How Hillary intends to fight back on the scandal

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

AS THE HILLARY CLINTON E-MAIL SCANDAL CONTINUES, CLAIMS EMERGE THAT THE E-MAILS WOULD REVEAL PAY-TO-PLAY -- A FOREIGN COUNTRY DONATES TO THE CLINTON FOUNDATION AND GETS HILLARY TO ADVOCATE FOR THAT COUNTRY'S WANTS WITHIN THE STATE DEPARTMENT.

REACHED FOR COMMENT, CRANKY CLINTON INSISTED TO THESE REPORTERS THAT SHE HAD NOTHING TO HIDE.

ASKED HOW SHE WOULD BACK UP THAT ASSERTION, SHE REPLIED, "I DON'T HAVE TO.  AMERICA LOVES ME.  THOSE STUPID FOOLS WILL BELIEVE WHATEVER I TELL THEM!  GOTTA' GO, I'M INSTAGRAMMING!"



FROM THE TCI WIRE:




February 26th, the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee heard from the VA led by Secretary Robert McDonald, we covered part of the hearing in Thursday's snapshot.  McDonald is in his seventh month on the job.  He replaced Eric Shinseki who resigned in disgrace.  As Ranking Member Richard Blumenthal told McDonald in the hearing, "That has been one of the downfalls of the VA to this point, the lack of reliable truthful information.  It was the downfall of your predecessor."


It was noted throughout the hearing and it sort of left a question mark hanging over whatever limited information the VA was able to provide in the hearing.  Blumenthal is the Ranking Member and Senator Johnny Isakson is the Chair.  The hearing was about the VA's budget request and the first panel was composed of VA employees led by McDonald.  The others were Dr. Carolyn Clancy, well known fabulist Allison Hickey, Ronald Walters, Stephen Warren and Helen Tierney.


Senator Patty Murray is a long serving member of the Committee and is a former Chair of the Committee.  She and Senator Dean Heller sponsored the Women Veterans Access to Quality Care Act of 2015.


Senator Patty Murray:  Secretary McDonald, as you know and as you said in your opening statement, the population of women veterans is increasing dramatically, it's doubled since 2001. I was really pleased to work with Senator Heller to introduce the Women's Veterans Access to Quality Care Act to make sure that the VA does have the services and the facilities to meet the needs of women veterans.  One of the key positions of that bill is requiring obstetrics and gynecology to be available at every medical center.  I wanted to ask you what resources and staff -- including support staff -- will you need to meet that requirement?

Secretary Robert McDonald: Thank you, Senator Murray.  We've very much in favor of that -- of that approach.  We're in the process of putting, uh, women's clinics all over the country.  We have a new one here in Washington, D.C. and I'd like to invite the members of the Committee to visit it.  Uhm, it's in our Washington, D.C. facility, it's a women's clinic.  Uh, as you know, I've been out to about 12 medical schools, talked to deans.  I'm -- We're hiring.  And we need to hire more gynecologists --

Senator Patty Murray:  Do you -- Do you know how many you would need to --

Secretary Robert McDonald:  Exact number --

Senator Patty Murray (Con't):  -- to do this?

Secretary Robert McDonald:  I don't have an exact number.  I can tell you that in the past -- the past nine months or so, we've hired about 8,000 people.  Of that, about 1,000 are doctors.  But I don't have how many of that are, uh, gynecologists --

Senator Patty Murray:  Okay, if you can get --

Senator Robert McDonald (Con't):  -- with that --

Senator Patty Murray (Con't): -- that for me and get back with me on that.  


And this is what frustrates me regarding the hearings.

McDonald doesn't have basic information?

He's got a team siting with him at the table and they don't have the information.

Forget not know -- they should know it -- but they're not able to flip through their paperwork in front of them and pull out the figure?

And the team McDonald has sitting behind him at the hearing can't whisper the information to him?

Because, throughout the hearing, the people behind him were feeding him figures and statistics.

When they don't feed on that, when no one at the table volunteers, it doesn't look like people just do not know, it plays like they don't want to share the information.

As Ranking Member Blumenthal and others noted throughout the hearing, Shinseki himself complained, when resigning, that he was not given accurate information from those in the VA reporting to him.

So you'd assume McDonald would be focusing on nailing down information.

If you're aware that approximately 8,000 people have been hired and 1,000 are doctors, knowing how many are OB-GYNs should not be a mystery.

Though he didn't supply a number, with 1,000 being doctors.


There are 152 VA medical centers and if we add in VA outpatient clinics, we're left with nearly 1,000 facilities.  (We could also add in the nursing home care units and domiciliaries.)

So there is an issue of a serious lack of gynecologists at VA medical facilities and if only 1,000 doctors were hired, you probably didn't fulfill the needs.

The hearing was February 26th.  The Women Veterans Access to Quality Care Act of 2015 was read and referred to Committee on February 12th.

14 days later, you're not prepared to discuss it?  You don't anticipate discussing it?

Let's go back:

Senator Patty Murray:  One of the key positions of that bill is requiring obstetrics and gynecology to be available at every medical center.  I wanted to ask you what resources and staff -- including support staff -- will you need to meet that requirement?

Secretary Robert McDonald: Thank you, Senator Murray.  We've very much in favor of that -- of that approach.  We're in the process of putting, uh, women's clinics all over the country.  We have a new one here in Washington, D.C. and I'd like to invite the members of the Committee to visit it.  Uhm, it's in our Washington, D.C. facility, it's a women's clinic.  Uh, as you know, I've been out to about 12 medical schools, talked to deans.  I'm -- We're hiring.  And we need to hire more gynecologists --

Senator Patty Murray:  Do you -- Do you know how many you would need to --

Secretary Robert McDonald:  Exact number --

Senator Patty Murray (Con't):  -- to do this?

Secretary Robert McDonald:  I don't have an exact number. 



The VA was present to argue for the budget and what the budget needs are.

The failure to be prepared to address this issue goes to the continued lack of respect for the needs of women veterans.


Senator Patty Murray:  And I also just wanted to bring up the VA's policy, up-to-date -- It is way past time to VA's policies up-to-date with modern medicine and allow the VA to provide better fertility treatment -- including in vitro fertilization for seriously injured veterans who want to start a family.  This is a high priority for me.  I think it is a high priority for our veterans and I want to work with you to get that done so I'll be talking to you more on that.

Senator Robert McDonald:  Working on it.


Senator Patty Murray:  Okay, I want to hear from you.  What are you doing to work on this?


Dr Carolyn Clancy: So my staff briefed me recently on how many women might be eligible and what would be the specific --

Senator Patty Murray:  Well it's women and men. 

Dr. Carolyn Clancy:  -- medical requirements.  Yes.  Uh, also compared what the Dept of Defense covers versus what we cover.  Or, actually, don't.  At the moment.  So, uhm, I sent them back with some more questions.  So we'll be happy to follow up with you.  

Senator Patty Murray:  I'll submit some questions on this but I think this is absolutely critical for our men and women who serve overseas, lose their capability and we have to make sure they can start a family so I will be focused on this.  



Again, the lack of respect for women veterans.

An issue the VA has failed on is referred to, by a medical doctor -- no less, as an issue for women.

Murray corrected her because Murray's worked on this issue repeatedly. She has spoken to many couple's effected by the issue.  She has Chaired hearings on this issue.

She is informed.

And she's done the work to be.

Why hasn't Clancy?

Check her official bio and ask yourself why she is so ignorant of this basic medical issue.

And, please note, this ignorance is after, she maintains, "my staff briefed me on this issue."

