Showing them what they bought

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

YESTERDAY CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O GAVE CHINESE PRESIDENT HU JINATO A TOUR OF THE WHITE HOUSE AND A STATE DINNER LEADING SOME ACTIVISTS TO CALL FOR HIM TO MENTION THE ISSUE OF TIBET.

BUT BARRY O TOLD THESE REPORTERS THIS MORNING THAT IT WAS NOT THE TIME OR PLACE FOR THAT.

"LOOK," HE EXPLAINED, "I WAS JUST SHOWING THEM AROUND WHAT THE OWN, WHAT THEY BOUGHT AND PAID FOR. FIVE YEARS FROM NOW, WHEN CHINA'S CALLING IN THEIR MARKERS, NO ONE IN THIS COUNTRY IS GOING TO BE CALLING OUT 'FREE TIBET!' IT'S GOING TO BE 'FREE THE USA!'"



FROM THE TCI WIRE:

In England on Friday, former prime minister, forever poodle and eternal War Hawk Tony Blair is set to reappear before the Iraq Inquiry to offer additional testimony after his testimony last year just didn't appear to add up. Stop the War UK is organizing protests against War Criminal Tony Blair.

Reasons to protest when Tony Blair is recalled to give evidence to the Iraq Inquiry on 21 January:

• What happened last time Tony Blair appeared at the Iraq Inquiry
  
• My Iraq war crimes - the missing chapter from Tony Blair's book
  
• Tony Blair - war criminal running scared of protests
  
• Dear Tony Blair... Former UN assistant secretary Hans von Sponeck writes
  
• Iraq Inquiry: Normalising an epic crime by John Pilger
  
• Money, money, money... It just keeps rolling in for Tony Blair

JOIN THE PROTEST 21 JANUARY
QEII Conference Centre 8am-2pm
London SW1P 3EE

(Tube Westminster or St James's

Please publicise as widely as you can

Today the Iraq Inquiry heard from Tom McKane (held the post of Deputy Head of Defense & Overseas Secretariat from 1999 to 2002) and Stephen Wall (Prime Minister's Adviser on European Issues and Head of the Cabinet Office's European Secretariat, 2000 - 2004). Before we get to an exchange from McKane's testimony, we need to note a few documents the Inquiry published today. All are PDF format. First, a letter from Alan Goulty (Director Middle East and North African Department) dated October 20, 2000 to McKane. Most important part is: "Containment, but a looser version, remains the best option for achieving our policy objectives towards Iraq. International support is vital if this is to be sustained. SCR 1284 delivered the balanced package envisaged in the May 1999 DOP paper. Need for some tactical adjustments to make policy sustainable in the medium term."

SCR 1284 is United Nations Security Council Resolution 1284. Of the five permanent Security Council members, only the US and England voted for it. (France, Russia and China chose not to vote. Had any one of them voted against it, it would not have passed.) This turns weapons monitoring duties over to the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission. Previously, United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) had done the monitoring. (In March of 1999, Barton Gellman reported for the Washington Post that "United States intelligence services infiltrated agents and espionage equipment" in UNSCOM.) The October 20, 2000 letter from Alan Goulty notes that international support for SCR 1284 is weakening but calls it "the best means of pursuing our policy objectives" and insists "It would get us off the hook of responsibility for the humanitarian situation. It provides Iraq -- and us -- with an exit route out of sanctions. But its shelf life is limited. If there is no progress by next summer, SCR 1284 is likely to lose credibility, lending to growing pressure for a change of approach." The British government -- as evidenced by the letter -- assumed that whomever emerged as the Oval Office occupant in 2001 (Al Gore or George W. Bush), it wouldn't make a difference and the US would maintain a hard position against Iraq:

Most commentators (inside and outside the Administration) point out that either a Gore or a Bush Administration could be expected to be 'tougher' on Iraq. Bush's team includes noted hawks, and Gore (with [Leon] Fureth, his National Security Adviser) has consistently been at the harder end of the spectrum within the Clinton Administration. But neither has come up with specific policy directions. Bush attacks Clinton/Gore for failing to get rid of Saddam for eight years, but under the rhetoric, he goes no further than Clinton's stated red lines for military action, and he has avoided endorsing the "rollback" (regime change) philosophy of some of his advisers. Gore has made a big show of backing the Iraqi Opposition, but has also stressed continued containment, along the lines pursued by the current Administration.

Regardless of who wins, the letter cautions, "We cannot wait until the new Administration beds down to tackle them on Iraq policy. We need to get in early, before they make too many public policy statements from which it would be difficult to draw back, and be prepared to press them hard." Why? International support is waning, "sanction busting" is increasing.

February 15, 2001, McKane wrote John Sawers and noted, among other things, that sanctions were in danger of losing support because "there is an increasing sense that economic sanctions are unfair to the Iraqi people, ineffective as a means of pressuring the regime, and indeed counter-productive because Saddam and his cronies benefit disproportionately from the smuggling which undermines the sanctions." Now from today's hearing.

Committee Member Martin Gilbert: In February 2001 on the eve of the first meeting between the Prime Minister and the newly elected President Bush you were asked to produce a note by officials to highlight the key issues.

Tom McKane: Yes.

Committee Member Martin Gilbert: That were going to be settled in the course of the review of Iraq policy in order to basically inform the Prime Minister for the meeting. That note has been published today. Can you tell us who contributed to.

Tom McKane: It was the same group of people who had been engaged in the discussions on the Foreign Office's draft paper the previous autumn. So it would have been pulled together and coordinated in the Secretariat, but it would have included contributions from the Foreign Office and from the Ministry of Defence principally, but others would have seen the draft, other departments around Whitehall.

Committee Member Martin Gilbert: Were suggestions being put forward by Number 10?

Tom McKane: there was a sense in Number 10 I think that the official machine was running too much along well-worn tracks and that it needed a bit of a jolt, that, you know, there was -- that the way the options had been reviewed in the first draft of the paper looked too much like a regurgitation of what we'd been doing up until then. So the paper was sharpened up at the request of Number 10, although my memory is that they were not the only people who thought the first draft was deficient, and it was quite frequent in that job to find quite a lot of comopetitive drafting going on, departments offering their version of the paper that you were trying to produce. That was a perfectly normal part of the way we did our business, but the end result, which I suppose is then encapsulated in the 7th March note, still is focusing on a policy of containment, not a policy of regime change.

And he keeps insisting that throughout his testimony. However, they knew sanctions were "increasingly" unpopular as was the UN Security Council resolution and they knew the No-Fly Zones patrols were also unpopular (one plan was to suggest to the US that British military fly them only) so for all of his talk about regime change not being a policy, you see that they are walling themselves off -- intentionally or not -- from maintaining what they had and, as for what replaces, it, they really only see war. That's most obvious in the sections of the February 20, 2010 letter which are edited out but indicate that, for example, to remove Saddam Hussein from Kuwait would require war and, specifically, the military of a neighbouring country (the country is whited out).

