  Williams characterized them as possibly "effective" and then went on to note last week's massacre of Sunnis (over 70) carried out by Shi'ite militia members (according to survivors).

That renders them ineffective.

There is no chance that they "may be effective."

They could kill X number of IS members a day, they would still not be effective.

That's because their targeting of Sunnis is exactly why the Islamic State got a foothold in Iraq and continues to thrive there.

As long as the Iraqi government continues to use these thugs, the Islamic State continues.

This is basic but Jen Psaki prefers to to play the public fool at the US State Dept such as today in the press briefing when she thought she was 'cute' during this exchange with Al Quds' Said Arikat.



QUESTION: Now, I know this is probably a question better addressed to the Pentagon, but there’s a great deal of talk about postponing the much-anticipated spring offensive, but there’s a political dimension to it. It seems that a great deal of differences between Sunni and Shiite --


MS. PSAKI: Are you referring to – in Iraq?

QUESTION: Yes, yeah. In the fight against ISIL, in the fight or in the effort to reclaim or retake, liberate Mosul. So there seems to be a lot of bickering and infighting among Sunni and Shiites and so on. My question to you – that General Austin was there, of course, Mr. McGurk was there the week before, I think, or maybe a couple weeks before. What are you doing in terms of bringing all these different points of views together, having the Kurds, the Peshmerga, and the central forces working together?


MS. PSAKI: Well, let me first say on the first part I have no confirmation of that or validation of that, and my suspicion is your information is inaccurate.
On the second piece, there are a range of steps that we’re taking. Obviously, we work closely with the Government of Iraq. As you know, one of the efforts that the anti-ISIL coalition is very focused on is not only boosting their capacity but taking steps to go after ISIL in Iraq. We have – and you are right; most of this in terms of technicalities is best posed to the Pentagon, and they can get into specifics – let me finish – as they often do. And so I would certainly encourage you to pose this question to them.
But I would also add that, in addition to the efforts of the coalition countries, that Prime Minister Abadi has been taking steps to – greater – create greater unity to better incorporate different forces underneath the Iraqi Security Forces. That is something that has been ongoing. It’s not new now, but they’re continuing to take steps on.


QUESTION: I guess my point, or the thrust of my question, is the following: That while there was a great deal of enthusiasm, let’s say, a month ago among the Sunni tribes who was working with Prime Minister Abadi, there is less of that enthusiasm because they feel that much of what they have been promised has not been delivered. They are a bit skeptical about the national guard that is being formed and so on.
I wonder if you could – if you have any information, to begin with, that you can share with us on this.


MS. PSAKI: Well, Said, I have nothing to validate your view or your opinion, and I haven’t --


QUESTION: It is not opinion. I mean, that’s --


MS. PSAKI: -- seen those reports that you’ve mentioned. So I don’t think anyone should take that as fact. The national guard is part of the Iraqi Government’s long-term restructuring plan of the Iraqi Security Forces into a federalized security force. This is something that they’ve asked for United States – the United States for assistance to help further define and develop the program. We’re working with the government and providing advice based on our previous experiences. The national guard would not replace, but rather augment a restructured multi-sect and multiethnic federal security force as well as address a key demand that many leaders from across Iraq have called for over the last 10 years. It’s been in the process of being implemented for a couple of months now, but obviously, it’s not at full completion.




Poor Jen.  She didn't come off cute, she came off like an ass -- and an uninformed one at that.


For example, this morning Alice Fordham (NPR's Morning Edition) reported today on this reality and notes, "[Sheikh Ahmed] Dabash's views are typical of a broad spectrum of Sunnis in Iraq Islamists, tribes, one-time supporters of Saddam Hussein.  They feel victimized by Iraq's Shi'ite-led government and many fight against the Shi'ite-dominant army either joining ISIS or aligning with them -- even if they find the group extreme."

Fordham notes how the US feels the (still not formed) Iraqi national guard is the solution but Sunni leaders feel differently.

Jen Psaki missed that report -- how uninformed and ignorant is she?


Al Quds reports the long planned spring offensive to retake Mosul just got kicked back and the decision was made after US Gen Lloyd Austin shared his observations about the current state of Iraq following his visit to the country last week.

There is no plan, there is no forward movement.

And the window for new Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi to show change has been closing for some time.

We've noted that here, we've noted the lack of a political solution in Iraq and we've noted the White House's inability to aid Haider in pursing a political solution.  Instead, US President Barack Obama has not just used the Pentagon to plan military strikes on Iraq and to build the so-called 'coalition,' he's diverted the State Dept from its mission of diplomacy to make it a mouth piece for a militant theocracy that worships exploding bombs.

And how's that working out?

David Alexander and Lisa Shumaker (Reuters) report:



"Quite frankly, we need to see in Iraq political outreach that addresses the fact that some 20 million Sunnis are disenfranchised with their government," Lieutenant General William Mayville told a hearing on global threats facing the United States.
Mayville, director of operations for the Pentagon's Joint Staff, told lawmakers he endorsed the current steady, deliberate pace of efforts to defeat Islamic State in Iraq and Syria because it gave the Iraqi government time to act politically, a step he said was necessary to resolve the crisis.
"I think it is very, very important that the pace of operations be such that ... the military lines of effort don't get out in front of the political lines of effort that must be achieved in order to get an enduring solution here," he told a panel in the House of Representatives.


It's February.

Nothing's been accomplished but talk.

Empty words from Haider.




RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Michigan Greens Urge "NO" Vote May 5 on Sales-Tax ..."
"Veteran suicide prevention bill goes to President’..."
"Ignoring Sunnis grievances"
"The Originals"
"The big distraction"
"State of Affairs (Nick?)"
"50 Shades of Dull"
"If Barack Could Tweet"
"state of affairs (the terrorism)"
"Tweet"
"If Barack really had a plan . . ."
"The Mindy Project (Spoilers)"
"Jane The Boring"
"Little Terry McCoy needs his job description explained"
"THIS JUST IN! THEY DO NOT TRAIN THEM WELL AT THE POST!"

Little Terry McCoy needs his job description explained

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

DOES LITTLE TERRY MCCOY KNOW HIS JOB AT THE WASHINGTON POST?


DO HIS EDITORS?