And let's note again, as Senator Murray has highlighted for several years now, the Defense Dept provides coverage for this to service members.  It's the VA that's failing to do so.





RECOMMENDED:  "International Women’s Day 2015 Let’s Save Our Wome..."
"No to the racist backlash over Isis - former Guant..."
"Iraq snapshot"
"Who got trapped in Afghanistan?"
"Hillary's e-mails"
"The Hollow Man"
"Don't treat me like an idiot"
"Carly Simon's Anticipation"
"Who got arrested in Iraq?"
"more thoughts on scandal"
"Go away Brian Williams"
"Diana Ross"
"Hillary's scandal continues"
"The Slap episode 4"
"Tired Madonna"
"Clinton's response"
"THIS JUST IN! CLINTON SAYS SCANDAL IS A PLUS!"

Clinton's response

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

CRANKY CLINTON AND HER E-MAIL SCANDAL REMAIN IN THE NEWS.

NEW DETAILS EMERGE OF HER DOING STATE DEPT BUSINESS WITH OUTSIDERS FROM HER NON-GOVERNMENT E-MAIL ADDRESS OR ADDRESSES.


ASKED BY THESE REPORTERS IF SHE WAS WORRIED ABOUT FALL OUT FROM THIS HURTING HER POLLING NUMBERS, CRANKY CLINTON REPLIED, "WHY SHOULD IT?  ALL THESE E-MAILS DEMONSTRATE I AM POPULAR AND HAVE MANY FRIENDS!  SO MUCH FOR ALL THE PEOPLE WHO CALLED ME A COLD FISH!"


FROM THE TCI WIRE:



"The Choice Act has been shocking underutilized," declared Senator Richard Blumenthal at last Thursday's Senate Veterans Affairs Committee hearing.  Blumenthal is the Ranking Member, Senator Johnny Isakson is the Chair.  The hearing was about the VA's budget request and the first panel was composed of VA employees led by Secretary of the VA Robert McDonald.  The others were Dr. Carolyn Clancy, well known fabulist Allison Hickey, Ronald Walters, Stephen Warren and Helen Tierney.

Ranking Member Richard Blumenthal:  As I outlined earlier, Secretary McDonald, the choice card program basically seems not to be working.  I think you and I, in our conversations, have talked about the potential reasons that it is so underutilized a small fraction of the veterans who are eligible to use it in practical terms are doing so.  The 40 mile rule may be a cause.


Before we go further, let's all get on the same page.  The House Veterans Affairs Committee offers the following highlights of The Veterans Access, Choice and Accountability Act of 2014:

To improve access to and quality of care for veterans, the law:

• Requires VA to offer an authorization to receive non-VA care to any veteran who is enrolled in the VA health care system as of August 1, 2014, or who is a newly discharged combat veteran if such veteran is unable to secure an appointment at a VA medical facility within 30 days (or a future published goal established by VA) or resides more than 40 miles from the nearest VA medical facility, with certain exceptions.
  • Requires VA to provide a Veterans Choice Card to eligible veterans to facilitate care provided by non-VA providers.
  • Provides $10 billion for the newly-established “Veterans Choice Fund” to cover the costs of this increased access to non-VA care. Choice program authority would end when funds are exhausted or three years after enactment, whichever occurs first.
• Requires an independent assessment of VA medical care and establish a Congressional Commission on Care to evaluate access to care throughout the VA health care system.
• Extends the ARCH (Access Received Closer to Home) pilot program for two years.
• Extends for three years a pilot program to provide rehabilitation, quality of life, and community integration services to veterans with complex-mild to severe traumatic brain injury.
• Improves the delivery of care to veterans who have experienced military sexual trauma as well as care for Native Hawaiian and Native American veterans.

To expand VA’s internal capacity to provide timely care to veterans, the bill would:

• Provides $5 billion to VA to increase access to care through the hiring of physicians and other medical staff and by improving VA’s physical infrastructure.
• Authorizes 27 major medical facility leases in 18 states and Puerto Rico.

To provide real accountability for incompetent or corrupt senior managers, the law:

• Authorizes VA to fire or demote Senior Executive Service (SES) employees and Title 38 SES equivalent employees for poor performance or misconduct.
  • Provides an expedited and limited appeal process for employees disciplined under this authority. Appeals would go to a Merit Systems Protection Board administrative judge, who would have 21 days to decide on the appeal. If a decision is not reached within that 21-day period, then VA’s decision to remove or demote the executive is final.
  • Prohibits SES employees from receiving pay, bonuses and benefits during the appeal process.
• Reduces funding for bonuses available to VA employees by $40 million each year through FY 2024.

To improve education benefits for veterans and dependents, the law:

• Requires public colleges to provide in-state tuition to veterans and eligible dependents in order for the school to remain eligible to receive G.I. Bill education payments.
• Expands the Sgt. Fry Scholarship Program to provide full Post 9/11 G.I. Bill benefits to spouses of servicemembers who died in the line of duty after 9/11.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, the bill would result in net spending of roughly $10 billion from 2014 - 2024, making it less expensive than previous VA reform packages passed by the House and Senate.

Downloads

• Fact Sheet on Conference offsets.pdf »

Along with backlog claims issues, the VA has suffered from the scandal of not delivering timely care and inventing a system not to fix that but to hide it.  The simplest explanation is that the VA kept two sets of books on appointments -- the false one had veterans receiving timely care when they called in to schedule appointments, the reality version -- which was hidden from Congress --documented the lengthy wait times.

As a result of veterans being denied timely care -- and the health problems and, yes, deaths that resulted from these actions led to the passage of the 2014 act.

It was hoped that this measure allowing veterans living "more than 40 miles from the nearest VA medical facility" to utilize a non-VA facility and doctor would allow for more timely health care.


To be clear, veterans can utilize that and could before the bill -- minus the 40 miles clause.  But to do so they had to get a written referral from a VA doctor and present that at whatever appointment/consultation with a non-VA doctor.  This clause in the act was supposed to simplify this process.

But that did not happen.

Today, Tom Philpott (Stars and Stripes) noted Senate VA Committee Chair Johnny Isakson is calling for the 40-mile aspect to be loosened:

  As we reported here several times last year, the law is more restrictive than early Capitol Hill tweets had indicated.  For each episode of care, regional VA healthcare managers still must authorize outside care, and VA usually will direct patients into a contracted network of health care providers.
Meanwhile, the 40-mile rule narrows eligibility to use cards in two ways.  First, the law uses “geodesic” or as-the-crow-flies distance to determine if a veteran lives more than 40 miles from VA care.  This denies access to private sector care to many vets who reside within 40 miles of VA care if one uses a map and ruler.  Actual drives for care can be much longer.
Second, the 40-mile rule applies to the nearest VA health facility, not nearest VA facility providing needed care. So veterans who reside within 40 miles of a VA clinic that can’t treat their conditions still aren’t eligible to use the Choice Card.  Those are two problems that need fixing, Isakson said.
“We need to make sure that if [VA] health care within 40 miles of the veteran doesn’t provide chemotherapy or doesn’t provide a heart transplant or doesn’t provide a specialty the veteran needs, they get to exercise the 40-mile rule because the health care they need is not available,” said Isakson.

“We also need to be certain we look at how long it takes to drive there…This straight-line application is crazy,” Isakson said.  “It needs to be the time [or mileage] from leaving the garage of the veteran to pulling into the parking lot of the Veterans Administration.”


I understand why the act was passed, I understand the reasoning behind it -- and I actually support that.  But I'm confused to this day of why the lawmakers seem unaware of what was already available.