New developments also emerged (in the press, not from the Inquiry) on the private correspondence of Bush and Blair. From yesterday's snapshot:

Richard Norton-Taylor (Guardian) reports, "Britain's top civil servant, Sir Gus O'Donnell, is preventing the official inquiry into the Iraq invasion from publishing notes sent by Tony Blair to George W Bush -- evidence described by the inquiry as of 'central importance' in establishing the circumstances that led to war. O'Donnell, the cabinet secretary, consulted Blair before suppressing the documents, it emerged tonight." John Chilcot is the Chair of the Iraq Inquiry and, in his opening statement at today's session, he commented on the efforts to keep things from the public: [. . .]

Rosa Prince (Telegraph of London) notes today that the letters are quoted in recent books by Alastair Campbell (his published diary) and Jonathan Powell and she notes: "Sir Menzies Campbell, the former Liberal Democrat leader, criticised the ban. He said: 'It is a bit thick that Mr Blair and Mr Bush have been able to draw on these documents for their own memoirs and to be entirely selective in the use to which they have put them'." Rosa Prince goes on to demonstrate just how much Bush and Blair have quoted from the (private) letters in their books.

Moving to the US, on Antiwar Radio, Scott Horton spoke with John V. Walsh and we'll note this section (we're editing Horton's use of term because we don't allow any deity's name to be used in vain):

Scott Horton: And it really is just amazing how you can have Barack Obama who we all know for a fact with no exceptions -- every single one of us knows -- that this guy kills people every day. And then he can go and give this speech and cry all of these crocidile tears about "Oh my G**! An employee of the State was on the receiving end of some violence one day." And according to all the polls and TV and the newspapers and whatever this has really done good for him and given him a bump in the polls and he needs to exploit this tragedy the way Bill Clinton did the Oklahoma City bombing, a Democratic strategist told the Politico. And apparently it's working. In fact -- I'll say one more thing before I turn it back over to you, John -- I only heard a small bit of Obama's speech in Arizona. And the small bit I heard, all I heard from him was blah, blah, blah, whatever. But what was interesting to me was the audience. They were whooping and cheering and whistling and celebrating and clapping and acting like it was a campaign appearance. "Oh my G**! There he is in real life!" Like he's a TV star or whatever. And here he is trying to eulogize the dead and exploit this tragedy and they're sitting there like literally whistling and yelling "WOO!" and things at him.

John V. Walsh: Well actually, I would also say that in the antiwar sentiment that we see on the left and the right, I have been impressed that there is much -- if I read the Antiwar.com or the Future Freedom Foundation or Lew Rockwell, there's much more concern about the loss of human life in war than I see very often on the left, I'm sad to say. Because very often the left is talking about the cost of the war and how we could have more if only we weren't killing people over there. But that's true. We're a pretty wealthy country to begin with, that's true. But it certainly is not as important -- important though it may be -- as the loss of innocent life, the loss of life in general. Probably a million in Iraq alone. Certainly hundreds of thousands, there's no question about it. And people displaced by the millions -- four million in Iraq. Who knows what is going on? So there has to be some morality and concern for life attached to this. And it's kind of outside the discourse of the mainstream media. And it really almost has to be if we're going to continuing waging war because too much attention on that is going to distrub the average person. And so it's almost that we've fallen into a culture of -of irreverance for human life. It almost follows from having an empire. And that's very sad, it's of our own doing. Actually, in the Boston area, there's a syndicated NPR program called On Point and it's a talk show and you know, they have been, the host Tom Ashbrook, has been over -- all over this [Tuscon] story and the concern about guns and the Congresswoman's life. Yes, all of that is terrible. But it took him, I think, until something like 2006 before he ever had on his program anybody who was against the war.

Scott Horton: Huh.

John V. Walsh: He had experts that were for it in various ways. But not until well after there was a majority against the war did you ever one voice. And you rarelyl hear it anymore.

[Break]

Scott Horton: Welcome back to the show. This is Antiwar Radio. We're talking with John V. Walsh of CounterPunch and Antiwar.com about the permanent crisis and, I guess, the partisanship that is at the root of why we can't seem to get anything about it done. I mean, you think back, John, to the antiwar, anti-Bush rhetoric of the last decade and it wasn't just, "Well geez, we don't like this guy because he pretends to be a hick even though he's from Connecticut and we want power, not him." The criticism was that he's tapping our phones, he's murdering people, he tells lies all day, he's spending way too much money and breaking the dollar and real criticism. Yet when Barack Obama does all of these exact same things -- including killing kids like, I don't know, right this minute -- "Oh, no, we still love him. We woop and cheer and whistle." Just like the idiots who loved George Bush.

John V. Walsh: Yes. Well, you know, actually that brings me to another thing I wanted to mention while I was here. And that is one of the guarantees to make sure that this does not become a partisan issue -- that backing Obama or backing Bush or whatever -- doesn't take precedence over opposing war is to have -- as Antiwar.com has been pushing for for a long time -- is to have a right-left coalition against war. And I just wanted to mention, I don't know if you've had this on yet or not, but you know that a year ago there was the conference in Washington, DC. There were about 40 of us, people who write and talk and do some organizing with respect to war -- to oppose war. And we came from left and right and there is now a book out called Come Home America and it's a book of essays from the people who participated from the left and from the right. I have a piece in there. Justin Raimondo has a piece in there. Ralph Nader has a piece in there. The editor of The Nation who was not as enthusiastic as the people on the right about this project but nevertheless she came. And the editor of the

American Conservative and so on and so on.

Scott Horton: Is David Beito's piece in there?

John V. Walsh: I'm not, I don't recall. [C.I. note, Beito's piece is on the American Anti-Imperalist League and it is in the book.]

John V. Walsh: I need to get a copy of that book soon.

John V. Walsh: It is available. And if people want to get it you can find it -- well, you can find it on Amazon. But I would recommend you buy it from another source.

Scott Horton: Right. Agreed.

John V. Walsh: But if you write the -- it's a little tricky to get the title. It's Come Home America all one word or if you write it in three words it's Come Home America.US. And there are the rationales and the ideas of people who want to do this and I think it's right-on. There are people who blame Bush -- and I would say that's -- antiwar people who blame Bush and cannot bring themselves to utter a word against Obama. Or if they do, it is so gentle and so muted and so in the vein of "Well he really means well, he just can't do anything about it." Which is baloney. He has the power to stop the conflict at once. Just like Dwight Eisenhower had the power to stop the Korean War and was elected to do that and did it.

Scott Horton: Right.

John V. Walsh: So you can't say -- which, by the way, was the first undeclared [by Congress] war -- you can't say it is impossible. It is quite possible and, as a matter of fact, that was the reason that a lot of people -- not myself because I never believed it -- went out and worked for Obama because they thought they would get peace.

ComeHomeAmerica features many essays including one by Peace Mom Cindy Sheehan. It came out at the end of 2010, don't accidentally confuse it with Will Grider's 2009 book Come Home, America. For more from John V. Walsh on the topic you can refer to his "Sarah Palin's Cross Hairs -- and Obama's."

Lastly, Military Families Speak Out notes:

MFSO has partnered with Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL) and other ally organizations for a weekend of actions, training, and lobbying in Washington DC to mark the 8th anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq. Join us and make your voice heard!

A brief overview of the schedule....

• Saturday, March 19th - actions to mark the anniversary of the Iraq War, TBD
• Sunday, March 20th - MFSO meet-up and issue-area trainings
• Monday, March 21st - lobbying, media, and organizing trainings
• Tuesday, March 22nd - opportunity for lobby visits, and we will be delivering 20,000 postcards to members of Congress with the message "Bring our troops & tax dollars home!"