STILL AMAZED THAT HAIRS SPROUTED DOWN BELOW, TERRY MCCOY IS EASILY DISTRACTED THESE DAYS WHICH MIGHT EXPLAIN HIS BULLS**T OF CLAIMING FADED CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O DECLARING IN 2008 THAT THE SCIENCE WAS "INCONCLUSIVE" ON VACCINES WAS NOT PANDERING.

BUT WHAT EXPLAINS HIS EDITORS PUTTING UP WITH THAT CRAP?


FOR THOSE WHO ARE CONFUSED, LITTLE TERRY'S JOB IS DESCRIBED AT THE BOTTOM OF HIS BLOG POST:


Terrence McCoy writes on foreign affairs for The Washington Post's Morning Mix. Follow him on Twitter here.


FOREIGN AFFAIRS?

THAT WOULD INCLUDE IRAQ.

IS TERRY UNABLE TO WRITE ABOUT IRAQ?

IS LITTLE TERRY CONFUSED AS TO WHAT "FOREIGN AFFAIRS" MEANS?


FROM THE TCI WIRE:



Also on shaky ground is this statement she writes, "Meanwhile, on Saturday, Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi promised to address the deaths of 72 Iraqis allegedly murdered by Shi’ite militiamen."


Did Haider promise to address it?

No.

And the link, a Reuters report, doesn't maintain that he did.

Stephen Kalin, Ahmed Rasheed, Saif Hameed, Dominic Evans and Stephen Powell report that Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abahdi gave a speech.

It's an insignificant speech.

Al Jazeera noted of it:

Iraq's prime minister has fired a warning at government and militia fighters who operate beyond the law.
Speaking at a security summit in Baghdad, Haider al-Abbadi said criminals and outlaws responsible for kidnappings and killings were no less dangerous than what he called terrorists.

Here's the quote:


"Let everyone hear me - those are outlaws by the consensus of all Iraqi society. They do not represent the popular mobilisation forces, nor the security forces or even Iraqis," Abadi said.
"Those are criminals and outlaws. They came with their agenda to entrap Iraqis.
"I have said it before and will say it today - those who were conducting killings and kidnapping crimes in Baghdad and other cities are no less dangerous than terrorists."


What the hell was that?


He did not promise to address the deaths.

His comments about the investigation weren't even news.

He wasn't announcing an unknown thing.

The investigation was noted days ago.  Nabih Bulos (Los Angeles Times) reported it the Ministry of the Interior announced the investigation last Tuesday.

Haider al-Abadi did not say anyone would be arrested, did not assert that anyone would be punished.  He just noted the investigation and that this behavior (the massacre) is not helpful and is as destructive as terrorism.

Well it is terrorism.

Shi'ite militias (and possibly Iraqi forces) targeting and killing Sunnis is terrorism.

The Reuters report notes that the Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani endorses an investigation and that is new and news worthy.  But Haider just flapped his gums.

He flapped his gumbs because, as a State Dept friend said on the phone tonight, Democrats in the Senate are in a panic over Human Rights Watch's report on Iraq in their [PDF format warning] 25th annual World Report.

In November of 2013, Barack came dangerously close to the Senate cutting off his flow of weapons to Iraq because  they were concerned that the weapons were being used on the Iraqi people by thug Nouri al-Maliki.

Barack strong armed to get his way.

Now he's not just trying to continue the flood of weapons into Iraq -- with a new prime minister, Haider -- he's also trying to get authorization for US ground troops in Iraq, to keep critics of his 'plan' for Iraq at bay and much more.

In other words, Barack doesn't have time for the bad publicity of the massacre. Last Monday, Ahmed Rasheed, Stephen Kalin and Robin Pomeroy (Reuters) reported:


Sunni politicians and tribal chiefs from Iraq's eastern Diyala province accused Shi'ite militias on Monday of killing more than 70 unarmed civilians who had fled clashes with Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (ISIL) militants.

And then Ahmed Rasheed, Ned Parker and Stephen Kalin (Reuters) reported on the testimony of the survivors.

Barack doesn't have time for this.

So the White House that can't or won't use their power to force Haider to put through a more inclusive government did use their power to inform Haider he had to make some remarks the White House could use to calm Congressional Dems.

RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Haider fumbles, Nouri plots"
"Hejira"
"British nobody David Oyelowo needs to go home already"
"TV and other things"
"Failure to applaud TV's women of color"
"Hulu"
"TV critics"
"Stalker"
"What Ann said"
"what ann said (ms. doesn't think women can talk sports)"
"Tim Wise and other nuts"

• Truest statement of the week
• Truest statement of the week II
• A note to our readers
• Editorial: The White House doesn't do democracy
• TV: How they pretend they care about racism
• Ty's Corner
• Aging Power Bottom Justin Raimondo Rides Again!
• Jim's World
• Tweet of the week
• The week goes to Michelle Obama
• This edition's playlist
• Rulers want Chilcot inquiry to hide their crimes i...
• Highlights

"Putting the stink in CodeStink"
"THIS JUST IN! BOTH! BOTH ARE SCUM!"

Putting the stink in CodeStink

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

TIRED HAG MEDEA BENJAMIN REFUSING TO FADE AFTER HER 15 MINUTES OF FAME LONG AGO ELAPSED WANTS TO ASK:

"Who’s the “Low Life Scum:” Kissinger or CODEPINK?"


OH, MEDEA.

YOU AND YOUR BINARY THINKING!

YOU AND YOUR EITHER/OR.


"Who’s the “Low Life Scum:” Kissinger or CODEPINK?"


YOU BOTH ARE.


NOW GO WHORE FOR BARACK AGAIN CAUSE YOUR TIRED AND SMELLY JUNK AIN'T GETTING ANY YOUNGER.



FROM THE TCI WIRE:




 Six months into US President Barack Obama's 'plan' for saving Iraq from violence, the violence continues.  Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) counts 197 dead from violence on Friday with another forty-one left injured.  And already today, Sameer N. Yacoub (AP) reports Baghdad and surrounding areas have been slammed with bombings resulting in 9 deaths and twenty-five people injured.


