BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE
CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O IS BEING PSYCHOLOGICALLY PROFILED AND IT IS NOT PRETTY. THE WORK OF ROBERT J. BURROWS DETAILS A MAN WHO WAS NEVER TAUGHT COMPASSION AND LEARNED VIOLENCE IS ITS OWN REWARD.
REACHED FOR COMMENT, BARRY O TOLD THESE REPORTERS, "IT'S ALL FALSE! ALL OF IT! THIS IS WHY I HATE PEOPLE! I'M GOING TO ORDER ANOTHER DRONE STRIKE, EXCUSE ME."
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
While Ed Snowden was asked of, Iraq was not raised at either the State Dept press briefing or Carney's Air Force One briefing. This despite the fact that US officials say Iraq is now in the midst of a civil war. From Tuesday's Today (NBC):
Richard Engel: Iraq is now back in a civil war, US officials tell NBC News. The hard fought US surge there, the benefits of American war to stop Iraq's civil war, are being wiped out. In car bombs, ambushes and gun fights more than 250 killed in ten days. Abu Ghraib prison notorious for American abuses and humiliations that United States [. . .] remains an open wound. On Sunday, attackers free hundreds some say up to 500 inmates in a jail break include dozens of al Qaeda fighters.
The Sunday prison attacks and breaks only became news outside of Iraq when the number of prisoners who escaped (between 500 and one thousand) was announced on Monday. Yesterday, the Islamic State of Iraq claimed credit for the two prison assaults and breaks. On yesterday's Nightly News with Brian Williams, Richard Engel reported on Iraq.
Richard Engel: Iraq is back in a civil war -- bad for Iraqis. More than 600 killed just this month in bombings and Sunni versus Shi'ite vengeance. And bad for Americans -- after all nearly 4,500 US troops died to bring stability to this strategic, oil rich country A trillion dollars was spent, hundreds of thousands of American troops were deployed and deployed again. But now Iraq is tearing itself apart again. al Qaeda in Iraq won a big victory this weekend, perhaps enough to reconstitute itself. They staged a major prison break, a major assault on Iraq's notorious Abu Ghraib Prison. Hundreds of militants were freed from their cells. Iraqi officials today said at least 250. al Qaeda in Iraq puts the number even higher at 500. Militants stormed the prison, car bombs blasting open the gates, as suicide bombers rushed in and reinforcements fought off guards with mortars and assault rifles. Nothing good seems to come from Abu Ghraib. It was Saddam Hussein's dungeon. After his fall, it held US detainees and became infamous for graphic images of prisoner abuse and humiliation. And now a prison break releasing militants who will likely target the Iraqi government but who also have years of training fighting American troops. Richard Engel, NBC News.
AFP's Mohamad Ali Harissi spoke with The World (PRI) today noting:
Sunday night, just one or two hours before midnight, two prisons -- one in the north and one in the west of Baghdad -- were attacked at the same time and the battle continued until six or seven a.m. the next morning . At least twenty police men and soldiers were killed and at least 26 prisoners died in these battles. But what's more important is that hundreds of prisoners escaped from both prisoners.
The World also featured a conversation with guest host Carol Hills Time's Michael Crowley. Excerpt.
Matthew Crowley: I think the most worrisome aspect of this is the larger context: Sectarian violence in the region if flaring up, to say the least. ... To be honest, I don't know which is worse. In other words, should we be more concerned that al Qaeda in Iraq is strong enough, savy enough emboldened enough that they would stage these attacks? Or is the more concerning part that they have now freed a large number of their hardened brothers in arms who had been taken off the battlefield, so to speak? And incidentally one expert on Iraq to whome I spoke with something called the Institute for the Study of War here in Washington, a former army intelligence officer, said that al Qaeda leaders in these prisons actually become more radicalized when they're in prison. In fact, they may actually have become more dangerous in captivity. [. . .]
Carol Hills: Most US troops pulled out of Iraq more than a year ago and the idea was that Iraq was fairly secure. And so this prison break can't bode well in what area. What does this mean?
Michael Crowley: In the piece I wrote about this for Time.com today, I opened with Barack Obama's presidency has been filled with several surprises in the Middle East but, actually, up until now, Iraq has not been one of them.