Some logistical info (more details coming soon)...

• Housing - we are working to find homestays and affordable housing for as many Military Families and Gold Star Families as possible. Please indicate below if you need housing, can offer housing in DC, or already have a place to stay.
• Travel - Please indicate below if you need financial assistance to get to DC. We will have limited scholarships available for Military Families and Gold Star Families.
• Trainings - the trainings are being organized by FCNL for a small fee of $20 (this price includes lunch and refreshments on Sunday and Monday)

RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Today's wave of attacks"
"Deployments, refugees, theft"
"Desperate Housewives"
"Gloria Feldt plays sexist"
"Motion in the right direction"
"brothers & sisters"
"Women's Media Center is not being a freind to women"
"Regis and franchises"
"Idiot Riverdaughter's online meltdown"
"Everybody has died"
"Harry's Law"
"Chuck, Third"
"THIS JUST IN! THE WHITE HOUSE HAS A PLAN!"
"It's a win for Barry"

It's a win for Barry

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

CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O WAS UNUSUALLY BRIGHT AND ENTHUSIASTIC IN AN INTERVIEW WITH THESE REPORTERS THIS MORNING.

WHEN ASKED ABOUT POTENTIAL G.O.P. OPPOSITION IN THE HOUSE OVER THE NEXT TWO YEARS, BARRY O WAIVED A HAND DISMISSIVELY AND INSISTED IT DIDN'T MATTER.

"I'VE GOT AN ANSWER," HE INSISTED. "IF IT DOESN'T WORK OUT, I'VE GOT MY NEXT JOB LINED UP. A SPOT'S OPENED UP FOR ME."

AFTER FURTHER PROBING, BARRY O ADMITTED HE WAS REFERRING TO REGIS PHILBIN'S DECISION TO LEAVE HIS LONG TIME DAYTIME TALK SHOW CURRENTLY CALLED "REGIS & KELLY."

"BARRY & KELLY!" BARRY O ENTHUSED. "IT'S A NATURAL! AND WHEN HE REPLACED KATHY LEE, THAT TOOK NEARLY A YEAR SO REGIS DROPS OUT AT THE END OF 2011, I RUN FOR RE-ELECTION AND LOSE IN NOVEMBER 2012, I MAKE IT IN JUST BY A HAIR AND AM SOON SITTING PRETTY AS THE NEW QUEEN OF DAYTIME JUST AS OPRAH MOVES TO CABLE!"


FROM THE TCI WIRE:

Today Tikrit was slammed with a bombing in the latest news from the ongoing Iraq War. AFP calls it the worst bombing in Iraq since October 31st while Liz Sly (Washington Post) terms it "the bloodiest incident since Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki announced the formation of a new government in December". Xiong Tong (Xinhau) reports police recruits were queued up when a suicide bomber in their midst detonated. Laith Hammoudi and Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) quote police spokesperson Hatem Akram stating, "We have a lot of unemployment. All those people are poor people trying to find a job." Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) notes, "Local television reports have urged people to donate blood for victims." Tang Danlu (Xinhua) reported this morning that the death toll had climbed to 60 with at least one hundred and fifty injured and reports:

A doctor named Mustafa in Tikrit hospital told Xinhua that dozens of patients were taken to the hospital and there were very dangerous situations.
"We tried best to save lives of those wounded people," he said.

Charles Stratford (Al Jazeera -- video and text) explains, "Tikrit's hospital couldn't cope with the number of casualties An Interior Ministry official says some were being rushed to hospitals in Baghdad and other cities." BBC News has video of the blood stained ground as well as some of the wounded at the hospital. Steven Lee Myers (New York Times) quotes Abu Muhammad outside the Tikrit hospital stating, "My brother was there between the recruiters. I don't know if he is still alive or dead." Ned Parker and Salar Jaff (Los Angeles Times) provide this context, "Militants from Iraq's onetime Sunni elite have long opposed efforts to recruit members of their sect to position in the new security forces, and have used intimidation and violence to keep them away." Charles McDermid and Nizar Latif (Time magazine) points out, "The latest is almost certainly going to increase pressure on al-Maliki, who rode to re-election on a strongman persona and promises to restore stability. But the Prime Minister has not yet appointed anyone to the nation's top security posts; he is running the departments himself in the interim." Ned Parker and Hameed Rasheed (Los Angeles Times) report these numbers: 60 dead and 160 wounded. They also quote Mohammed Ahmed Jaboori (possibly speaking for many Iraqis) stating, "This explosion shows the big security infiltration and violation. They cannot control all of these poples. They don't have any observation or inspections."

In other reported violence today, Reuters notes 1 police offficer was injured in a Baghdad shooting, 1 Iraqi soldier and 1 bystander were injured in a Baghdad shooting and 3 Baghdad roadside bombings left eleven people injured.

The Economist wonders about the violence and feels, for Iraqis, Moqtada al-Sadr's call for them not to attack one another might prevent another sectarian war, "Instead, says Al-Sadr, they should resist 'the occupation through armed, cultural and all kinds of resistance'. That implies a worrying year ahead for the 50,000 or so American troops who have remained in Iraq after the official departure last summer of America's combat troops."
Saturday three US soldiers were killed, a fourth died on Monday. DoD issued the following yesterday: "The Department of Defense announced today the deaths of two soldiers who were supporting Operation New Dawn. They died Jan. 15 in Mosul, Iraq, of wounds suffered when an Iraqi soldier from the unit with which they were training shot them with small arms fire. They were assigned to the 1st Squadron, 9th Cavalry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, Texas. Killed were: Sgt. Michael P. Bartley, 23, of Barnhill, Ill. [and] Spc. Martin J. Lamar, 43, of Sacramento, Calif. For more information on this release, media may contact the Fort Hood public affairs office at 254-287-9993." And they issued this yesterday as well: "The Department of Defense announced today the death of a soldier who was supporting Operation New Dawn. Spc. Jose A. Torre, Jr., 21, of Garden Grove, Calif., died Jan.15 in Baghdad, Iraq, of wounds suffered when insurgents attacked his unit with a rocket-propelled grenade. He was assigned to the Special Troops Battalion, 2nd Advise and Assist Brigade, 1st Infantry Division, Fort Riley, Kan. For more information related to this release, the media may contact the Ft. Riley Public Affairs office at 785-239-2022." When DoD updates the count -- today around ten a.m. EST -- the number will rise from at 4435 to 4438. They haven't yet announced Monday's death so they won't include it in their count (unless they make an announcement before they issue the count).

While The Economist sees a civil war as unlikely, libertarian Ivan Eland (Antiwar.com) has another view:

The lull in Iraqi mayhem was mainly achieved by the U.S. bribery of Iraqi Sunni tribes (the "Awakening") to fight against their foreign-led Sunni brethren from al-Qaeda. The bribery worked because even Sunnis were shocked at the over-the-top brutality of al-Qaeda against civilians, including Sunnis; these ruthless foreigners were eventually perceived as being worse than even an American occupation. A similar outcome occurred in Malaya from 1948 to 1960, as majority Malayans hated the minority Chinese (perceived foreigners) more than the British occupation. It enabled Britain to tactically defeat the largely Chinese insurgency and adroitly exit Malaya.