US President Barack Obama: Good afternoon, everybody.  I just met with my national security team to discuss the situation in Iraq.  We’ve been meeting regularly to review the situation since ISIL, a terrorist organization that operates in Iraq and Syria, made advances inside of Iraq.  As I said last week, ISIL poses a threat to the Iraqi people, to the region, and to U.S. interests.  So today I wanted to provide you an update on how we’re responding to the situation.
First [. . .]
American forces will not be returning to combat in Iraq, but we will help Iraqis as they take the fight to terrorists who threaten the Iraqi people, the region, and American interests as well.
[. . .]
I want to emphasize, though, that the best and most effective response to a threat like ISIL will ultimately involve partnerships where local forces, like Iraqis, take the lead. 
Finally, the United States will lead a diplomatic effort to work with Iraqi leaders and the countries in the region to support stability in Iraq.  At my direction, Secretary Kerry will depart this weekend for meetings in the Middle East and Europe, where he’ll be able to consult with our allies and partners.  And just as all Iraq’s neighbors must respect Iraq’s territorial integrity, all of Iraq’s neighbors have a vital interest in ensuring that Iraq does not descend into civil war or become a safe haven for terrorists.
Above all, Iraqi leaders must rise above their differences and come together around a political plan for Iraq’s future.  Shia, Sunni, Kurds -- all Iraqis -- must have confidence that they can advance their interests and aspirations through the political process rather than through violence.  National unity meetings have to go forward to build consensus across Iraq’s different communities.  Now that the results of Iraq’s recent election has been certified, a new parliament should convene as soon as possible.  The formation of a new government will be an opportunity to begin a genuine dialogue and forge a government that represents the legitimate interests of all Iraqis.

Now, it’s not the place for the United States to choose Iraq’s leaders.  It is clear, though, that only leaders that can govern with an inclusive agenda are going to be able to truly bring the Iraqi people together and help them through this crisis.  Meanwhile, the United States will not pursue military options that support one sect inside of Iraq at the expense of another.  There’s no military solution inside of Iraq, certainly not one that is led by the United States.  But there is an urgent need for an inclusive political process, a more capable Iraqi security force, and counterterrorism efforts that deny groups like ISIL a safe haven.


That's Barack speaking on June 19th.

First off, please note, there's been no serious updates from Barack in the time since.  Starting in August, US tax payers on the hook for over a billion dollars because of Barack's 'response' to the Islamic State.  Despite spending billions of tax payer dollars, the White House hasn't felt the need to seriously address Iraq -- it was but a brief aside, one sentence, in Barack's State of the Union Address last week -- despite the fact that this Constitutionally mandated speech required Barack to address the issue of Iraq.

The State Dept's also failing to address it.  I was asked Friday if I'd organized a veterans lobby?  Huh?  This week, the State Dept's online surveys have resulted in one slam after another from self-identified veterans of the Iraq War noting that the daily press briefings have ignored Iraq repeatedly.  No, I had nothing to do with that.  But how out of touch is the State Dept with American citizens -- including veterans -- that when their own surveys reveal the public is appalled that they're refusing to update daily on Iraq, the State Dept's natural assumption is to assume it must be a conspiracy and not, in fact, a true reflection of public attitudes.


Let's emphasize this from the speech:

Finally, the United States will lead a diplomatic effort to work with Iraqi leaders and the countries in the region to support stability in Iraq.  At my direction, Secretary Kerry will depart this weekend for meetings in the Middle East and Europe, where he’ll be able to consult with our allies and partners.  And just as all Iraq’s neighbors must respect Iraq’s territorial integrity, all of Iraq’s neighbors have a vital interest in ensuring that Iraq does not descend into civil war or become a safe haven for terrorists.




Where's that diplomatic effort?

As noted Friday morning, some feel I should have covered the passage of the Iraqi budget in Thursday's snapshot.


This morning Alsumaria has published it in PDF format and, at some point today, I will try to read it.  Prior to that, it's a sentence: Iraq passed a budget worth $150 billion US dollars. Saif Hameed (Reuters) has that here.
Considering the way programs to rebuild Iraq were being slashed when oil was at a high, I can't imagine that the programs didn't suffer even more as the oil prices dropped.
That's what the story of the budget's about: Where the money is going.
That is passed is meaningless without knowing that.



Reuters has published another piece here -- the last part notes some budget issues.  I'm not talking about the budget, I haven't read it.  I haven't had the time.  I also haven't to sleep since I woke up Friday morning.  I do have a life.  (There may be a piece tonight responding to flack from United Nations' friends over Thursday's snapshot, there may not be.  I listened to their whines repeatedly yesterday.  It's whining.  We may do something here tonight on the UN, the CIA, etc.)

But the budget . . .

I don't work for the US government (or the UN), I don't take orders from them.


I don't work for Reuters either.

Reuters did their job reporting, from Iraq, that the budget had passed and noting that former prime minister (and forever thug) Nouri al-Maliki never was able to pass a 2014 budget.

The news agency spends a lot of money to cover Iraq, they did their job and justified the money spent.


But more money is being spent by the American taxpayer on Iraq right now than by Reuters.

Again, the price tags for just the time since August is over a billion (some of that is Syria-related costs as well).


The American public, footing the bill, is not seeing a return on their dollar for this huge expenditure.

Not in terms of information.


What has been the US government's response to the budget passing?

There's been no statement released by the White House.  There's been no read out of a phone call the president or Vice President Joe Biden had with Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi congratulating him on the budget passing.

The State Dept?






Recommended: "Alan Grayson embarrasses, Michelle Obama succeeds"
"Iraq snapshot"
"Things we overlooked?"
"Instead of idiot of the week . . ."
"American Sniper"
"The Mind Project (a spoiler)"
"What a self-obsessed groupie Joan Baez was"
"State of Affairs (Alfre Woodard)"
"state of affairs (the terrorists)"
"California Dreamin' by Michelle Phillips"
"The Star Machine by Jeanine Basinger (attacking KT Stevens and others)"
"Nikita"
"High Treason: The Assassination of President Kennedy and the New Evidence of Conspiracy"
"Barry spots his love of bitchy"



"THIS JUST IN! MEOW MIX FOR BARRY!"

Barry sports his love of bitchy

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


FADED CELEBRITY AND FOREVER BITCH BARRY O LET HIS CLAWS OUT YET AGAIN TODAY BECAUSE, PERIODICALLY, HE FEELS BLUE AND DOWN.