How serious has the prison break become? INTERPOL issued the following today:
LYON, France – A regional security alert has been issued by INTERPOL at the request of Iraq following a mass breakout from two Iraqi prisons involving hundreds of dangerous prisoners, many of them members of Al-Qaida.
During the night of 21 July, gunmen attacked the Taji and Abu Ghraib prisons near Baghdad using mortars to gain access and free the prisoners, killing at least 20 members of the Iraqi security forces in the process. INTERPOL said the jailbreaks constituted a major threat to global security.
Many of the escaped prisoners were senior-level Al-Qaida members, some of whom had been sentenced to death.
Following confirmation of the escape from INTERPOL’s National Central Bureau in Baghdad, the Command and Coordination Centre at the General Secretariat headquarters issued the alert to member countries in the region to warn them of the threat posed by the fugitives.
INTERPOL is working closely with NCB Baghdad to collect information on the escaped prisoners, including photographs and fingerprints, with the view to issuing a global Orange Notice, to assist law enforcement officers regionally and worldwide in their search and eventual identification of the fugitives.
An Orange Notice can be issued by INTERPOL’s General Secretariat or an NCB for any act or event that poses a serious and imminent threat to the safety of citizens around the world.
A resolution underlining the need for member countries to alert the General Secretariat to prison escapes of suspected terrorists and other dangerous criminals was adopted at the INTERPOL General Assembly in 2006.
In addition to the INTERPOL notice, others are weighing in on possible meanings. Jabbar Yaseen and Liz Sly (Washington Post) quote the Middle East Forum's Aymenn al-Tamimi stating, "This is a significant milestone in the resurgence of al-Qaeda in Iraq,” he said. “A good deal of the progress achieved from 2006 onwards has essentially been undone now.” David Blair (Telegraph of London) observes, "The mass breakout from two of Iraq’s biggest prisons is yet more evidence of how close the country is to suffering the terrible sectarian bloodshed of 2006-07 once again. [. . .] The increasingly poisonous and sectarian nature of Iraqi politics – with Nouri al-Maliki, the prime minister, purging Sunnis from his government – is leading to greater alienation and violence."
The break outs and the increased violence are also prompting comments from Iraqis. Sunday, Cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr has already decried the 'leadership' that has allowed the problems to emerge and thrive. Today, All Iraq News reports National Dialogue Front MP Haidar al-Mulla is calling for Nouri al-Maliki to be replaced as a result of "his failure in running the security file." Mulla is quoted stating, "All realize well the failur of the CGAF in running the security institution in light of the continuing security breaches over the past eight years especially after Maliki dominated the management of this file without engaging any other side. The one-sided administration of the security file proved failure, so the issue needs changing the CGAF and his strategy and plans." Nouri should be held accountable for the security failures. He is over the security ministries having refused to nominate anyone to head them. Over a year ago, Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) observed, "Shiite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has struggled to forge a lasting power-sharing agreement and has yet to fill key Cabinet positions, including the ministers of defense, interior and national security, while his backers have also shown signs of wobbling support." These positions were supposed to be filled no later than December 2010. They have never been filled. The Constitution requires they be filled for someone to be moved from "prime minister-designate" to "prime minister." But the Iraqi Constitution was circumvented by the US-brokered Erbil Agreement.
The Erbil Agreement was needed because Nouri's State of Law came in second and Barack was adamant that, the will of the Iraqi people be damned, Nouri would have a second term.
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"US officials: 'Iraq is now back in a civil war'"
"Snowden granted temporary asylum"
"The Iraq War"
"The pipsqueak as president"
"The scamming of Detroit"
"the real dianne feinstein, the faux left"
"Michael Dickinson is an ass"
"Jay Z's latest release"
"Susan Celia Greenfield is an idiot"
"Comic books and politics"
"The same speech delivered yet again"
"The IRS scandals"
"No happily ever after"
"THIS JUST IN! THE FAIRY TALE UNRAVLES!"
Thursday, July 25, 2013
Wednesday, July 24, 2013
No happily ever after
BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE
AMERICA'S PRINCESS BARRY O REMAINS UPSET OVER THE BIRTH OF THE ROYAL PRINCE IN ENGLAND.