Veterans had to jump through hoops -- whether they were VA, TRICARE or CHAMPVA to get those referrals unless their VA primary care doctor was a good one.  (A sign of a good one?  They retroactively authorize it if you're on vacation and have to see a non-VA doctor out of your area.  Which they can do but only very few will.)  (If your visit is not authorized -- prior to the appointment or retroactively -- you are responsible for the cost of the visit, your veterans plan is not covering it.)

It appears the hope was that by the wording of the 40 miles, it would be easier for the veterans to receive the referral for care.  I think it was stupid to rely on the same system that was already a problem -- VA doctors -- to give the same referrals.

I'm glad Isakson wants to reform it and I agree with his comments but more needs to be done.  The easiest thing would be to have some sort of clearance that took place online and by phone (because everyone doesn't have a computer -- shocking though that is to America's so-called 'creative class').  So a veteran would log on or dial in and enter their address -- already on file with the VA -- and request a referral for a visit to a non-VA facility.  The computer or phone system would know that the address was X number of miles from the nearest VA and if was 40 or more a referral would automatically be sent out to the veteran.

The thinking seems to have been that by putting it into law the VA doctors would be less hesitant about providing the referrals.  But the problem was more the issue of accessing the doctors and getting the referral -- the time involved for both -- and this was time while you were waiting for treatment.  The system should have been automated.

If the doctors are part of the reason for the delay -- and they are and that's chiefly because of the time involved -- then the solution was to automate the process.


RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Iraq, etc"
"Iraq snapshot"
"Cale Conley Expands Relationship with IAVA"
"Iraq: A weasel and a woodpecker"
"Hypocrite Hillary"
"Neil Patrick Harris"
"another lousy episode of scandal"
"It is a real scandal"
"The scandal continues"
"Martin O'Malley"
"Films"
"Family Guy"
"Where is the choice?"
"Goldie"
"What I don't like about Netflix"
"hillary's scandal continues"
"Old Slush Mouth should shut his mouth"
"The Penis Blathers"
"Even Biden's camp is slamming her"
"The oil workers strike continues"
"No one got away with boredom"
"Bama Jelly would have been more helpful"
"So am I the only one bothered that Shonda Rhimes . . ."
"The Following"
"The big meet-up"
"THIS JUST IN! THEY REALLY ARE TWO DIFFERENT PEOPLE! MOST LIKELY!"

The big meet-up

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

FADED CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O WILL MAKE A RARE PUBLIC APPEARANCE WITH BULLY BOY BUSH THIS SATURDAY.

THE POINT OF THE MEET UP?

TO PROVE THAT ALTHOUGH THEY GOVERN IDENTICALLY, THEY REALLY ARE TWO DIFFERENT PEOPLE.


FROM THE TCI WIRE:



February 19th, "CENTCOM whispers about an upcoming assault on Mosul which may involve US troops."  That's when an official with CENTCOM spoke on 'background' with the US press about the then-planned upcoming attack on Mosul which has been held by the Islamic State (also known as ISIS and ISIL) since June.  As we noted then:


This was not a private conversation.
It was a background briefing.
Here's how that works, the Pentagon is the john insisting on his fantasies being played out and the press are the whores working to make the fantasy come true.


While we emphasized the aspect that US troops would be utilized -- despite US President Barack Obama insisting last June that US troops would not be sent back into Iraq to be ground troops in combat -- most went with the official declaring the assault would begin in March, April or May . . .

This has resulted in a large amount of criticisms.

Strangely, Barack hasn't been asked about it.

Strangely, he's not offered an opinion.

For once in his time as President, Mr. Know It All hasn't had an opinion to share -- this from the man who's weighed in on everything from reality TV to Kanye West.

At today's Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, the background briefing to the press was raised and the new Secretary of Defense Ash Carter labeled the briefing an error and a mistake.


Senator Tom Cotton: I have to go back to something that we were discussing a few series ago about the leak of our plans to Mosul.  I believe, Secretary Carter, you said you were looking into it.  I know General Dempsey that you said you were looking into it.  I-I-I don't understand what would take so long to get to the bottom of. I mean, this was not a leak.  I mean it was a planned conference call with members of the media, if I understand the reporting correctly.  Do I misunderstand something here?

Secretary Ash Carter: No, that's my understanding as well.  And I just say two things about this whole incident.  The first is, Senator, that when a-a-a operation is mounted against Mosul or anywhere else, uh, it needs to be a success and it needs to be Iraqi-led and supported by us and it needs to be successful.  And that -- It's a little bit like the conditions-based point that Senator --

Senator Tom Cotton:  Mr. Secretary, I agree fully.  I agree fully.  I don't -- I don't understand why announcing any timeline would have contributed to any idea it would have been a success nor do I understand why it would take so long to understand why an organized conference call with the media was held. 

Secretary Ash Carter: I'll say something about that and let the Chairman who's also spoken about that to General [Lloyd] Austin [CENTCOM Commander] about that.  That clearly was not neither accurate information nor had it been accurate would it have been information that should be blurted out to the press.  So it's wrong on both fronts -- on both scores.  And the only thing I'll say is that we try as aaaaaaaaaaaa [he stretched "a" out and we're noting it that way to capture it correctly] -- as the Department of Defense  of  a democracy to be as open as we can.  So there are lots of people out there talking all the time about what we're doing and every once in a while somebody gets out in front of their skis but I also even as we make sure that this particular incident doesn't happen again, uhm, I-I-I think that it's important that we be open as a Department -- not with military secrets and not with war plans -- which is the mistake made in this case -- but we do try to keep the country informed about what we're doing. It's about protecting them, it is a democracy, and so openess is important but it has to have limits when it comes to security matters and those limits obviously weren't respected in this case.


Robert Burns (AP) observes, "The episode is remarkable in at least two respects. It was unusual for the U.S. military to disclose in advance the expected timing of an offensive as well as details about the makeup of the Iraqi force that would undertake it. And it was curious that a secretary of defense would wait nearly two weeks after such a briefing to denounce it publicly for having spilled military secrets."


If the briefing was wrong, maybe it's equally wrong to inaccurately portray Carter's remarks.  This outlet did just that.  Above is what was said.

If you're going to put words in between quotation marks, you need to make sure they're accurate.  And while mishearing a word or two is always possible for anyone, recreating and restructuring public remarks is not reporting.


With the Secretary of Defense now calling out the briefing, it's probably past time that the White House was asked for a formal comment.



RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Fixing Veterans Health Care"
"Paralyzed Veterans of America Responds to Proposed..."
"Retrial Begins for Nepalese Migrant Worker Wrongfu..."
"David DeGraw's Transcendental Element"
"Save The Children tries to spin their award to a W..."
"Oh, Canada"
"Man, are you normal?"
"Iraq"
"Go away, Hillary, just go away"
"Sexism abounds around the world"
"Hillary needs to announce she is not running for the presidency"
"hillary's waist deep in a new scandal"
"Cat blogging"
"Libby Liberal"
"But they're on the ground"
"Crabby Clinton"
"THIS JUST IN! CRABBY CLINTON SAYS 'TRUST ME'!"

 

Crabby Clinton

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

HILLARY CLINTON'S FOUND HERSELF IN YET ANOTHER SCANDAL OF HER OWN MAKING.

THIS TIME SHE WAS DISCOVERED TO HAVE USED A PERSONAL E-MAIL ACCOUNT, NOT A GOVERNMENT ONE, WHEN E-MAILING.