SO HE ATTACKED G.O.P. POLITICIAN MITT ROMNEY AND ROMNEY'S REMARKS REGARDING CONCERN OVER POVERTY.

BARRY O SNAPPED AND DID A NECK MOVE AS HE DECLARED, "THAT'S GREAT! LET'S DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!"

BARRY O THEN THREW HIS HEAD BACK AND SNORTED.

BRAYING, HE LEFT THE ROOM AT A GALLUP.

FROM THE TCI WIRE:


First off, Dirk Adriaensens has another important article, this one is entitled "Iraq: Media professionals assassinated in 2014." We will note it in the next snapshot (hopefully a Friday snapshot and not a Saturday one -- but the next one regardless).  It's an important topic, it's an important issue.  However, since the September 8, 2011 assassination of Iraqi journalist and activist Hadi al-Mahdi, I have to be in place for this topic.  I'll go to that place next time but there's too much to do to fall apart now.

So instead we'll zoom in on the United Nations.


Today, Human Rights Watch issued their [PDF format warning] 25th annual World Report which, as usual, is a wealth of information about the world.  Here, our focus is Iraq.

While the report rightly calls out the actions of the Islamic State, unlike many, it doesn't limit itself to that nor does it pretend that the Islamic State sprung up in a vacuum or that it was an initiating action.

In Iraq, the Islamic State exists as a response -- specifically as a response to an abusive government.

HRW's report notes:

On December 30, 2013, security forces attacked demonstrators in a public square in Ramadi where Sunnis had gathered every Friday for a year to protest perceived government abuses of the Sunni population. The attack left 17 people dead and helped to trigger renewed conflict in Anbar province that continued throughout the year. The army closed the main eastern, northern, and southern checkpoints to Fallujah, and elsewhere in Anbar, refusing to allow people, medicine, or food to enter or leave the city.

The government failed to investigate the April 23, 2013 attack on a demonstration camp in Hawija in which soldiers, federal police, and SWAT forces fired on a crowd of about 1,000 demonstrators, killing more than 50.



Those are part of the injustices that bred the reaction that is the Islamic State in Iraq.

Let's note the  April 23rd massacre of a sit-in in Hawija which resulted from  Nouri's federal forces storming in.  Alsumaria noted Kirkuk's Department of Health (Hawija is in Kirkuk)  announced 50 activists died and 110 were injured in the assault.   AFP reported the death toll eventually (as some wounded died) rose to 53 dead.   UNICEF noted that the dead included 8 children (twelve more were injured).

That is appalling.

The shock and outrage many felt was completely understandable.

But somehow that shock didn't make over the ocean and over the airwaves to the United States.

The minute that took place, the White House should have repudiated Nouri al-Maliki.

They refused to do so.

The cowardly and craven administration continued to embrace thug Nouri.

8 children killed.  Peaceful protesters killed and wounded.

In an attack order by Nouri al-Maliki and carried out by Iraqi forces he commanded.


Here's the weak ass response from the US government:


The United States strongly condemns the actions that resulted in the death and injury of civilians and security personnel in Hawija.  We regret that this violence took place before ongoing efforts to reach a peaceful resolution of this situation were given sufficient time to succeed.
All sides should immediately refrain from further violence or provocative actions.
U.S. officials have been in contact with senior Iraqi leaders to help defuse political and sectarian tensions. We call for a transparent investigation with the broadest possible participation.  Perpetrators of unlawful actions – whether from the government, security forces, or protestors – must be held accountable under Iraqi law.

The United States expresses its heartfelt condolences to the families of the victims and urges all Iraqis to move beyond this tragedy and to work together to prevent any recurrence.



All sides should immediately refrain from further violence?


What violence had the dead children participated in?

Huh?


Not that most Americans know because the US media never bothered to report on the protests themselves -- even though they were spread out across Iraq and lasted over a year -- but these protests weren't just male or one type of male.  Women participated, children participated.

And Iraq's challenged or disabled communities participated.

We noted that.

Check any Friday piece here during the year  of protests and you'll encounter a look at the diversity of the protests.

But we need to grasp what so many have refused to -- the dead and wounded in Hawija also included the challenged or disabled.

These were peaceful protesters.

What kind of monster orders an assault on peaceful protesters?

What kind of monster orders an assault on children?

What kind of monster orders an assault on people in wheel chairs?


BRussells Tribunal carried a translation of one activist who was an eye-witness to what went down:


 

I am Thamer Hussein Mousa from the village of Mansuriya in the district of Hawija. I am disabled. My left arm was amputated from the shoulder and my left leg amputated from the hip, my right leg is paralyzed due to a sciatic nerve injury, and I have lost sight in my left eye.
I have five daughters and one son. My son’s name is Mohammed Thamer. I am no different to any other Iraqi citizen. I love what is good for my people and would like to see an end to the injustice in my country.
When we heard about the peaceful protests in Al-Hawija, taking place at ‘dignity and honor square’, I began attending with my son to reclaim our usurped rights. We attended the protests every day, but last Friday the area of protest was besieged before my son and I could leave; just like all the other protestors there.
Food and drink were forbidden to be brought into the area….
On the day of the massacre (Tuesday 23 April 2013) we were caught by surprise when Al-Maliki forces started to raid the area. They began by spraying boiling water on the protestors, followed by heavy helicopter shelling. My little son stood beside me. We were both injured due to the shelling.
My son, who stood next to my wheelchair, refused to leave me alone. He told me that he was afraid and that we needed to get out of the area. We tried to leave. My son pushed my wheelchair and all around us, people were falling to the ground.
Shortly after that, two men dressed in military uniforms approached us. One of them spoke to us in Persian; therefore we didn’t understand what he said. His partner then translated. It was nothing but insults and curses. He then asked me “Handicapped, what do you want?” I did not reply. Finally I said to him, “Kill me, but please spare my son”. My son interrupted me and said, “No, kill me but spare my father”. Again I told him “Please, spare my son. His mother is waiting for him and I am just a tired, disabled man. Kill me, but please leave my son”. The man replied “No, I will kill your son first and then you. This will serve you as a lesson.” He then took my son and killed him right in front of my eyes. He fired bullets into his chest and then fired more rounds. I can’t recall anything after that. I lost consciousness and only woke up in the hospital, where I underwent surgery as my intestines were hanging out of my body as a result of the shot.
After all of what has happened to me and my little son – my only son, the son who I was waiting for to grow up so he could help me – after all that, I was surprised to hear Ali Ghaidan (Lieutenant General, Commander of all Iraqi Army Ground Forces) saying on television, “We killed terrorists” and displaying a list of names, among them my name: Thamer Hussein Mousa.
I ask you by the name of God, I appeal to everyone who has a shred of humanity. Is it reasonable to label me a terrorist while I am in this situation, with this arm, and with this paralyzed leg and a blind eye?
I ask you by the name of God, is it reasonable to label me a terrorist? I appeal to all civil society and human rights organizations, the League of Arab States and the Conference of Islamic States to consider my situation; all alone with my five baby daughters, with no one to support us but God. I was waiting for my son to grow up and he was killed in this horrifying way.