"HE'S CONVINCED THAT THE BABY HAS CUT INTO HIS OWN POPULARITY," VALERIE JARRETT WHISPERED TO THESE REPORTERS EARLY THIS MORNING AT AN UNDISCLOSED MDONALD'S IN THE CAPITOL WHERE SHE WAS PLIED WITH SAUSAGE MCMUFFINS.
AS SHE DEMANDED CINAMON MELTS, JARRETT INSISTED, "BITCH BE TRIPPING. HE IS SO UNPOPULAR AND SO UNLOVED THAT I TEASE HIM HE'S THE NEW MILLI VANILLI. YOU WATCH MUCH VH-1 BEHIND THE MUSIC?"
A NEW WALL STREET JOURNAL - NBC POLL FINDS 50% OF AMERICANS DISAPPROVE OF BARRY O'S JOB PERFORMANCE WHILE A MCCLATCHY - MARIST POLL FINDS 52% OF AMERICANS DISAPPROVE OF BARRY O'S JOB PERFORMANCE.
BURROWING THROUGH A FRUIT 'N YOGURT PARFAIT, JARRETT INSISTED, "FOOL'S LOST IT. HE'S CONVINCED ALL HE NEEDS TO DO IS TAKE HIS SHIRT OFF DURING NEXT MONTH'S VACATION AND THE PEOPLE WILL LOVE HIM ALL OVER AGAIN. DAMN IT, WHERE'S THE GRANOLA THAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE IN THIS PARFAIT?"
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
Through Monday, Iraq Body Count counts 684 violent deaths in Iraq so far this month. With eights days left in the month, AFP is declaring July to have "the highest monthly figure in a year marked by spiraling violence."
Federal News Radio notes, "Hundreds of convicts, including senior members of al Qaeda, broke out of Iraq's Abu Ghraib jail after comrades launched a military-style assault, authorities said on Monday." The Sunday prison news only became news outside of Iraq when the number of prisoners who escaped were announced on Monday. Dan Murphy (Christian Science Monitor) concludes:
These weren't attacks on mosques or markets, designed to spread terror by killing unprepared civilians in public spaces. These were attacks on the militarized prisons of Abu Ghraib and Taji, both of which have large contingents of insurgents among their inmates and have long been targets for Iraq's jihadis. Yet the government of Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was forced to scramble attack helicopters and rush troops to join pitched battles. Even so, they may not have staved off a stunning symbolic defeat.
Alsumaria reports today that al Qaeada in Iraq has issued a statement claiming responsibility for 'invading' the prisons in Abu Ghraib and Taji and breaking down the walls to allow for the release of the prisoners. BBC News adds, "In an online statement, al-Qaeda said Sunday's attack was the final one in a campaign aimed at freeing inmates and targeting justice system officials." Salam Faraj and Mohamad Ali Harissi (AAP) point out the note proclaims "dark days ahead."
Ari Soffer (Israel National News) explains, " Iraqi officials had initially denied that any prisoners had escaped, but were forced to backtrack as the sheer scale of the jailbreak became clear." Mohammed Tawfeeq and Joe Sterling (CNN) note, "At least 21 inmates and at least eight prison guards were killed, the Iraqi Justice Ministry said, while 25 inmates and 14 guards were wounded." Mona Mahmood and Peter Beaumont (Guardian) report:
Yousef Ali had just sat down at his home near Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison at shortly after 9pm on Sunday evening to break his Ramadan fast when he was startled by the sound of explosions from the direction of the prison. "We began to hear mortars and gunfire, followed by two car bombs," he said. "We could tell there was a big fight inside the prison. We could see aircraft hovering above the prison and nearby areas."
The scope and magnitude of the attacks drawfed earlier attempts at breaking out which is another reason that the prison attacks and break outs are news. Also making the events news? The issue of how and the issue of what it says about the state of Iraq today as well as the issue of the attempt to locate the escapees. On the last one, Carol J. Williams (Los Angeles Times) reports, "Iraqi security forces on Tuesday set up dragnets at airports and along highways leading out of the country in a hunt for hundreds of Al Qaeda-allied militants broken out of jail by a massive, coordinated assault on two prisons near Baghdad, Arab media reported." NBC News' Richard Engel reported (video and text) on the prison break this morning for NBC's Today:
Checkpoints were set up Tuesday as the search continued for up to 500 militants freed by the attack, which followed the deaths of 250 Iraqis in 10 days of violence.