REACHED FROM COMMENT A CRABBY CLINTON TOLD THESE REPORTERS THAT IF PEOPLE WANT E-MAILS, "ALL THEY HAVE TO DO IS ASK."

AND HOW WILL THEY KNOW THAT SHE HAS TURNED ALL E-MAILS OVER?

"PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO TRUST ME."

ONCE UPON A TIME WHEN YOU RAN FOR THE PRESIDENCY YOU EARNED THE PEOPLE'S TRUST.

CRABBY CLINTON NOT ONLY TAKES THE PEOPLE'S TRUST FOR GRANTED, SHE ALSO TAKES THE PEOPLE FOR GRANTED.





FROM THE TCI WIRE:



The assault on Tikrit has begun.

Sunday, Dominic Evans (Reuters) reported that "Iraq's army and Shi'ite militia" were attacking Tirkit.


Nancy A. Youssef (Daily Beast) reports that the forces are being aided by the Iranian government but not the US one:

The U.S.-led coalition forces that have conducted seven months of airstrikes on Iraq’s behalf did not participate in the attack, defense officials told The Daily Beast, and the American military has no plans to chip in.
Instead, embedded Iranian advisors and Iranian-backed Shiite militias are taking part in the offensive on the largely Sunni town, raising the prospect that the fight to beat back ISIS could become a sectarian war.
The news is the latest indication that not all is well with the American effort against the terror group. On Friday, U.S. defense officials told The Daily Beast that a planned offensive against the ISIS stronghold of Mosul had been indefinitely postponed.

Jim Michaels (USA Today) adds, "Iran provides artillery and other support for a military offensive in Tikrit, according to a senior U.S. military official. He did not want to be named because he is not authorized to speak publicly about Iran's role."  Zaid Sabah and David Lerman (Bloomberg News) note:



Naim al-Aboudi, a spokesman for the Iranian-backed Asaib Ahl al-Haq militia, one of the main forces fighting around Tikrit, said that “the U.S.-led coalition has never decisively ended any battle.”
“We don’t trust the coalition and we don’t need their help,” he said by phone. 



Meanwhile Luis Martinez and Martha Raddatz (ABC News) offer, "A U.S. official told ABC News that this appears to be more of a 'tactical operation' and that Iraqi military elements involved do not appear to be well-coordinated."


Iranian help is not just support from afar in Tehran, it's on the ground in Iraq.  Paul McLeary (Defense News) notes, "Twitter came alive on Monday with photos of Iranian Quds Force commander Gen. Qasem Soleimani who is again in Iraq, directing Shia militias in their fight against IS militants."



The assault's just begun.  Already the warning signs are flashing bright red.  Bobby Ghosh (Quartz) reports:

There’s already cause for alarm. Early reports indicate that Shia irregulars are leading the assault on Tikrit, under the supervision of Hadi al-Amiri, nominally Iraq’s transport minister, but better known as the leader of the Badr Organization, an Iran-backed militia notorious for brutal torture and murder of Sunnis.

Apparently unsatisfied with having a surrogate in the battlefield, Tehran has also despatched to Iraq’s Salahuddin province—of which Sunni-majority Tikrit is a part—the notorious Qassem Suleimani, the general who supervises most of Iran’s proxies, from Hizbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza, to the Houthis in Yemen.

One of the world’s most dangerous men, Suleimani has had the freedom of Iraq for over a year, building and reinforcing Shia militias that have been murdering and terrorizing Sunnis with almost as much enthusiasm—if not with quite as much efficiency—as ISIL has been slaughtering civilians.

Mark Thompson (Time magazine) notes Haider spoke today:

He addressed the Iraqi people in a televised address Monday. “Today, God willing, we start an important military campaign to liberate the citizens of Salahuddin province which includes Samarra, Dhuluiya, Balad, Dujail, al-Alam, al-Door, and Tikrit and other areas in the province from ISIS,” al-Abadi said. 

More than just being suspicious of Haider, the Sunnis in Tikrit are right to be suspicious of the 'liberation' being attempted by the Shia forces.


Sheren Khalel and Matthew Vickery (Middle East Monitor) speak with a man, Kareem Abbas, whose Diyala Province village was 'liberated' by Shia forces:


According to Abbas, the massacre didn’t start until the day the Islamic State was pushed out. The Badr Brigade, an Iranian-funded Shiite militia with a force between 10,000 and 15,000, advanced on his village, and forced the Islamic State out of his hometown in a move the Iraqi central government called liberation.
Human Rights Watch (HRW) has documented several cases of kidnap and summary executions by the Badr Brigade in Diyala province.
“Iraqi civilians [in Sunni areas] are being hammered by ISIS and then by pro-government militias in areas they seize from ISIS,” Joe Stork, HRW’s deputy Middle East and Africa director, said in a statement.
Visibly upset with hands shaking, Abbas tells MEE that on that first day militiamen gathered the villagers together, crosschecking their identification with names of known Islamic State fighters. Terrified, Abbas and other adult male villagers co-operated with the armed men.
“But then a man with a facemask approached the fighters,” Abbas explains. “He started screaming at them ‘Are you really doing this? We know they [the villagers] are not with the Islamic State. We are here to kill.’”
According to Abbas, the masked man raised his gun to the nearest villager and fired several shots at point blank range into the man – the rest of the militiamen started shooting indiscriminately. 




Dominic Evans (Reuters) quotes Iraq's Shi'ite Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi declaring Sunday of the Sunnis in Tirkist, "This is their last chance. If they insist on staying on their wrong path they will receive the fair punishment they deserve because they ... stood with terrorism."


With those kind of remarks, do you really think the Sunni population is safe in Tikrit?



UNAMI issued the following cautionary statement today:

Baghdad, 2 March 2015 – The Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General for Iraq (SRSG), Mr. Nickolay Mladenov, urges all armed forces in Tikrit to do their utmost to spare civilians and to protect their security and safety in line with international standards. 

“Military operations reinforced by international and Iraqi air support must be conducted with the utmost care to avoid civilian casualties, and with full respect for fundamental human rights principles and humanitarian law”, Mr. Mladenov noted.  He also called on the Government and the international community to take urgent action to ensure that desperately needed humanitarian aid is provided and to ensure that all those who fled from ISIL can safely return to their homes.

Also issuing a statement was the Association of Muslim Scholars (statement via BRussells Tribunal):


The Association of Muslim Scholars in its Statement No. 1056 ,  issued on the 1^st March 2015 charges the current government as well as the religious “marijiya”in  Nejaf  with the responsibility for the crimes committed by the sectarian militias.
The Association reiterated the truth of the fact it had previously stated that Abadi’s government is nothing but an extension of Maliki’s government in committing sectarian crimes  and that they are both Qassim Sulaimani’s diligent pupils, and part of his tools for putting into effect the Iranian project in the region.
AMSI attributed to eye witnesses in Al Muqdadiya in Diyala that the so called “popular mobilization militias” with the government police force in the area bombed the Tawfiq Ajjaj Mosque, after using it as a headquarters, in addition to last Thursday in the Al Hussayniya area, north of Baghdad, 19 extra judicial executions and kidnappings of displaced people from the Yathrib area in Sallahudeen were carried out by sectarian militias in the presence and full view of government security forces.

Finally, the Association  charged the current government, with full responsibility for these hideous crimes,  as well as the religious “marjiiya” in Nejaf,  for it is the “marjiiya” that called for the formation of the “popular mobilization militias” in the first place, and did not take any steps and precautions to keep them under control and prevent them from committing such crimes against innocent civilians.