I hold Obama responsible for this act because he is the one who gave them these weapons. The weapons and aircrafts they used and fired upon us were American weapons. I also hold the United States of America responsible for this criminal act, above all, Obama.



Americans should be outraged.

They should be outraged that Bully Boy Bush installed Nouri as prime minister (2006) and then (in 2010) when Nouri lost the election Barack Obama demanded that Nouri get a second term.

Americans should be outraged by that.

They should be outraged by what Nouri did.

They should be outraged with a press that failed to report honestly and accurately what Nouri was doing to the Sunnis.

 They should be outraged with the United Nations.



Recommended: "Iraq snapshot"
"New Veterans Thank Secretary Chuck Hagel For Lifet..."
"United Nations: In business to protect governments..."
"Tweet of the week"
"Best CW Show"
"How To Get Away With Murder -- the end is coming"
"scandal"
"How To Get Away With Murder"
"Income inequality"
"The verdict on Roy is in"
"Tweet of the Week"
"Vouchers"
"Jerry White keeps hitting us with the truth"
"Hey, Barry, American Idol is lookng for you!"
"THIS JUST IN! HE SINGS!"

Hey, Barry, American Idol is lookng for you!

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

FADED CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O DOES NOT HAVE TIME TO FOCUS ON THE ECONOMY OR IRAQ BUT DON'T WORRY AMERICA BARRY O IS WORKING!

ON HIS BRUNO MARS IMPERSONATION!

IF ONLY, IN 2008, HE'D AUDITIONED FOR AMERICAN IDOL INSTEAD OF RUNNING FOR THE WHITE HOUSE.

SMOOTH JAMS, BARRY, SMOOTH JAMS.



FROM THE TCI WIRE:


Starting in the United States and starting with some basic questions about the VA.

"How many veterans are being seen? What are they being seen for?".

Very basic questions.

Fundamental, you could argue, to understanding what quality of care the VA is delivering.

But as the Congressional Budget Office's Matthew Goldberg explained to the House VA Subcommittee on Health this morning, in response to Chair Dan Benishek, these basic questions remain unanswered by VA year after year.

And while much has been made (here at this site and elsewhere) about VA and DoD's computers still being unable to link up and 'talk' to one another -- allowing for a seamless electronic medical record to follow a service member from active duty status to veteran's status -- Goldberg noted the reality that the computers for VBA (Veterans Benefits Administration) and VHA (Veterans Health Administration)  can't link up and talk to each other.


These were among the issues discussed in this morning's Subcommittee on Health hearing.  Benishek is the Chair and US House Rep Julia Brownley is the Ranking Member.

The witnesses appearing before the Subcommittee were the Congressional Budget Office's Matthew Goldberg, Paralyzed Veterans of America's Carl Blake, the American Legion's Louis Celli Jr. and the VA's Dr. James Tuchschmidt.

The hearing was about the quality and cost of VA health care and was set in motion by a December 2014 Congressional Budget analysis entitled [PDF format warning] "Comparing the Costs of the Veterans' Health Care System With Private-Sector Costs."



In his opening statement, the American Legion's Celli noted that "if CBO is looking for a baseline by which to estimate the cost of non-VA care, they need look no further than their own library of published reports when in June of 2014, they estimated the cost of outsourcing VA care to exceed $50 billion over 5 years, or roughly $10 billion dollars per year, just to eliminate the backlog of veterans waiting more than 30 days to see a VA doctor. One important point to keep in mind is that this $50 billion represents an additional $10 billion per year to VHA’s already existing $65 billion annual budget, and this measure was only designed to serve less than one percent of VA’s total patient population. After reducing eligibility and constricting payments not to exceed Medicare rates, and a couple of other adjustments, CBO was able to come back with a second score that trimmed about $15 billion from the figure and came in with a second estimate of $35 billion."



Subcommittee Chair Dan Benishek: Mr. Tuchschmidt do you know what the average cost for speciality care for the VA for a routine colonoscopy within the VA versus the private?

James Tuchschmidt: I-I don't have that in my head.  Uh, uhm, we can probably get that information.  Uh, I --

Subcommittee Chair Dan Benishek: I don't think you can.  See, that's the whole point of what we're doing here. We don't know what it costs to do some of the routine things in the VA because we've inquired on this in the past and that's the kind of data that we need to -- we need to have and we need to provide oversight because I agree with these other gentlemen here that VA provides care to our veterans that can't be provided in the prviate sector and yet a lot of things the VA provides can be and in those areas I think a comparison is in order so that we can provide the best speciality care for our veterans.

Pressed by Ranking Member Brownley, the VA's Tuchschmidt tried to spin, "I think that asking what is the cost of care is the wrong question to be asking."

Oh, really?  The VA is above the budget now?

Now?

I shouldn't say "now."

As Paul Giblin (Arizona Republic) reported last November, the VA "didn't track its number of unfilled medical positions until June"  and that, in November, the VA learned they had over 31,000 vacant medical positions.

The VA was unanswerable under Bully Boy Bush and it's only become more so under President Barack Obama.


Former VA Secretary Eric Shinseki's tenure (January 2009 through May 2014) was characterized by one scandal after another -- not limited to the backlog, the wait times, the doctored lists to make the wait times disappear,

Shinseki was finally forced to resign in disgrace during the spring of 2014.