[. . .]
They added that checkpoints had been set up around Abu Ghraib, as the search for the escapees continued.
Both attacks took place exactly a year after The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant's most senior leader, Sheikh Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, launched a campaign dubbed "Breaking the Walls" to make freeing imprisoned members a top priority.
“The mujahideen brigades set off after months of preparation and planning to target two of the biggest prisons of the Safavid government," the group said in the statement, Tuesday.
Suada al-Salhy (Reuters) also quotes that section of the statement from the Islamic State of Iraq, "In response to the call of the mujahid (holy warrior) Sheikh Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to seal the blessed plan of 'Breaking the Walls'... the mujahideen brigades set off after months of preparation and planning to target two of the biggest prisons of the Safavid government." David Blair (Telegraph of London) offers this on the statement and its meaning:
Let's move on to the questions of how the two attacks were carried out. Colin Freeman (Telegraph of London) notes that questions are being asked about the hows of the attack and break out:
Questions were also asked as to why it took the Iraqi government 10 hours to send in helicopter gunships to quell the fighting at Abu Ghraib, a delay that some said suggested poor command and control within the security establishment.
One Iraqi politician, who asked not to be named, claimed that the assault on the prison at Taji was planned simply to divert security forces from what was to be the main strike at Abu Ghraib, where an estimated 15,000 inmates are held.
He added that a number of senior Sunni guards at Abu Ghraib had gone missing since, and that it was possible that they had been acting as "inside men". Other reports claimed that inmates had started riots just prior to the attacks to distract the guards, and had been armed with weapons.
Adam Schreck (AP) observes, "The attacks, among the most stunning in Iraq since a surge in violence began in April, have provoked sharp criticism from opposition lawmakers of the government's efforts to keep the country's safe." All Iraq News notes that cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr has declared the prison attacks are the "beginning of the terrorist attacks and the biggest security breach in Iraq." He is calling for Nouri and others to appear before the Parliament for questioning. Ibrahim al-Jaafari is the head of the Iraqi National Alliance. He is also a former prime minister of Iraq and, had the White House not stepped in, but would have been renamed prime minister for a second term. (Instead, in 2006, the Bush White House insisted Nouri be named prime minister; just as, in 2010, the Barack White House insisted Nouri get a second term despite the will of the voters.) All Iraq News reports that al-Jaafari is calling for an investigation into the prison attacks and escape. Comments are also coming in from US observers. RT offers:
However, despite widespread claims that the escapees are largely affiliated with Al-Qaeda, there is no way of knowing, says Sara Flounders, head of the International Action Center. She also told RT that not much is known about Abu Ghraib itself after the US handed over control to the Iraqi government, following its withdrawal from the country.
“The state of security hasn’t substantially improved since. We know also there are many operatives left in Iraq that continue US policy aims. There’s a lot that’s uncertain and unknown today in Iraq. We do know there was a prison break. But before we rush to label everyone Al-Qaeda, let’s be aware that Abu Ghraib itself as a prison was notorious for US torture techniques… it was turned back over to the Iraqi government and we have no idea if any conditions improved.”
But ultimately, Flounders concludes that the international audience shouldn’t be surprised at the news, because Western efforts in Iraq have not shown any signs of addressing the actual spread of sectarian violence after the toppling of Saddam Hussein, while billions of dollars were misspent – an opinion shared by defense consultant Moeen Raoof.
“The Iraqi government isn’t controlling anything… [It] hasn’t been spending its oil funds on security… the toppling of Saddam Hussein was a fatal, fatal mistake,” one that will be repeated in Afghanistan, after complete US withdrawal, he believes.
And there's is criticism from a US Senator. Lauren Fox (US News and World Reports) notes:
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., blamed the Obama Administration Tuesday for the massive prison break in Abu Ghraib outside of Baghdad.
"It's the result of our failure to leave a residual force behind. The whole place is unraveling," McCain says. "We won the peace and lost the war. It is really tragic. And those people who are out of Abu Ghraib now, they are heading right to Syria."
Press TV finds someone who also feels the US government is to blame -- along with the British government:
“This is a legacy of the occupation of Iraq by the United States and the British for the past ten years or so,” said Sabah Jawad in a Tuesday interview.