Ben Wedeman and Mariano Castillo (CNN) note, "Iraqi forces approached Tikrit from several fronts, Iraqiya TV reported, engaging with ISIS north of the city at al-Alam and south of the city at al-Dour."




RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"The 'liberation' of Tikrit"
"Hejira"
"Third and that idiot Paul Street"
"Idiot of the Week"
"Hillary Clinton isn't fit to be president"
"Oh, Hillary, you are such a masochist"
"CBS misses the story"
"Barbara Mikulski leaving not a minute too soon"
"noam chomsky's becoming an idiot"
"No Magnificent 7 for me"
"Iraq Tweet not to miss"
"Hillary, just go away"

Truest statement of the week

Truest statement of the week II

A note to our readers

Editorial: Iraq, apparently, Can Wait (Yet Again)

TV: Agent Carter demonstrates a path forward

The bitches go after Patricia

Beyonce's biggest fan Janell (a cautionary parody)...

The IRS Scandal -- a Tale of Democratic Lying and ...

Celebrity

Bad Cops

The WSWS arts beat -- always a little behind (Ava ...

This edition's playlist

Human Rights Human Wrongs: How striking images can...

Miller Statement on Sec. McDonald’s Special Operat...

The IRS scandal

"Idiot of the week"
"That cowardly David Swanson"
"The needed statement"
"What sucks more than Netflix?"
"No, I can't!"
"Chief of police busted for soliciting prostitution"
"Leprosy"
"The oil workers strike continues and The Slap"
"There has been no recovery"
"who's creating crime in the u.s.?"
"CNET and sexism"
"Inside scoop of Rice"
"THIS JUST IN! WHAT THEY SAY ABOUT RICE!"

Inside scoop of Rice

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

SPECULATION ABOUT DIRTY RICE'S SANITY CONTINUES TO SWIRL.

A WHITE HOUSE INSIDER -- WHO ASKED THAT WE SAY "NOT JOE BIDEN" -- TOLD THESE REPORTERS THAT SUSAN RICE HAS ALWAYS BEEN NUTS.

FURTHERMORE, SHE WAS NEVER HIRED BY THE ADMINISTRATION.


"THE REASON PREZ NEVER NOMINATED HER FOR SECRETARY OF STATE WAS HE NEVER GAVE HER A JOB TO BEGIN WITH," EXPLAINED THE INSIDER.  "HONESTLY, I THINK SHE SNUCK INTO ONE OF THE D.C. 2008 INAUGURAL BALLS AND JUST SET UP SHOP IN THE WHITE HOUSE AFTER.  AND SHE'S SO SCARY WHEN SHE SCOWLS, NO ONE WANTS TO BE THE ONE TO ASK HER TO GO HOME."

IT WAS A RARE INSIDE LOOK AT THE WOMAN SOME HAVE CALLED DEMI-GOD AND OTHERS HAVE CALLED A DEMON.


BUT TO THE INSIDER -- WHO ASKED THAT WE SAY IS NOT JOE BIDEN -- DIRTY RICE IS JUST CRAZY,  "F-ING NUTS! I USED TO STOP IN MID-WILL & GRACE MARATHON AND TELL MYSELF, 'SUSAN RICE IS F-ING NUTS!'  AND THEN I'D HOLLER, 'JILL! HEY, JILL! DON'T YOU THINK -- OH, FINE, YOU'RE ON THE PHONE.  BEAU!  BEAU!  BEAU COME TALK TO YOUR OLD MAN! DON'T YOU THINK SUSAN RICE IS NUTS?'  AND BEAU WOULD AGREE WITH ME."



FROM THE TCI WIRE:


Seems like just yesterday that a puffed chest former general and current envoy John Allen was boasting to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, "In addition we're also discussing the coalition's next steps now that we've largely achieved the objectives of the campaign's first phase  which was to blunt ISIL's strategic operation and tactical momentum in Iraq."

Oh, wait, that was yesterday.

Yet Al Jazeera reports today at least 20 Iraqi troops were killed when the Islamic States "seized a strategic bridge" in Anbar Province which "connects the cities of Baghdadi and Haditha" and Iraqi forces attempted (but failed) to take it back.  In addition, the bridge is near the US-occupied Ayn al-Asad airbase (where the US trains -- among other things) and there was a suicide truck bombing outside the entrance to the base.

So the Islamic State is on the run?

Various US officials keep insisting that but reality rejects it.

That's how it is under Barack, that's how it was under Bully Boy Bush.

They appear to see the Iraq War as a 12-step program and that, if they spin the talk hard enough, reality will eventually bend to their will.

They pulled this in 2003 and it didn't happen.

They pulled this in 2004 and it didn't happen.

They pulled this in 2005 and it didn't happen.

They pulled this in 2006 and it didn't happen.

They pulled this in 2007 and it didn't happen.

. . .

As Vanessa Williams says at the end of "Running Back To You," "Get the message?  'Nuff said."


The Senate's concerned with what Barack's Authorization for the Use of Military Force (in Iraq, Syria, Disneyland and pretty much the entire world) says.


We covered some of Wednesday's Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing in yesterday's snapshot.  Senator Bob Corker is the Chair, Senator Bob Menendez is the Ranking Member. Appearing before the Committee was retired Gen John Allen whom US President Barack Obama has named the Special Presidential Envoy for The Global Coalition to Counter the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.


Senator Barbara Boxer: Under Article I, Section 8, Congress has the power to declare war.  I know that you agree with that, yes?

Ambassador John Allen Yes, ma'am.

Senator Barbara Boxer: Alright.  So I hope you could then understand why we would want to be very precise when we do that because we're sent here by a lot of people who have a lot of kids who serve in the military and they're the fabric of our communities so we want to be careful. I just want to say I'm not even going to ask you to expand on this enduring word because you've said it very clearly. Your definition is no enduring presence could mean a 2-week presence of combat boots on the ground -- American combat boots on the ground -- or a two-year presence of American combat boots on the ground.  And that answers a question the Democrats on this Committee have been searching for this-this definition and I think what you are proving with your honesty is there is none because its in the eye of the beholder.  When you say to me if I vote for this, no enduring combat presence and I'm sending my kids there in my state for two years I would argue to you you've misinterpreted it.  Yet the Congressional Research Service says there's really no definition.  And if I wanted to take the administration to court as I would say, as a member of Congress, "I said no enduring presence," CRS says I wouldn't have a legal leg to stand on 'cause there's no definition.  So I just think it's very important the administration hear this once again.  I know poor Senator -- Secretary [of State John] Kerry had to hear it over and over from our side yesterday.  But we're very uncomfortable with this language.  And when Senator Menendez was Chairman, he cobbled together a really good AUMF that united all of us on our side because he essentially said no combat troops with these exceptions -- and he put in the kind of exceptions that I think you would agree with -- special forces operations, search and rescue, protecting personnel.  And we would urge you, please, to go back and take a look at it. I just feel very strongly.