Had Congress being doing their job, he could have -- and should  have -- been forced out in the fall of 2009.


The first big scandal he weathered was during that time period.  Veterans going to college on the GI Bill suddenly found themselves with tuition and cost of living expenses but with no check from the VA.

Many had to take out loans.

Many had to beg landlords to be forgiving about rent being late.

Some would still be waiting in December 2009 for their fall 2009 checks.  As a result, some veterans had to postpone Christmas for their children.

And, thing is, when Eric Shinseki took over as Secretary of the VA, he was told that the Post 9/11 GI Bill would not be able to make the college payments in a timely manner in the fall of  2009.  He knew it months ahead of time.  Neither he nor anyone else in the administration made Congress aware of the looming problem.  When the fall semester rolled around in 2009, veterans were planning on those checks.  They took out loans to cover tuition and books, they spent their own money, they did whatever they could to stay afloat and enrolled as they waited and waited on the checks that did not come.   October 14, 2009, he told the House Committee on Veterans Affairs:

Secretary Eric Shinseki: I'm looking at the certificates of eligibility, uh, being processed on 1 May and enrollments 6 July, checks having to flow through August. A very compressed time frame. And in order to do that, we essentially began as I arrived in January, uh, putting together the plan -- reviewing the plan that was there and trying to validate it. I'll be frank, when I arrived, uh, there were a number of people telling me this was simply not executable. It wasn't going to happen. Three August was going to be here before we could have everything in place. Uh, to the credit of the folks in uh VA, I, uh, I consulted an outside consultant, brought in an independent view, same kind of assessment. 'Unless you do some big things here, this is not possible.' To the credit of the folks, the good folks in VBA, they took it on and they went at it hard. We hired 530 people to do this and had to train them. We had a manual system that was computer assisted. Not very helpful but that's what they inherited. And we realized in about May that the 530 were probably a little short so we went and hired 230 more people. So in excess of 700 people were trained to use the tools that were coming together even as certificates were being executed. Uhm, we were short on the assumption of how many people it would take.

When we reported on that hearing, we became the only ones to report on the fact that Shinseki knew months ahead of time that the VA wouldn't be able to issue the checks in a timely manner.

The so-called news outlets wanted to give Eric a pass because he's such a 'good guy.'

I don't care if rainbows and candy corn flow out his ass, his job performance is what matters and he failed at it repeatedly.

A functioning press would've led the charge on that but we don't have a functioning press in the United States, we have a fawning public relations group that latches onto personalities and sells them and their 'life struggle' stories as news -- Lifetime Intimate Portraits passed off as investigative journalism.

And it wasn't just that Shinseki knew months ahead of time that veterans going to college would be screwed over in the fall of 2009.

Let's remember too what the VA did in real time: Blamed veterans.  The VA said the veterans filled out the wrong form or that their schools did.  The VA  stalled and stalled.   The VA didn't suffer.  Christmas bonuses continued at the VA.


The recent scandals were on the mind of the Subcommittee members this morning.


US House Rep Mike Coffman:  We need to know what procedures cost and we don't know that right now.  And we need transparency.  And we don't have that right now in the VA system. And we're talking about a system that --  I mean, we're talking about the quality of care -- that just excluded veterans by virtue of manipulating wait lists -- appointment wait lists, so that people could get cash bonuses.

Tucschmidt was full of nonsense and when he really didn't want to answer a question, he fell back on he wasn't sure if he understood the computer systems and accounting and thought it might date back to, gasp, the 1940s and how was simple him supposed to grasp all that?

The VA is one embarrassment after another and as they continue to play dumb in hearings and refuse to fork over information Congress requests, it's really time for Congress to start censuring them.


RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Paralyzed Veterans of America Calls on the House a..."
"Free e-book from Greece's new Finance Minister and..."
"Pentagon lets slip an admission about combat in Ir..."
"Thom Hartman, Truth Out and other f**king idiots"
"Diana"
"iraq"
"Arrow -- is it wrong to wish someone dead?"
"The loony left"
"Nancy Pelosi needs to show leadership"
"William Boardman can rot in hell"
"Emotional?"
"Look at all the little . . ."
"And that's why no one takes CodeStink seriously"
"Tea, Texas Tea! Bubbling In The Atlantic!"
"THIS JUST IN! BARRY CRIES 'DRILL, BABY, DRILL!'"

Tea, Texas Tea! Bubbling In The Atlantic!

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

FADED CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O THOUGHT ABOUT RELEASING A BOOK OF SELFIES UNTIL HE LEARNED KIM KARDASHIAN WAS ALREADY DOING THAT.

SO INSTEAD, HE'S DECIDED TO PROPOSE DRILLING IN THE ATLANTIC OCEAN FOR OIL.

REACHED FOR COMMENT, BARRY O TOLD THESE REPORTERS, "ECO-SCHMECO.  IF I GAVE A DAMN ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT I'D STOP ALL THE PREGNANCIES.  YOU KNOW HOW MANY LANDFILLS HAVE DIAPERS IN THEM?  AND THESE DIAPERS ARE FILLED WITH STINKY POOS.  STINKY POOS!  BABIES ARE THE BIGGEST POLLUTERS IN THE WORLD.  STINKY BABIES AND THEIR STINKY POOS."


FROM THE TCI WIRE:




This morning, the Senate Armed Services Committee heard testimony from three retired military officials: Gen James Mattis, Gen John Keane and Adm William Fallon  or, as Senator Kelly Ayotte described them, "three of America's most distinguished military leaders."


Ayotte presides over the hearing as Acting Chair since John McCain was not present.  He's out of the country and we'll note why later but while he had an excuse for missing the hearing, others really didn't.

Unlike Senator Lindsay Graham, I'm referring to members of the Committee.  We'll note his criticism in a minute but it would have been nice if all members in the country could have been present.  There are twenty-five members on the Committee.  Seven are women.  That's a big deal.  The Senate Judiciary Committee, by contrast, has only two women on it.

Only two.

The Armed Services has seven women and three things on that.

First, show up for the hearings.  You wanted on the Committee, show up.

At a time when even Brookings can decry the low number of women invited to participate in Middle East discussions, female senators on the Armed Services Committee should consider themselves obligated to participate in hearings on the Middle East.