Despite the likely ephemeral nature of the respite in Iraq, the United States should similarly withdraw its remaining 50,000 troops from Iraq and not be suckered by any Iraqi government requests to stay longer. The longer U.S. forces stay, the more likely they are to be engulfed in any renewal of ethno-sectarian violence.

Neighboring Iran wielded its now significant influence in Iraq to end the nine-month post-election stalemate, allowing the return of the fiercely anti-American critic Muqtada al-Sadr. The United States, even with its remaining troop presence, was eclipsed by Iran in ending the political gridlock. Al-Sadr's triumphant return as a key pillar in support of Nouri al-Maliki's Shi'ite-led government means the pressure for a full U.S. withdrawal will increase. Thus, a seemingly hidden goal of the George W. Bush administration for invading Iraq in the first place -- gaining access to Iraqi military bases to safeguard Persian Gulf oil, replacing those in Saudi Arabia that were lost -- would need to be abandoned. With al-Sadr back in the country and acting as a power broker in al-Maliki's governing coalition, an Iraqi request for U.S. forces to stay past their end-of-2011 withdrawal date is less likely.

Iraq's Christians have been targeted throughout the Iraq War. The latest wave of targeting began October 31st with the assault on Our Lady of Salvation Church in Baghdad. Al Mada reports today that Jalal Talabani, Iraqi President, met with EU ambassadors whose countries are accredited to Iraq and stated that at the forefront of the challenges facing Iraq are terrorism and the targeting of Christians. He noted that he met with Muslim and Christian religious officials about the targeting on Friday and Talabani spoke of a "new Iraq" where Iraqis live with one another "in harmony and peace" and live with their neighboring countries and the world "in harmony and peace." KRG President Massoud Barzani also met with religious leaders. Al Mada reports he met with offiicals from the Chaldean Culture Society, National Council, the Assyrian Democratic Movement, the Chaldean Democratic Forum, the Federation House of Mesopotamia and others to discuss the targeting of Iraqi Christians. Barzani told the "delegation that he will always ben an advocate and strong supporter for the Christian brotherhood."

Friday's snapshot included the following:

However, approximately at the time Talabani was speaking to reporters, the Christian Association of Ashurbanipal in Baghdad was under attack and their property was damanged by unknown assailants and by, according to eye witness, Baghdad police officers. Abdul-Karim, speaking for the police, denied that they were connected to the attack. One eye witness reports that the Baghdad police could be seen with the assailants and exclaiming, "We are an Islamic state!" and "No place for Christians and Yazidis in Baghdad!" Iraqi Christians have long been targeted throughout the Iraq War and the latest wave of attacks started October 31st with the assault on Our Lady of Salvation Church in Baghdad leading to the deaths of approximately 70 people with approximately 70 others left injured.

Saturday John Leland (New York Times) reported on the raid (but states it took place Thursday night) and quotes Christian Association of Ashurbanipal in Baghdad board member Sharif Aso stating, "They came in and said, 'You are criminals. This is not your country. Leave immediately." From Leland's article:

The intruders wore civilian clothes, said Mr. Aso and others at the organization, but their arrival was preceded by three police vehicles that blocked off the street. He said the men stole his ring and bashed him ont he leg with a pistol.

RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Tikrit bombing claims at least 60 lives"
"The fallen"
"The Disgusting Thomas E. Ricks"
"Another US soldier dies in Iraq"
"Francis A. Boyle's US War Crimes During 1st Persia..."
"And the war drags on . . ."
"3 US soldiers killed in Iraq, a fourth wounded"
"Credibility"

• • Truest statement of the week
  • A note to our readers
  • Editorial: Thanks, Barack
  • TV: Really can't be without you
  • Chris Hedges' Death of the Liberal Class
  • TV: She wants you to fight her revolution
  • Roundtable
  • 3rd Estate Fashionistas
  • For a single sentence
  • Bradley Manning
  • Highlights

"Beauty is as beauty does"
"Please use other words"

Beauty is as beauty does

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

CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O IS PREPPING FOR HIS UPCOMING STATE OF THE UNION SPEECH. THAT MAINLY MEANS HE GETS A RINSE AND CUT TO MAKE THAT AWFUL HAIR LOOK BETTER.

EXPLAINS WHITE HOUSE LITTLE PERSON VALERIE JARRETT, "WE DRESSED DOWN FOR ARIZONA. WE HAD TO FOR THOSE PEOPLE. DID YOU SEE THE K-MART ENSEMBLE MICHELLE WORE?"

BUT BARRY O IS BEING FITTED FOR A NEW SUIT AND PLANS TO LOOK "DANDY" ACCORDING TO JARRETT WHEN HE FACES THE COUNTRY ON JANUARY 25TH.

FROM THE TCI WIRE:

This week US Vice President Joe Biden visited several countries including Afghanistan and Iraq. On the second hour of today's The Diane Rehm Show, the visit was discussed and we're emphasing the Iraq section but picking up at the end of the Afghanistan discussion. Diane's guests were NPR's Tom Gjelten, NBC News' Courtney Kube and UPI's Martin Walker. Excerpt:

Diane Rehm: Courtney?

Courtney Kube: Yeah, on Vice President Biden's remarks in Afghanistan, I-I had to laugh when I read that the other day because he's made so many comments about the withdrawal -- the deadline in Afghanistan -- in the past few months. Just three weeks ago, he told Meet The Press -- NBC's Meet The Press -- that-that the US was going to be out of Afghanistan in 2014 come hell or high water. So three weeks later he's standing with President Karzai and says they're going to stay there. Now if you read through his remarks, it's plausible that he was specifically referring to supporting an Afghanistan nation-building plan and that-that it's possible he was talking more about the US would be there in a support role for nation-building -- that's sort of how his aides were spinning it afterwards. Whether that's what he meant or not, you got to ask Vice President Biden, though.

Tom Gjelten: You have to wonder, Diane, whether President [Barack] Obama sent Vice President Biden on this trip to Afghanistan precisely to force him into that situation to clarify his remarks. I think it was -- You know, we were -- everyone was -- looking for the magic words from him about the withdrawal and he did say to them -- he said that the withdrawal of US forces would be "conditions based" and that is not his position before. Clearly, he had gotten the message from President Obama that he needed to get on the same page as the rest of the administration in supporting the policy. That's one point. The second point is, as Martin eluded to, no one could better project the-the credibility of this message than the very figure of the administration who had been most skeptical of it. So, if you have Vice President Biden saying the United States is ready to stay after 2014, you can assume there are no more dissenting voices that are going to detract from that message.

Diane Rehm: But what about what the American people have been told? Namely that we are gonna get out [of Afghanistan] in 2014? Does that matter at all?

Martin Walker: It depends what you mean by "out." And I think this is Courtney's point, but -- as we're seeing in Iraq -- it's one thing to withdraw combat troops.

Diane Rehm: Sounds like the definition of the word "if."

Martin Walker: Exactly. That's the echo I was seeking. But there is a difference between having combat troops engaged in combat aggressive operations and having a number of support troops [who are] training troops and so on. And I think we're going to see that distinction blurred as creatively as possible by the administration over the next couple of years.