In yesterday's snapshot, we noted some exchanges on this issue.  We'll note another from the hearing:


Senator Ed Markey: In the Authorization for the Use of Military Force text that the administration provided to this Committee.  It said that it would prohibit "enduring" ground forces. And this was meant to convey that large numbers of [US] troops wouldn't be on the ground for a long time -- whatever that means.  I voted for the 2001 resolution and I'm reminded that the US combat operations in Afghanistan were dubbed Operation Enduring Freedom.  We are now past 13 years in that enduring fight and that resolution, of course, was also the basis for the justification of our actions in Somalia, in Yemen and the administration is saying quite clearly that they oppose the repeal of that and that the operations that are going on right now, in fact, are consistent with that 2001 authorization.  Now causes great problems to me and I think many members of the Committee because even in the absence of the passage of a new AUMF, the administration is maintaining that they have the authority to continue -- as they have for thirteen years -- under Operation Enduring Freedom.  And so that obviously is a problem for us because that sits there as an underlying authority for the next president -- Democrat or Republican who is sworn in on January 20, 2017 and most of us are will be sitting here then as you'll successor will be sitting here then and perhaps not with the same interpretation of the word "enduring." So my questions then go to is this going to open up a potential for an open-ended war in the Middle East?  Will it allow for unfettered deployment of ground troops?  And ultimately, whether or not we are opening up Pandora's Box -- especially in Syria?



The "enduring" aspect has attracted some media attention.

It's not resulted in any real media analysis.





RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Smearing veterans with a tired old tale dressed up..."
"Who gets attention?"
"Lois cannot run and she cannot hide"
"Motown"
"Tracee Ellis Ross"
"The Originals"
"Diana Ross "Give Up""
"WSWS Podcast"
"iraq"
"The destruction"
"Attack on a museum"
"I heard he's going to be working in the warehouse"
"THIS JUST IN! JAY CARNEY'S A WONDER! WONDER WOMAN!"

I heard he's going to be working in the warehouse

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

FORMER PLUS SIZE WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMODEL JAY CARNEY HAS A NEW JOB AT AMAZON.

CARNEY TOLD THESE REPORTERS, "EVERYTHING'S STILL NEW AND UP IN THE AIR BUT I THINK I'LL BE WEARING THE TIARA AND MAYBE THE TIGHTS.  I DON'T KNOW THOUGH, IS MY ASS TOO FAT?  I'D LOVE TO WEAR THE WHOLE WONDER WOMAN UNIFORM.BUT I JUST DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW?  I WOULD HAVE LOVED LIKE A YEAR LEAD UP TO THIS SO I COULD HAVE WATCHED CARBS AND ALL."




FROM THE TCI WIRE:


Corker was speaking at the start of this afternoon's Senate Foreign Relations Committee.  Corker is the Chair, Senator Bob Menendez is the Ranking Member. Appearing before the Committee was retired Gen John Allen whom US President Barack Obama has named the Special Presidential Envoy for The Global Coalition to Counter the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

Let's get to the really big news about Barack's war.

It is endless.

It's US troops committed far beyond three years to Iraq.

This was established in Senator Ben Cardin's line of questioning.



Senator Ben Cardin:  Of course the President's request to Congress is pretty specific on ISIL and expires in three years.  It's clear that there may well be a need for a continued military US presence beyond that three years. 

Envoy John Allen: Uh, I would say probably a need for military activity, US military activity, of some form or another, yes sir.


Get it?

First off, this is John McCain.

If you've forgotten, John McCain, while campaigning for the GOP presidential nomination, declared he as fine with US troops in Iraq forever -- or that's how it was portrayed.

He meant US troops in Iraq in the manner in which they remain in South Korea all the years after the Korean War.

Barack Obama was the candidate who was supposed to be 'different.'

And he was going to get all US troops out of Iraq within 16 months of being sworn in as president.

Samantha Power -- as we noted in real time while whores like John Nichols lied -- was forced out of Barack's campaign not because of what she said about Hillary Clinton but because the BBC was about to air an interview with her where she revealed Barack's campaign promise wasn't a promise and that he'd decide what to do after he was sworn in.  This interview was going to be big and Samantha had to 'save' Barack by leaving the campaign so that Barack wasn't forced to answer questions about what she'd said.

Forced?

The little whores of the press ignored it.

And months later, when Tom Hayden was outraged about Barack (the July 4, 2008 holiday), he stumbled upon this and wanted to know why no one made a big deal out of it?  And he answered his own question with Hillary's campaign ignored the issue.

No.

They raised it repeatedly.

In conference calls with the press and in repeated press releases.

It was the press that didn't give a damn.

They were too busy -- remembering the infamous video of Barack wearing jeans and walking past them on the plane -- oohing and awing over Barack to actually cover what he said and what his aids said.

So now, to steal from Jeremiah Wright, the chickens have come home to roost.

The liar who pretended he was always against the Iraq War lied as well about getting US troops out.

The end of 2011 was a drawdown, not a withdrawal.

By fall of 2012, as Tim Arango reported in the New York Times, Barack had sent another special ops brigade into Iraq.

By June 2014, he was sending troops in openly.

And now his envoy tells Congress that the plan is for a continued US military presence -- that Barack pictures it not just for the next three years, but for well beyond that.

How did that chump change work out for The Cult of St. Barack?

Because it didn't improve anything in Iraq and never took all US troops out of the country.

But, hey, we got to see his nipples, right?

He went jogging without shirts and didn't that make up for everything else?

Didn't his man boobs -- moobs -- sliding all around while he jogged make up for everything else?

Let's hope he was a wealth of masturbation fantasies because all he offered was fantasy and, again, to steal from his mentor Jeremiah Wrights, the chickens are coming home to roost.




RECOMMENDED:  "Iraq snapshot"
"Arkansas Passes First Abortion Restriction of 2015..."
"Blundering their way through"
"Janell Hobson supports domestic abuse and abusers"
"Janell Hobson can rot in hell for supporting domestic abuse (and Ms. is seriously racist)"
"A bitch named Ben Swann"
"Jesse Jackson's screaming 'race!' and getting embraced all over again"
"Ms. magazine has their own Brian Williams and Bill O'Reilly problem"
"US troops to remain in Iraq far beyond three years"
"'Dr' Janell Hobson needs to be fired for shoddy work"
"The Oil Workers Strike"
"that stupid janell hobson"
"Janell Hobson goes bat s**t insane"
"State of the country"
"THIS JUST IN! HE'S UNITED US IN HATE!"

State of the country

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

AN 8TH GRADE TEACHER DOES AN ASSIGNMENT SLAMMING REPUBLICANS.

SLATE DECLARES REPUBLICANS TO BE THE ENEMY.

AND THEY WONDER WHY THERE IS GRIDLOCK?

WITH THE DEMONIZATION NEVER ENDING THERE IS NO HIGHER GROUND FOR ANY 'SIDE' IN THE UNITED STATES.

THE AGE OF OBAMA: WHERE EVERYONE WALLOWS IN THE MUD OF THE PIG STYE.


FROM THE TCI WIRE:



Today Amnesty International issued "Amnesty International Report 2014/15: The State of the World's Human Rights."  The section on Iraq opens with:


There was a marked deterioration in human rights as armed conflict intensified between government security forces and fighters of the Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) armed group, which gained control of large parts of central and northern Iraq. IS fighters committed widespread war crimes, including ethnic cleansing of religious and ethnic minorities through a campaign of mass killings of men and abduction and sexual and other abuse of women and girls. Government forces carried out indiscriminate bombing and shelling in IS-controlled areas, and government-backed Shi’a militias abducted and executed scores of Sunni men in areas under government control. The conflict caused the deaths of some 10,000 civilians between January and October, forcibly displaced almost 2 million people and created a humanitarian crisis. This was exacerbated by the continuing influx of thousands of refugees from Syria, mostly to Iraq’s semi-autonomous Kurdistan Region. The government continued to hold thousands of detainees without charge or trial, many of them in secret detention with no access to the outside world. Torture and other ill-treatment in detention remained rife, and many trials were unfair. Courts passed many death sentences, mostly on terrorism charges; more than 1,000 prisoners were on death row, and executions continued at a high rate.