Second, Senator Kelly Ayotte's noted here but we're not excerpting.  That's not that she did anything wrong but most of her time was wasted by a witness giving an ahistorical view of the Cold War.  I don't include known lies.  People can have different opinions and I'm fine with that and fine with including different opinions or even different or new facts or factoids.  But when you lie about history and I know it's a lie, I'm not including it. That witness took up Ayotte's entire questioning time in the first round with his rewriting.  Senator Joni Ernst did attend -- one of the few women to show up.  She's new and I would've graded anything on a curve because she is new.  The first female Iraq War veteran to serve in the Senate, I expected Ernst would reflect on the war.  I expected her view to be different than mine and I thought we'd include it.  We're not noting her because she didn't talk about Iraq.  She didn't ask about Iraq.

This isn't the "Afghanistan snapshot." This isn't the "Iran snapshot."  This isn't the "sequestration snapshot."  If Iraq's discussed, that's our focus.

One female senator did show up and did ask about Iraq.



Senator Mazie Hirono:  Gen Keane, you described life in Mosul where schools are set up just to radicalize the population, where every day life has changed.  And one wonders how long ISIL can so-called 'govern'  in this way?  So you're indicating that we need to be doing -- we, in the United States, should have people on the ground -- not boots on the ground -- when the people in Iraq finally get to the point where they want to fight ISIL.  Now the question becomes then, when is that time?   And would you say that is perhaps a major role for our intelligence community?  To inform us as to when that critical point is that we need to be there to help the people fight back? And I'd also like to ask that question of Gen Keane because Gen Keane you noted the importance of our intelligence community in establishing priorities.


Gen John Keane:  Yeah the -- Listen, that's a very tough question, Senator.  The only thing I can -- in helping you with that -- is just look back a bit.  We had an insurgency begin in Iraq in the spring and summer of 2003 -- led by Saddam Hussein and his people -- and the al Qaeda fell in on that very quickly.  And the in 2006, some two-and-a-half, three years later, Sunni tribes began -- who were aligned with them -- began to push back -- and much of it was literally driven by women, frankly.  Because the women were putting pressure on the tribal leaders that they did not want their children and their grandchildren to live like this for generations to come with 7th century Talibanism, under the foot of what al Qaeda was doing, controlling every aspect of their life -- from diet to costume behavior, Sharia law, etc.  That frustration is already there.  I do believe that given the fact that -- particularly in Anbar Province -- that this has existed before, the accelerate will be faster and not take three years.  I'm going to make an assumption that our intelligence community, with the use of informants and others are-are monitoring what is taking place and we have some sense of what the conditions are and more importantly what the attitude and behavior of the people are themselves.  But let's also be honest that there's just so much those people in Mosul will be able to do against a well armed and well equipped force as ISIS is -- in Mosul and in its suburbs.  To eject them out of there will take a conventional military force to do that -- supported by air power and some pretty good intelligence on where people are.  The attitude and belief of the people will be a factor.  But I don't believe in and of itself it will be decisive.  What will be decisive is the use of military force to defeat the military organization that is there.

Senator Mazie Hirono:  And the conventional military force should be the Iraqi military itself? With --

Gen John Keane:  Yes.

Senator Mazie Hirono:  -- possible air support --

Gen John Keane:  Yes.

Senator Mazie Hirono:  -- from us and our allies.

Gen John Keane:  Well it's the Peshmerga, as you know, who is the militia from Kurdistan who have the will to fight and the skill.  They don't have all the weapons they need.  Iraqi army?  And by the way the Iraqi army is probably in better shape based on some recent reports I just got this weekend from people who returned [Kimberly and Fred Kagan] and many of the military reports are suggesting -- But secondly, and thirdly, would be the Sunni tribes.  Now the Shi'ite milita are part of this and they have strengthened the Iraqi military very considerably.  The best fighters in the army are Iranian-backed Shia militia



Third thing regarding the women on the Committee?  Ava's going to grab that at Trina's site tonight (it's a joke we polished in the hearing).  Kat's going to grab a topic at her site and Wally's planning to grab an exchange that took place during Senator Thom Tillis' round of questioning (he'll be posting at Rebecca's site).




Of all the idiotic moments in the history -- and there were a good many -- Senator Joe Manchin provided the worst as he used his time to advocate and argue for re-instating the draft -- a position that even the three generals were reluctant to embrace.  Manchin kept insisting the US forces would still be in Vietnam today if there had not been a draft during the Vietnam era.  He also, when he realized no one was supporting his call for a return of the draft, began proposing an enlisted force with "some" element of a draft.

Is Manchin insane?

That was the Vietnam era.

You had people drafted and you had them enlist.

I'm confused that Manchin's confused by this.

He graduated high school in 1965, he lived in this era.

Of course, he didn't serve.

The Chicken Hawk who now wants to bring back the draft didn't serve in Vietnam.

He took a football scholarship to college.

Had a -- we're sure -- 'brutal' injury on the football field -- why, he's practically a P.O.W.!

It takes a lot of nerve to be a sitting US Senator trying to bring back the draft, pointing to the Vietnam era, and failing to note that your own ass sat that war out.

By choice.

And via war babies, right?  Avoiding the draft by rushing into marriage and popping out war babies? Dick Cheney did the same thing.  We've called him out for it as well.

When Manchin starts trying to bring back the draft, how he avoided it becomes news worthy.

And Senator Jeanne Shaheen should be happy about that.  It allows us to ignore her show up for the hearing over two hours after it started and the prepared question she brought with her.



Senator Graham had criticism, as I noted earlier.

Senator Lindsey Graham:  I just regret, to our media friends that are here, thank you for coming.  Maybe if we had Tom Brady, we'd fill up the room.  But that's the world in which we live in.  We're talking about consequential things and got [only] a couple of reporters here.



 Where was the media?

Where was CodePink?  Oh, right, if the media's not there, CodeStink's not there.