Tom Gjelten: You know, Diane, I'll go out on a limb here, I think what really concerns American people more than anything else is casualties and if you can --

Diane Rehm: Exactly.

Tom Gjelten (Con't): -- come up with a presence that does not produce a lot of casualties, there's gonna be a lot more tolerance for it. The United States still has a lot of combat troops in Iraq and will continue to have for a long time. But casualties there have gone way, way down. And I think that probably means the United States would be inclined to accept it -- the people of the United States would be inclined to accept it.

Diane Rehm: But what about Moqtada al-Sadr and his comments that he wants the US out of Iraq right now?

Martin Walker: Well he's back and he seems almost as feisty as [in] the past. What he was not saying was that he would perhaps lead any kind of military action to drive the Americans out. What is really striking is that his joining the government means that the deal that was reached with [Ayad] Allawi to bring the Sunnis on board by making him [Allawi] chairman of this new national strategy council -- that deal now looks hollow. In other words, the stability of Iraq in the future -- which will depend upon Sunni support -- now looks a great deal less certain than it was looking just two weeks ago.

Since Diane raised the issue of Moqtada al-Sadr, we'll move first to him and his supporters. Khaled Farhan, Khalid al-Ansary, Michael Christie and Tim Pearce (Reuters) report that approximately 2,000 followers of Moqtada al-Sadr marched through Kufa protesting that Joe Biden had visited and, P.S., they don't want him coming back. Of course the protest might not be so damn laughable if they'd managed to stage it while Joe Biden was actually in Iraq. In what should be a show of strength or at least moderate influence, the Sadr movement looks incredibly sad as their protest takes place after Biden leaves. So much for the talk of 'powerful' Moqtada and his 'powerful' movement. Azzaman reports that the followers "chanted anti-Ameircan slogans" and quoted follower Mohammed Abbas ("day-laborer") stating, "We demand no repeat visits to Iraq by Biden and we demand the departure of the occupier."

In the midst of a series of high profile meetings with Nouri al-Maliki, Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Ali al-Sistani and Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, Moqtada al-Sadr presumably wanted to "stay on message." The protest knocked him off that and, in fact, got far more attention than did any of his photo-ops. It's doubtful al-Sadr's sanctined, let alone called for, the demonstration which only further indicates the problems he will be experiencing in the coming months as he tries to strike the pose of leader of a civil and engaged political body. His years and years in exile has allowed his 'movement' to engage in a variety of activities and, as Kufa's protest demonstrates, they still think that is appropriate -- even when it knocks al-Sadr off message and, in fact, upstages him and forces him to spend Saturday addressing the topic of the protest. So much for 'fearless' or 'fearful' leader Moqtada al-Sadr. Whether these are merely initial growing pains as the 'movement' and the man re-embrace or if they are signs of a natural split emerging will be determined in the coming months.

Moqtada al-Sadr wasn't the only one visiting al-Sistaning, also visiting him was Iraq's President Jalal Talabani. Al Mada reports that al-Sistani stressed that Iraq was a place for all Iraqis regardless of "religion, doctrine or nationalism, they are all brothers and we stand as one" and that Talabani told reporters after the meeting that he discussed with al-Sistani the suffering of Iraqi Christians and that al-Sistani repudiates the attacks and calls them crimes that do an injustice to all of Iraq. However, approximatley at the time Talabani was speaking to reporters, the Christian Association of Ashurbanipal in Baghdad was under attack and their property was damanged by unknown assailants and by, according to eye witness, Baghdad police officers. Abdul-Karim, speaking for the police, denied that they were connected to the attack. One eye witness reports that the Baghdad police could be seen with the assailants and exclaiming, "We are an Islamic state!" and "No place for Christians and Yazidis in Baghdad!" Iraqi Christians have long been targeted throughout the Iraq War and the latest wave of attacks started October 31st with the assault on Our Lady of Salvation Church in Baghdad leading to the deaths of approximately 70 people with approximately 70 others left injured.

In November, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton became the highest ranking US official to speak out on the ongoing attacks. Joe Biden quickly followed. Today President Barack Obama issued the following proclamation:

Our Nation was founded on a shared commitment to the values of justice, freedom, and equality. On Religious Freedom Day, we commemorate Virginia's 1786 Statute for Religious Freedom, in which Thomas Jefferson wrote that "all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion." The fundamental principle of religious freedom -- guarded by our Founders and enshrined in our Constitution's First Amendment -- continues to protect rich faiths flourishing within our borders.

The writ of the Founding Fathers has upheld the ability of Americans to worship and practice religion as they choose, including the right to believe in no religion at all. However, these liberties are not self-sustaining, and require a stalwart commitment by each generation to preserve and apply them. Throughout our Nation's history, our founding ideal of religious freedom has served as an example to the world. Though our Nation has sometimes fallen short of the weighty task of ensuring freedom of religious expression and practice, we have remained a Nation in which people of different faiths coexist with mutual respect and equality under the law. America's unshakeable commitment to religious freedom binds us together as a people, and the strength of our values underpins a country that is tolerant, just, and strong.

My Administration continues to defend the cause of religious freedom in the United States and around the world. At home, we vigorously protect the civil rights of Americans, regardless of their religious beliefs. Across the globe, we also seek to uphold this human right and to foster tolerance and peace with those whose beliefs differ from our own. We bear witness to those who are persecuted or attacked because of their faith. We condemn the attacks made in recent months against Christians in Iraq and Egypt, along with attacks against people of all backgrounds and beliefs. The United States stands with those who advocate for free religious expression and works to protect the rights of all people to follow their conscience, free from persecution and discrimination.
On Religious Freedom Day, let us reflect on the principle of religious freedom that has guided our Nation forward, and recommit to upholding this universal human right both at home and around the world.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim January 16, 2011, as Religious Freedom Day. I call on all Americans to commemorate this day with events and activities that teach us about this critical foundation of our Nation's liberty, and to show us how we can protect it for future generations here and around the world.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this fourteenth day of January, in the year of our Lord two thousand eleven, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fifth.

RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Continued presence, fey protest"
"What returns from Iraq"
"I Hate The War"
"Iraq snapshot"
"Biden in Iraq means what?"
"Veterans and refugees"
"Book in the Kitchen"
"Why the delay?"
"The ex-factor of Lauryn"
"Thursdays"
"Who does NPR think it's kidding?"
"Who does NPR think they're serving?"
"rolling stone: the worst mag website"
"the sad and sick naomi"
"The economy"
"Various"
"Stevie Nicks"
"Best line online"
"Sci Fi"
"Michelle, just sit down already"
"Sibling Rivalry"
"Propped up for a reason"
"Bully Boy's Immigration PLan"
"Cultural delusions"
"Fringe"
"Haiti"
"Scraggles"
"THIS JUST IN! CELEBRITY IMPLOSION!"

Scraggles

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


IT WAS LIKE CATCHING JOEY HEATHERON IN PUBLIC WITHOUT HER GIRDLE OR MARV ALBERT IN PUBLIC WITHOUT HIS BAD TOUPE. THERE WAS CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O IN PUBLIC WITHOUT HIS RINSE AND WITH SCRAGGLY HAIR.