That the Islamic State is committing crimes and overseeing horrors is not hard to discover in reports and 'reports' in the western media.


The fact that Iraq's government forces are doing the same?


Much harder to find reported in the western media.

For example, starting in January of 2014, then-prime minister Nouri al-Maliki began bombing the civilian areas of Falluja -- a Sunni dominate city.  Bombing civilians areas as collective punishment?  Legally defined as War Crimes.  These bombings quickly became daily bombings.

The western press looked the other way until September 13, 2014 when new prime minister Haider al-Abadi announced these bombings had been stopped.

That the western press rushed to cover.

But, thing is, bombings continued the next day and ever since.  The bombing of the residential neighborhoods in Falluja has never stopped.


These bombings are acknowledged in a sentence in the Amnesty report:


Government forces used indiscriminate shelling to regain control over Fallujah and parts of Ramadi from ISIS, killing civilians and causing damage to civilian infrastructure. Anbar province remained in conflict throughout the year amid allegations that Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki had undermined efforts by tribal leaders to broker a solution.
The government’s failure to resolve the crisis, among other factors, left Anbar unable to stem the rapid military advance of ISIS, whose fighters seized control of Mosul, Iraq’s second largest city, in June and then much of Anbar, Diyala, Kirkuk, Ninevah and Salah al-Din provinces. This sparked a dramatic resurgence in sectarian tensions and massive displacement of communities at risk from armed attacks by ISIS or government air strikes. Ethnic and religious minorities were particularly targeted by ISIS, which forced all non-Sunni and non-Muslims out of the areas under its control.


The report also notes:

Government forces and Shi’a militias armed and backed by the government committed war crimes and human rights violations, predominantly targeting Sunni communities. In Anbar, Mosul and other areas under IS control, government forces carried out indiscriminate air strikes in civilian areas, including with barrel bombs, that killed and injured civilians. In September, Prime Minister al-Abadi called on the security forces to cease all shelling of civilian areas, but air strikes in IS-controlled areas continued, with ensuing civilian casualties.
Security forces and Shi’a militias abducted or detained Sunnis and carried out scores of extrajudicial executions with impunity. In areas where they regained control from IS, they also destroyed homes and businesses of Sunni residents, in reprisal for the alleged support for IS by members of those communities. KRG Peshmerga forces also carried out reprisal destruction of homes of Sunni Arab residents in areas they recaptured from IS.



Will any of the above get serious attention from the western press?

Did the findings in the United Nations report issued on Monday get any serious western press attention?


No, they did not.


The reports was issued by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq and is entitled [PDF format warning] "Report on the Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict in Iraq: 11 September - 10 December 2014."


The report notes:


During the reporting period UNAMI/OHCHR continued to receive reports alleging civilian casualties attributed to airstrikes and shelling by Government security forces and those supporting them -- that at times appear to have been carried out against civilian targets or heedless of the disproportionate effects of those operations on civilians, in which case it would amount to war crimes. Hundreds of civilians were reportedly killed (including at least 3 children) from airstrikes and shelling during the reporting period. However, in many cases, UNAMI/OHCHR has not been able to verify these reports nor the number of civilian casualties that may have caused . On 13 September, Prime Minister al - Abadi released a statement that he had ordered the Iraqi Air Force to s uspend bombardment in civilian areas, including those controlled by ISIL, and expressed his commitment to protect civilians. The statement was ostensibly in response to increasing concerns regarding civilian casualties stemming from airstrikes and shelling by Government forces,


Did CNN rush to cover the report?

No.

Did the Washington Post, McClatchy or the New York Times?


No.

Now it took forever for the report to get back to Falluja.

Because the United Nations is so cowardly -- especially UNAMI.


So you went from the bombing of civilian areas in Falluja to other bombings by forces -- Iraqi as well as the US-led foreign fighters -- before the report would (briefly) get back to Iraq.


ISF, and coalition forces 32 assisting the Government of Iraq, are bound to respect applicable humanitarian law in the conduct of military operations.  These norms include the principles of distinction and proportionality, and the requirement to take all reasonable precautions to avoid and minimize incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, and damage to civilian objects. UNAMI/OHCHR notes one confirmed case (and there have been a few other similar reports cited in local media), where the Iraqi Air Force dropped leaflets from the Ministry of Defense advising civilians to evacuate areas occupied by ISIL that may be potential targets in military operations.
 As noted above, ISIL continues to deliberately position itself in civilian areas and within civilian infrastructure, such as schools and hospitals, either to use the presence of civilians to shield their forces from attack or to cause civilian casualties in the event of attack.
Salah al-Din governorate reported the highest number of civilian casualties due to airstrikes, with allegedly 67 civilians killed during the reporting period. Subsequent to ISIL complex attack on the sub-district of Dhuluiya on 8 September, ISF began a series of airstrikes in defense of the area. Several aerial bombardments of the area during the remainder of September allegedly resulted in the deaths of at least 11 civilians , and the injury of two others. On 8 October, ISF shelling on Tikrit reportedly killed at least 14 civilians. On 9 and 10 November, shelling allegedly by ISF in al - Alam sub-district, including in a market area, reportedly killed at least seven civilians and wounded 14 more.
On 14 October, in the Kahrabaa area of Baiji district , an air strike reportedly hit two houses, killing 18 persons, most allegedly civilians. On 17 October, an airstrike in the Albo - Tuama area of Salah al - Din was alleged to have killed five people from one family, including one woman and three children. On 21 October, a building collapsed in the central part of Baiji district after it was targeted in an airstrike. According to one source, a second air strike killed at least five people and wounded at least 10 others who had gone to the site to retrieve those killed and injured by the first strike.
On 29 November, an airstrike allegedly targeted a vehicle in Yathrib sub-district, killing one civilian, with a second strike targeting a house where a family had allegedly gathered for a funeral. It was reported that at least 15 civilians (including four children) were killed and another 25 were injured in the attack. Local sources have reported that a predominately Sunni Arab area of Yathrib sub-district has been under regular attack by ISF and government-affiliated forces from Balad Air Base (formerly the al-Bakr Air Base) over the past several months. Approximately 15 - 20 villages have been affected, with the most severe impact on al-Jami’y a area, where it is alleged that almost half of the 600 homes were destroyed by shelling. Number of casualties could not be verified due to lack of access to the affected area. Residents have claimed that they are under threat of being shot if they entered their fields for agricultural purposes. It is alleged that the main actor conducting military operations in the area is the Asa’ib Ahl al - Haq (AAH).
Sources in Ninewa also alleged that the governorate had experienced a high number of air attacks during the reporting period. On the morning of 10 September, an air strike allegedly hit al-Majmoua area, north of Mosul, reportedly killing 11 civilians. In the afternoon of the same day, two additional air strikes in al - Shurta and Ba’aj areas allegedly killed at least seven civilians and wounded three more. Air strikes carried out on 17 October north of Mosul allegedly killed at least 26 civilians. It was further reported that on 7 November, two air strikes killed 10 civilians, including two children in Qayyara district.
UNAMI/OHCHR received several reports of air strikes in Anbar governorate, but due to the security situation was not able to verify these incidents or the casualties that are alleged to have resulted. On 6 October, an air strike allegedly hit civilian buildings in Heet, killing at least 18 civilians (including three women and eight children), with an undetermined number of wounded. Other sources, however, reported that the target of the air strike was ISIL, and that the three civilian houses had been hit with resulting civilian casualties in subsequent shelling of the area. It was also alleged that on 4 November, an air strike hit a market in al-Qaim, western Anbar, killing at least five civilians and wounding at least 27 more. Four days later on 8 November, another strike reportedly killed at least 13 civilians in the same area.
Sources in Fallujah General Hospital reported that 144 bodies (including 18 children) had been received during September, 398 (including 26 children) during October, and 2 94 bodies (including 8 children) during November. Sources in the hospital alleged that most of these casualties had resulted from shelling carried out by the Iraqi army and associated forces. UNAMI/OHCHR was not able to verify these figures.