But this was an important hearing.  It was noted, by Gen John Keane, that Iraq required "a political and military alliance."  He elaborated further:



Gen John Keane:  There is no other way I believe that you can cope with this scale of problem without bringing the countries involved together whether they're in the region or have interests outside of the region as many do because of the export of terrorism to their countries and develop a strategy to deal with it.  This isn't about the United States driving a strategy.  This is about the countries together because much of what has to be done in the region where the radical Islamists are growing has to do with those countries themselves, has to do with the conditions that exist in those countries.  This issues simply are -- and what the Arab Spring was about if you recall, it was about seeking political reforms, social justice and economic opportunity.  Nobody was demonstrating in the streets for radical Islam.  But the radical Islamists saw the Arab Spring as an opportunity and it became an accelerate for them because they saw political and social upheaval and they could take advantage of it.  So using that as a backdrop -- it drives you -- those issues are still there -- political reform, social injustice and lack of economic opportunity.  







RECOMMENDED:  "Iraq snapshot"
"Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Barack Goes To..."
"The short supply of common sense"
"The Hollywood Reporter caught lying"
"Drones and Stalker"
"Arrow"
"Tired of the fake asses"
"A solar system discovered"
"The threat from the Islamic State (Wally)"
"The forever delayed report from the Iraq Inquiry"
"Naming the prettiest and the ugliest members of the Senate Armed Services Committee (Ava)"
"The Originals (bring on Rebekkah)"
"Sequestration"
"His trade, your lives"
"THIS JUST IN! HE'LL SHIP THOSE JOBS OVERSEAS, YES, HE WILL!"

His trade, your lives

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

FADED CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O IS STILL SCRAMBLING TO GET THE TRANS PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP TREATY DONE.


THE SHOW HORSE WAS NEVER MUCH OF A WORK HORSE BUT THESE DAYS HE'S A REGULAR MY LITTLE PONY.


REACHED FOR COMMENT, BARRY O TOLD THESE REPORTERS, "LOOK, ALL I'M TRYING TO DO IS CREATE MILLIONS OF LOW PAYING JOBS IN OTHER COUNTRIES AND THE EASIEST WAY TO DO THAT IS TO SHIP OVERSEAS ALL THE JOBS THAT STILL REMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.  IT'S ABOUT SACRIFICE.  IF MY TWO TERMS AS PRESIDENT HAVE TAUGHT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE NOTHING ELSE, IT'S THAT I WILL FORCE THEM TO SACRIFICE AND THEY WILL BE GRATEFUL -- DAMN GRATEFUL!"


HE THEN ASKED THESE REPORTERS TO BRAID HIS MANE AND PUT A PRETTY PINK BOW ON IT.



FROM THE TCI WIRE:




And Iraqi Spring MC reports that Falluja General Hospital received the corpses of 4 civilians and seven wounded civilians today -- a result of the Iraqi military's one-year-plus of bombing residential neighborhoods in the Sunni city of Falluja.


These attacks would not be tolerated by the Shi'ite Prime Minister of Iraq if the victims were Shi'ites. Haider al-Abadi became prime minister in August and, September 13th, he announced these daily bombings -- which are War Crimes -- had been stopped.

Either he's a liar or the Iraqi military does not listen to their commander in chief.

Within 24 hours of his announcement that the bombings had ended they were already going on again.

And they continue each day.

Maybe four lives don't matter to the international community?

I'd hope they would but maybe they don't.

If they don't, try to grasp that this is four people dead today.  Today.  These bombings have been going on daily since January of last year.  Over 12 months of these daily bombings -- which, again, are War Crimes -- the toll adds up -- the number dead and the number injured.

And the international community should be demanding answers starting with whether Haider al-Abadi lied or if he's just so ineffective that the Iraqi military blows off any order he gives them?


Staying with the topic of the targeting of the Sunnis . . .

شمرية العراق ‏@MoonNor27 6h6 hours ago

My senses no longer bear the pain &sadness cause I cant save innocent Sunni civilians who are die every day, by shia Gangs in #Iraq

0 replies 486 retweets 27 favorites

Ahmed Rasheed, Stephen Kalin and Robin Pomeroy (Reuters) report:

Sunni politicians and tribal chiefs from Iraq's eastern Diyala province accused Shi'ite militias on Monday of killing more than 70 unarmed civilians who had fled clashes with Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (ISIL) militants.

Interior Ministry spokesman Brigadier General Saad Maan denied the claims, saying ISIL was trying to undermine the reputation of Iraqi security forces.


The Minister of the Interior is a laughable joke and far from a trusted source on the topic of thugs murdering Sunnis.  As Loveday Morris (Washington Post) noted last October:


The new interior minister is Mohammed Ghabban, a little-known Shiite politician with the Badr Organization. But there is little doubt that Hadi al-Amiri, head of the party and its military wing, will wield the real power in the ministry.

The Badr militia ran notorious Shiite death squads during Iraq’s sectarian war, after infiltrating the Interior Ministry. A leaked 2009 State Department cable said sources had indicated that Amiri may have personally ordered attacks on up to 2,000 Sunnis. Amiri has denied such allegations.




Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) counts 215 people dead from violence (299 injured) today while, over the weekend, she added Friday, Saturday and Sunday's numbers coming up with the total of 692 people killed and another eighty-nine injured.




RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Google helps Barack break the law"
"Hejira"
"I Hate The War"
"Paralyzed Veterans of America Responds to Presiden..."
"Harper hits (and gropes?) below the belt"

• Truest statement of the week
• Truest statement of the week II
• A note to our readers
• Editorial: We speak out when?
• Media: American Sniper
• Documentary roundtable
• Tweet of the week
• They raise 'em real stupid at Information Clearing...
• Nancy Pelosi wants to talk ethics
• This edition's playlist
• Paralyzed Veterans of America Responds to Presiden...
• President Admonished for Overlooking Veterans in S...
• Michigan Greens Tie Values to Issues in 2015 'Stat...
• How radical are the Greens? (Socialist Worker)
• Highlights

"Am I the only one tired of Amy Goodman's White Power racism?"
"Drones"
"Mission Impossible 5?"
"a moderately good episode of revenge"
"Bernie Sanders, sit your fake ass down"
"Let's get real about Cindy, Military Families Speak Out and World Can't Wait (a whole lot White)"
"Michael Moore's big mouth"
"Calling out the b.s."
"Iraq"
"Ruth Conniff is an idiot (and worse and, yes, I say it)"
"Who will teach Barry O to count?"
"THIS JUST IN! HE CAN'T EVEN COUNT TO SIX!"