SOME PRETENDED HE HAD SOMETHING TO SAY BUT THOSE WHO COULDN'T NOTE HOW HAGGARD HE LOOKED REALLY CAN'T BE EXPECTED TO TELL THE TRUTH TO BEGIN WITH.

MEANWHILE TWO OF THE BIGGEST LIARS IN THE CREATION OF BARRY O -- AP AND SHEPARD THE LIAR FAIREY AGREED THEY COULD STILL SQUEEZE SOME GREEN OUT OF THE FAILED AND FADED IMAGE OF BARRY O AND AGREED TO STOP SUING EACH OTHER AND HOP INTO BED ALREADY.

"IT'S ABOUT TIME," SAID MANY OBSERVERS NOTING THE RUMORS THAT SHEP WAS PREGNANT.

FROM THE TCI WIRE:

Starting in the US where the Justice Dept is targeting activists. Friday, September 24th FBI raids took place on at least seven homes of peace activists -- the FBI admits to raiding seven homes -- and the FBI raided the offices of Anti-War Committee. Just as that news was breaking, the National Lawyers Guild issued a new report, Heidi Boghosian's [PDF format warning] "The Policing of Political Speech: Constraints on Mass Dissent in the US." Heidi and Michael S. Smith and Michael Ratner covered the topic on WBAI's Law and Disorder Radio including during a conversation with Margaret Ratner-Kunstler which you can hear at the program's site by going into the archives and the program has also transcribed their discussion with Margaret and you can read it here. The Lawyer's Guild is an hourly show hosted by Jim Lafferty each Thursday night from 7:00 to 8:00 pm PST on Los Angeles' KPFK. Among his guests last week was Bruce Nestor. Excerpt:

Jim Lafferty: Bruce Nestor is one of the lead attorneys for political activists around the country who've had their homes raided by the FBI recently and, as I said at the top of the show, subpoened to testify before grand juries under some rather suspicious and ominous circumstances. I should mention that Mr. Nestor is a former national president of the National Lawyers Guild and he joins us by phone from Minneapolis, MN of St. Paul, which is it?

Bruce Nestor: Minneapolis.

Jim Lafferty: Minneapolis! Alright, Bruce Nestor, welcome to The Lawyers Guild Show. Bruce, first off, who are your clients? And when I say that, I don't mean by name. But who are they in terms of what their political work was and what is happened to them so far as a result of actions by the FBI, the US Justice Dept? Walk us through where all this began, these raids on home, these subpoenas and so forth.

Bruce Nestor: These events started -- that we were publicly aware of -- although clearly an investigation was going on long before it with home raids on September 24th of last year when political activists in Minneapolis and Chicago had their homes raided, subpoeanas were served and across the country other activists, including in California, were contacted and the FBI was trying to interview them. That group of people has now grown to at least 23 individuals who have either been served with subpoenas or told that they will be served with subpoenas to appear in front of a grand jury being run by Assistant -- by US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald in Chicago -- the US Attorney who prosecuted Scooter Libby, Dick Cheney's former Chief of Staff. And so no one yet has appeared in front of the grand jury, everyone has asserted their right to remain silent and their political right not to testify against their friends and colleagues about their political beliefs and activities. But the range of people ranges from people who have been active in the anti-war movement, the labor movement -- many of the activists here in Minneapolis in particular are very -- are members of their labor unions and active in the labor movement, to young people who've just recently traveled to Palestine and the occupied territories as part of Solidarity trips or as part of fact-finding delegations to investigate US policy and how the Palestinian people are resisting occupation. So it - it's really frightening. The stated purpose of the investigation is to investigate material support for terrorism -- a claim that public statements of support for groups abroad as well as humanitarian fund raising in limited amounts constitutes material support for terrorism. And that's being used as a pretext to really go after entire political organizations and large numbers of people.

Jim Lafferty: Yeah. Well we'll get back into that again in a minute but these things, as you've just pointed out, started with-with raids. And I assume they had search warrants. If so, what were they looking for in these raids and what kind of things did they take away?

Bruce Nestor: They took everything. They took baby pictures, they took boxes of documents, computers, cell phones. The range of what they said they were looking for was anything related to contacts with a foreign organization -- some in Columbia, some in Palestine, informations related to people's travels abroad but including information about groups that are active locally. Like, in Minnesota, for instance, they wanted to know how people recruit, how they fundraise, what their membership lists are. And, you know, some of it, they talk about indoctrination and recruitment -- as if this were secret. I mean, some of the money that was being raised here for humanitarian aid was raised by kids at lemon aid stands -- literally selling lemon aid at fifty cents a cup to try to raise money for day care and baby formula in the occupied territories.

Jim Lafferty: (Laughing) That certainly sounds dangerous to me. Listen, I laugh to keep from crying. Maybe I should jump ahead? Well, let me first ask this question. Have any of your clients yet or have any of these 23 people actually testified or agreed to testify before the grand jury?

Bruce Nestor: Nobody has testified before the grand jury. It doesn't appear that people in good conscience are going to be able to do that or will agree to do that. That's, of course, a decision that each individual needs to make. And nobody's been indicted yet. Nobody's been charged. We're now going on three months and people -- A few people got their cell phones back but people don't have their computers back, the antiwar committee doesn't have their computer back with their membership lists and other information on it. It's a very serious investigation.

If you missed that broadcast, you can visit the KPFK archives in the next 54 days to hear it, after that it's gone from the archives. This week on Law and Disorder Radio (aired yesterday on WBAI and is broadcasting throughout the country throughout the week -- and which archives at its own website -- all five years of the program and congratulations on five solid years of broadcasting) hosts Heidi Boghosian, Michael Ratner and Michael S. Smith address the issue. Yesterday's snapshot noted their interview with activist and journalist Maureen Murphy who is among those subpoenaed and who states she will not provide testimony. (Murphy is with The Electronic Intifada and I say that only to give them a link -- she does not believe her work with TEI had anything to do with her being subpoenaed.) On this topic, this week they also speak with attorney Michael Deutsch of the People's Law Office in Chicago who is also representing some of the people subpoenaed. Excerpt:

Heidi Boghosian: This past December, we had what seems to be a second wave of subpoeanas following the rash that occurred in September Can you give us a brief summary of what happened?

Michael Deutsch: Towards the end of the summer, the FBI went out with a stack of subpoenas and wound subpoeaning nine additional people in the Chicago area which then makes 23 --14 had been subpoenaed prior -- right at the end of September. And these people who are subpoenaed are all people who are active in Palestinian support work. You know, they're invovled with a group called the Arab American Action Network -- AAAN, or they're part of a group called the Palestinian Support Group, some of them have made trips to the Middle East, others have just been active in the Chicago area and educating people about the situation in Israel and Palestine.

Heidi Boghosian: And are the subpoenas asking for specific documents or, do you think, sort of a general fishing expedition?

Michael Deutsch: Well unlike the first series of subpoeneas which did ask for documents to be produced, these subpoenas only talk about coming to testify. And it seems to me what's going on now, the first group it seemed were people who were directly related to the searches and related in some way to this Freedom Road Socialist Organization. This next wave of subpoenas are people who are not necessarily related to that organization but are people who they are trying to gathering information from. So it's particularly a fishing expedition in terms of gathering information about people's political work and associations.