Took them five paragraphs to get back to Falluja but eventually they did.

Again, did the western press rush to cover the UN's report?

No.

Nor will they rush to cover Amnesty International's report.

There's nothing in it for them.




RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"IAVA Statement on Secretary Bob McDonald"
"Legion statement on McDonald's Special Forces clai..."
"Secretary McDonald’s False Claim of Special Forces..."
"Paralyzed Veterans of America Responds to VA Secre..."
"Crisis Hotline: Veterans Press 1 wins an Academy A..."
"The criticism of the administration continues to g..."
"why ms. magazine sucks"
"A truthful Tweet"
"The oil workers strike is too hot for The Progressive to cover"
"Exactly"
"Netflix"
"How about 'why to attack Mosul?'"
"A CNN story that matters"
"That racist Mia Farrow at it again"
"Yea for Lester Holt!"
"Oh, look, closet case Janell Hobson's lying yet again"
"What was he smoking?"
"THIS JUST IN! OLD MCDONALD HAD A BLUNDER! OH NO OH NO OH NO!"

What was he smoking?

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

''I WAS IN THE SPECIAL FORCES!" DECLARED V.A. SECRETARY ROBERT MCDONALD.

THEN, REALIZING HE WAS ON CAMERA, HE EXPLAINED (LATER) HE WAS NOT A MEMBER OF SPECIAL FORCES.

HOW DOES ONE MAKE THAT MISTAKE?

REACHED FOR COMMENT FORMER WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMODEL JAY CARNEY DECLARED, WARNING HE'D BEEN ON A 4-DAY CLEANSE AND MIGHT NOT BE THINKING CLEARLY, THAT IT WAS PERFECTLY NATURAL FOR AN OFFICIAL TO BE CONFUSED ABOUT THEIR ROLE AND WHAT THEY HAD DONE.

"BARRY O WAS ELECTED PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES," HE EXPLAINED.  "BUT SOMETIMES -- ESPECIALLY IF HE WAS WEARING HIS TIARA OR PLAYING GRAB ASS WITH BODY MAN REGGIE LOVE -- OR BOTH -- HE'D INSIST WE CALL HIM QUEEN OF AMERICA.  AND WE DID."

SO THERE YOU HAVE IT.


FROM THE TCI WIRE:



Today, Law and Disorder Radio, aired this week's hourly installment on   WBAI -- and airs around the country throughout the week.  The program is hosted by attorneys Heidi Boghosian, Michael S. Smith and Michael Ratner (Center for Constitutional Rights) and at the opening of the program, the hosts discussed US President Barack Obama's recent AUMF request.



Heidi Boghosian:  Michael, President Obama has gone before Congress to get authorization to use military force against ISIS  but I understood that he was already fighting ISIS.  What is this about?

Michael Ratner:  It does seem bizarre, Heidi.  I mean, in one way it's probably going to expand his authority -- and we'll get into some of the details.  In another, I guess he feels better having Congress on his side against ISIS.  It may also be now that he has Republicans on both sides, that he has an easier time getting authority to go to war.  I think that's actually the biggest factor, the Democrats might give him a little harder time, not much harder, but a little harder.  Let me give a little of the technical details. It's called the Authorization to Use Military Force.  And, of course, under our Constitution, the Congress is supposed to approve the use of military force.  In fact, of course, this president, like every other one, seems to ignore that.  He has -- as people recall, he went to war against Libya without such a use of authority from Congress.  And he's been fighting against ISIS for five, six months already.  Although he's claimed that he's fighting against ISIS because it fits an old authorization to use military force -- the one from 2001 which was originally authorized to go after the people who were involved in the attacks of 9/11.  That's been infinitely expanded so far that not only is the President bombing ISIS but he's using drones in Yemen, he's using them in Somalia, he's all over the world with the 2001.  So you can see it hasn't a bit -- these broad uses of force that the president is authorized to use by Congress.  It reminds us, Heidi, of course, as we've talked about, of the Gulf of Tonkin resolution which was passed to give the president [Lyndon B. Johnson] authority to go into Vietnam and fight against the Vietnamese.  But it was so broadly stated that it went on forever and it expanded the war to half-a-million troops.  And in addition in this case, in the case of Gulf of Tonkin, it was based on a false set of facts having to do with an attack by the North Vietnamese, a supposed attack in the waters.  But in any case, these are bad examples because what happens is you give the presidents these kinds of authority and they basically expand them into world war.  And what's amazing to me hear is that you have the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force which has already been expanded.  And they're not planning to end that one.  They're planning to leave that on the books even if they get this new Authorization to Use Military Force in 2015.  So he's going to have both.  And then he says he doesn't even need it. Even if Congress turns him down, he says, 'I still have the old one.'  So the whole thing is just a charade for wide war. 


And that is correct that the White House is asking for an AUMF that they insist they really don't need.  This was established last December when US Secretary of State John Kerry appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.



Secretary John Kerry:  Let me try to help you a little bit on this.

Ranking Member Bob Corker:  Well help me this way:  Are you going to ever explicitly seek an authorization from Congress?

Secretary John Kerry:  We're seeking authorization now.  With respect to  --

Ranking Member Bob Corker:  So you are.  And if you didn't receive the authoirzation, will you continue the operation?  That's a --

Secretary John Kerry:  The authorization for what we're doing nowin both Iraq and Syria?

Ranking Member Bob Corker:  That's correct.

Secretary John Kerry:  Absolutely we will continue it because we believe we have full authority under the 2001 AUMF and parts of the 2002 AUMF but here's where I want to help you.



That December 9th hearing was covered in the December 9th snapshot, the December 10th snapshot,  Ava covered it at Trina's site with "Ground Hog Day (Ava)," Wally at Rebecca's site with "Barack wants war all over the world (Wally)" and Kat with "John Kerry, damn liar."




RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Trashing Gary ..."
"The protest in Diwaniya you won't hear about and m..."
"Hejira"
"The VA Secretary said what?"
"Allegiance"
"Kayla Mueller"
"The Oscars"
"So many fools"
"Joan Rivers was a film director"
"48 Hours 'Til Monday"
"Hard Truths"
"scandal and how to get away with murder"
"Oh dear Lord"

• Truest statement of the week
• Truest statement of the week II
• A note to our readers
• Editorial: The AUMF silence
• TV: Off the rails
• He put it all out there but . . .
• It ought to be a scandal
• Dirty Debbie plays dirty
• It's all about that grip
• This edition's playlist
• Here comes Hillary
• When we invited Malcolm X to Smethwick
• Paralyzed Veterans of America Responds to VA Secre...
• Highlights

"Idiot of the week: Barack Obama"
"Debbie's downfall"
"50 shades of bad"
"The Mamas and the Papas' Deliver"
"If only we could all agree"
"Neighbors"
"scandal - how 1 show can suck so bad"
"Scott Horton disappoints yet again"
"The displaced"
"The Slap"
"Gutierrez still hasn't gotten his period!"
"THIS JUST IN! LUIS GAVE IT UP FOR BARRY O!"