Michael Ratner: Michael, I don't understand. You mean to say someone gets a subpoena that doesn't even mention a criminal law they're investigating? That they don't --

Michael Deutsch: No. Uh-uh.

Michael Ratner: They just say, like "Michael Deutsch, report to the grand jury to testify"? And doesn't say what about?

Michael Deutsch: It does not say what it's about. It just says: "You're subpoenaed to appear before the grand jury January 25th." It doesn't even say the statute which they're investigating.

Michael Ratner: Have you had any experience in your life with a subpoena like that?

Michael Deutsch: No. I haven't had experience with that and, of course, I've never, in all my experience, seen so many people subpoenaed to a grand jury -- I mean in a political situation. So it really looks to me like they're just relying on any type of relationship to the Palestinian Solidarity Movement to subpoena people to a grand jury. People who went on trips, people who went to demonstrations, people who are active in community work. So it's a very strange development but ominous nonetheless.

Heidi Boghosian: Michael, I'm curious about the midwest region. Now is -- do you think we're seeing so many subpoenas in this area because of the presence of joint-terrorism task forces there? Do you have any explanation?

Michael Deutsch: I don't think it's related to the fact that there's a joint-terrorist task force because there's one in New York and probably one in other places. I think it's because a lot of the Palestine support work has gone on in Chicago and based in Chicago and I would say that the FBI has been around somewhat in New York and in the Bay Area trying to talk to people as well. So the subpoenas may extend to other areas but because one of the main targets of their investigation is the executive director of the AAAN -- the Arab American Action Network -- Hatem Abudayyeh -- they're focusing on him and people who work with him or are part of organizations that he's been part of. And that's who this last wave of subpoenas has really focused on.

The grand jury appearance is coming up. It's Tuesday, January 25th and this is from Stop FBI Repression about the January 25th actions:

In December 2010, under the direction of U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, the FBI delivered nine new subpoenas in Chicago to anti-war and Palestine solidarity activists. Patrick Fitzgerald's office is ordering the nine to appear at a Grand Jury in Chicago on January 25.

In response we are calling for protests on Jan. 25 across the country and around the world to show our solidarity. Hundreds of organizations and thousands of people will be protesting at Federal Buildings, FBI offices, and other appropriate places, showing solidarity with the nine newly subpoenaed activists, and with all the activists whose homes were raided by the FBI.

Fitzgerald's expanding web of repression already includes the fourteen subpoenaed when the FBI stormed into homes on September 24th, carting away phones, computers, notebooks, diaries, and children's artwork. In October, all fourteen activists from Chicago, Minneapolis, and Michigan each decided to not participate in the secret proceedings of Fitzgerald's Grand Jury. Each signed a letter invoking their Fifth Amendment rights. However, three women from Minneapolis -- Tracy Molm, Anh Pham, and Sarah Martin -- are facing re-activated subpoenas. They are standing strong and we are asking you to stand with them --and with the newly subpoenaed nine activists -- by protesting Patrick Fitzgerald and his use of the Grand Jury and FBI to repress anti-war and international solidarity activists.

Defend free speech! Defend the right to organize! Opposing war and occupation is not a crime!

• Tell Patrick Fitzgerald to call off the Grand Jury!
• Stop FBI raids and repression!

Take Action!

Please organize a local protest or picket in your city or on your campus on Tuesday Jan. 25 and e-mail us at stopfbi@gmail.com to let us know what you have planned.

The Committee to Stop FBI Repression www.StopFBI.net

Please e-mail stopfbi@gmail.com or call 612-379-3585

Here is a flyer you can use for your local protest (pdf). Just fill in the time and location of your local protest, and local contact information if you want.

We have noted this repeatedly and will continue to try to do so. This is an assault on political freedom. When our response is to stay silent, we lose political freedom. (Just as when we participate in a frenzy to demonize political speech, we damage political speech and a lot of people need to be thinking about that right about now.) Marueen Murphy and Nora Barrows-Friedman have a piece at Electronic Infitada about the targeting. Is it the new McCarthyism? Could be. Some would argue we're already there as evidenced by attorney Lynne Stewart being a political prisoner of the United States for the 'crime' of breaking a guideline. Once was a time you went to prison for breaking law, now it just requires breaking a guideline. We'll note Lynne and some other actions at the end of the snapshot. There is a great deal coming up in the next two months.

RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"The media circus leaves town or Iraq at any rate"
"Continued war"
"Scary night"
"A little late, Matthew Rothschild"
"The amazing Hillary Is 44"
"katha pollitt and brothers & sisters"
"Destroying the internet"
"Stevie Nicks"
"Guantanamo"
"V and Hillary is 44"
"Chris Hedges"
"Haiti, Gulf Disaster and other stories being ignored"
"THIS JUST IN! MORE THAN 1 QUEEN IN THE DECK!"
"The queens have spoken"

The queens have spoken

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

CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O JUST PREFERS A FRENCH KISS AND FOR THAT REASON PREFERS HOLDING HANDS WITH NICHOLAS SARKOZY AND FRANCE WHILE DECLARING THAT HE'S CLOSER TO NO ONE ELSE.

ACROSS THE POND THE REACTION FROM ENGLAND WAS FURIOUS; HOWEVER, REACHED FOR COMMENT, BUCKINGHAM PALACE SAID, "HER ROYAL HIGHNESS WAS NEITHER AMUSED NOR SURPRISED AND HAS LONG KNOWN THAT PERSON LIVING IN GOVERNMENT HOUSING ON PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE COULD NOT DEAL WITH THE FACT THAT HER ROYAL HIGHNESS WAS THE ACTUAL QUEEN AND HE WAS A MERE PRETENDER."


FROM THE TCI WIRE:

US Senator Mark Warner is a Democrat. We're noting that party identitifcation for a reason that should become obvious after we deal with what Warner's done this week. Monday, he held a press conference to discuss a new report on female veterans' health. WTVR reports that the study found female veterans "more likely to suffer from mental health conditions than their male counterparts" and quotes Warner stating, "It became evident to me that this challenge was growing exponentially -- in this conflict, perhaps higher than any other in the past -- and that there was a particular concern in the changing nature in the conflict particularly in Iraq and Afghanistan, in terms of our women veterans." Corinne Reilly (Virginian-Pilot) quotes Warner stating, "Even if we continue to say that women don't serve in combat, the truth is they do. The claims rules need to reflect that."

The report is entitled [PDF format warning] "Review of Combat Stress in Women Veterans Receiving VA Health Care and Disability Benefits" and is from the VA's Inspector General's office and utilized "almost 500,000 male and female veterans who separated from the military from July 1, 2005 to September 30, 2006 for their experience transitioning to VA and using VA healthcare and compensation benefits through March 31, 2010." Among the findings were that women were more likely to be recognized as suffering from PTSD by the VA if they had filed paperwork for Military Sexual Trauma and they found that "VBA denied female veterans' disability claims for PTSD more often and denied male veterans' disability claims for other mental health conditions (excluding PTSD) more often." And:

Although female veterans generally were more likely to be diagnosed with mental health conditions after separation from active military duty, they generally were less likely than their male counterparts to be diagnosed with the specific mental condition of PTSD. The proportion of female OEF/OIF veterans who were diagnosed with PTSD (by VA or DoD) was 12 percent for active component and 16 percent for reserve unit, while the proportion for their male counterparts was about 17 percent for both active and reserve unit.

A problem that repeatedly pops up in the study is that women are not aware of the services available. Solutions in the report include postings at the VA listing available services and increasing the online listings of the services. In addition, Women Veterans Coordinators state that they need more training in MST -- the report notes that MST claims processing training currently is under the umbrella of PTSD claims processing, with no individual instruction for MST itself. The training the Womens Veterans Coordinators are asking for includes sensitivity training and that training specifically for claims processors. From the report:

At one regional office, the Women Veterans Coordinator is participating in a state-provided training program for victim advocates because VBA has not provided her with any training. This Women Veterans Coordinator told us that she has experienced difficulty in effectively managing conversations with veterans who were very distressed by their MST experience.

And we'll note this press release from American Women Veterans:

American Women Veterans Founding Member and Advisor, Kristen Rouse and Veterans' Advocate, Victoria Stattel, both very recent veterans of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan, are meeting with Senator Mark Warner this afternoon in Hampton and Richmond, Virginia to discuss the findings of the latest internal study on women veterans requested by Senator Mark Warner of Virginia. The findings show that women veterans were more often diagnosed with depression rather than evaluated for Post Traumatic Stress/Combat Stress, most likely due to the combat exclusion policy and the lack of understanding of servicewomen's increased role in combat.

In a meeting last year, Senator Warner met with women veterans representatives throughout Virginia and with their guidance, it was concluded that an internal review by the Veterans' Administration was the next best course of action. Due to the Senator's diligence, the VA conducted the review. These new findings have highlighted some of the misunderstandings about the nature of servicewomen's involvement early on in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. In the past, in order to be considered for diagnosis under Post Traumatic Stress, a servicemember had to have received a combat badge or Purple Heart. Many in the military understand that despite having served in direct combat, the combat badges/ribbons are not always awarded. Since the change in this policy, many more veterans are receiving the proper diagnosis and treatment however, those that were previously misdiagnosed have not. In an AWV supported letter from Senator Warner to Secretary Shinsecki, the Senator asked on behalf of all women veterans, that the VA reach out to those men and women and ensure that they know they can be re-evaluated.

AWV Founder, Genevieve Chase said, "It's important to have the appropriate diagnosis not only for disability rating purposes but also because combat veterans must receive relevant and timely treatment. The treatment for depression is not the same as treatment for Post Traumatic Stress and the latter, if addressed and treated quickly, will ensure that our veterans are better able to acclimate back into civilian society more quickly. The goal here is to prevent our combat veterans from spiraling downward to more serious issues like substance abuse, homelessness and even suicide."

As noted, Mark Warner is a Democrat. As noted many times before, I'm a Democrat. We avoided spending September and October demagoguing for partisan purposes and, in fact, called out the nonsense aimed at some Republicans -- including John McCain -- that really didn't have anything to do with anything except, "Let's get some blood and score one for the Dems!" The elections are over. In the House, the power switched to the Republicans who, by their own words, were going to be ready to govern from day one. When this month does day one begin?

There is no scheduled hearing for this month for the House Veterans Affairs Committee. This would not have happened -- and did not -- when Democrat Bob Filner was Chair. Republican Jeff Miller is the new Chair. In fairness to him, rarely does someone with his standing become Chair. He was the fifth ranked Republican on the Committee prior to the mid-terms. What happened? Steve Buyer (who was Ranking Member) stepped down and did not seek re-election. Next in line was Cliff Stearns who out ranked him and was re-elected but Miller ended up Chair. Jerry Moran is now US Senator Jerry Moran and Henry Brown did not seek re-election. All were ahead of Jeff Miller.

But the GOP claimed they were ready to lead. So where's the leadership? Forget holding a hearing, they haven't even scheduled any. If you're supposed to be demonstrating to the country how you hit the ground running, you're failing and the House Veterans Affairs Committee is one of the most followed Committees. Ways & Means? The Beltway cares about that and little else. Veterans Affairs is followed around the country by veterans, veterans families, veterans advocates. The only thing the GOP can currently point to with regards to this Committee is that they finally found a woman they could appoint to the Committee. In the 111th Congress, they had eleven Committee members and not one was a woman. In the 112th, they've found US House Rep Ann Marie Buerkle and that is something. The largest growing population in the veterans community is what? As the report we referenced earlier notes, it's the female veterans.

Last January alone, under Bob Filner's leadership, there were four hearings. Currently there are none scheduled for the month. Not one hearing scheduled in a month when the VA Inspector General's office issues a report. Not only is the House Veterans Affairs Committee one of the most followed Committees in the House, the US continues to fight two wars, producing new veterans every day. At a time of war, it really does not look good for the new leadership to be unable to even schedule a hearing. (As disclosed many times before, I know Bob Filner. I think the world of him. That's not what this is about. This is about the GOP making promises in the campaign and yet already veterans get tossed to the curb. Don't like the criticism, get off your butts and schedule a hearing.)

Yesterday Iraq and Kuwait were once again at odds. Caroline Alexander (Bloomberg News) reports that the incidnet involved an Iraqi fishing boat and Kuwait's Coast Guard, that the two exchanged fire and 1 Kuwaiti Coast Guard was killed. BBC News notes that Iraq's government maintains that 3 of their fisherman were injured and four are missing. The Kuwait Times includes that "HH the Amir Sheikh Sabah Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah sent a cable of condolences to the family of [Lance Corporal Abdelrahman] Al-Wadi. The Amir lauded the virtues of the martyr and the great sacrifice he made in defending his country. He also expressed his deepest sympathies to the family of the martyr and prayed to Allah Almighty to bliss the deceased with mercy. HH the Crown Prince Sheikh Nawaf Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah and HH the Prime Minister Sheikh Nasser Al-Mohammad Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah sent similar cables." John Leland and Omar al-Jawoshy (New York Times) observe, "The Iraqi and Kuwaiti authorities offered different accounts of the clash." Arab Times offers this account: "The boat refused to stop when ordered by the guards, leaving no option but the use of force and the Iraqi sailors returned fire. Sources disclosed that after the Iraqis were chased down, a senior officer ordered the martyred officer unto the Iraqi boat to conduct a search of the Iraqis as a precautionary measure. He said the Iraqis who were eight in number got hold of the officer, beat him and injured his head, forcing the senior officer to call for reinforcements from the air and navel forces. The boat was sunk after heavy shooting that ensued." AFP quotes Nouri al-Maliki's spokesperson Ali al-Dabbagh stating the two countries need to work together to provide security and that Iraq is investigating the incident.

RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Ignoring domestic outlets"
"All hail Sanchez -- not so fast"
"NPR doesn't think girls can do science"
"Desperate Housewives (I cry again)"
"Monday"
"it says a great deal"
"The Health Post"
"The Mamas & the Papas and Fleetwood Mac"
"Sexism is a-okay at Corrente! And other crazys"
"The end of V for me"
"March Forward"
"It's off to the big house"
"THIS JUST IN! THE CRAZY NEVER ENDS!"
"The crazy never dies"