“They recruited a lot of pro-Ba’athists within the security system. There [are] a lot of people in the security system who do not feel allegiance to Iraq as such,” he added.
The analyst highlighted links between the terrorists in Iraq and other parts of the Middle East, including in Syria, and said, “They (terrorists) have links with the regional powers. They are part and parcel of the whole plan to destabilize and divide the Middle East on sectarian lines as well.”
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Iraq continues to unravel"
"The Drone War"
"How we have destroyed Iraq"
"A lot of courage"
"Detroit"
"the revisionary 'love' for helen thomas"
"Mistresses"
"The Drone War"
"Barack's Drone War"
"Mistresses"
"Why Helen Thomas' peers killed her in 2010"
"Congress wants to give more money to warfare"
"Once upon a time . . ."
"THIS JUST IN! ANGST!"
AMERICA'S PRINCESS BARRY O REMAINS UPSET OVER THE BIRTH OF THE ROYAL PRINCE IN ENGLAND.
"HE'S CONVINCED THAT THE BABY HAS CUT INTO HIS OWN POPULARITY," VALERIE JARRETT WHISPERED TO THESE REPORTERS EARLY THIS MORNING AT AN UNDISCLOSED MDONALD'S IN THE CAPITOL WHERE SHE WAS PLIED WITH SAUSAGE MCMUFFINS.
AS SHE DEMANDED CINAMON MELTS, JARRETT INSISTED, "BITCH BE TRIPPING. HE IS SO UNPOPULAR AND SO UNLOVED THAT I TEASE HIM HE'S THE NEW MILLI VANILLI. YOU WATCH MUCH VH-1 BEHIND THE MUSIC?"
A NEW WALL STREET JOURNAL - NBC POLL FINDS 50% OF AMERICANS DISAPPROVE OF BARRY O'S JOB PERFORMANCE WHILE A MCCLATCHY - MARIST POLL FINDS 52% OF AMERICANS DISAPPROVE OF BARRY O'S JOB PERFORMANCE.
BURROWING THROUGH A FRUIT 'N YOGURT PARFAIT, JARRETT INSISTED, "FOOL'S LOST IT. HE'S CONVINCED ALL HE NEEDS TO DO IS TAKE HIS SHIRT OFF DURING NEXT MONTH'S VACATION AND THE PEOPLE WILL LOVE HIM ALL OVER AGAIN. DAMN IT, WHERE'S THE GRANOLA THAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE IN THIS PARFAIT?"
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
Through Monday, Iraq Body Count counts 684 violent deaths in Iraq so far this month. With eights days left in the month, AFP is declaring July to have "the highest monthly figure in a year marked by spiraling violence."
Federal News Radio notes, "Hundreds of convicts, including senior members of al Qaeda, broke out of Iraq's Abu Ghraib jail after comrades launched a military-style assault, authorities said on Monday." The Sunday prison news only became news outside of Iraq when the number of prisoners who escaped were announced on Monday. Dan Murphy (Christian Science Monitor) concludes:
These weren't attacks on mosques or markets, designed to spread terror by killing unprepared civilians in public spaces. These were attacks on the militarized prisons of Abu Ghraib and Taji, both of which have large contingents of insurgents among their inmates and have long been targets for Iraq's jihadis. Yet the government of Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was forced to scramble attack helicopters and rush troops to join pitched battles. Even so, they may not have staved off a stunning symbolic defeat.
Alsumaria reports today that al Qaeada in Iraq has issued a statement claiming responsibility for 'invading' the prisons in Abu Ghraib and Taji and breaking down the walls to allow for the release of the prisoners. BBC News adds, "In an online statement, al-Qaeda said Sunday's attack was the final one in a campaign aimed at freeing inmates and targeting justice system officials." Salam Faraj and Mohamad Ali Harissi (AAP) point out the note proclaims "dark days ahead."
Ari Soffer (Israel National News) explains, " Iraqi officials had initially denied that any prisoners had escaped, but were forced to backtrack as the sheer scale of the jailbreak became clear." Mohammed Tawfeeq and Joe Sterling (CNN) note, "At least 21 inmates and at least eight prison guards were killed, the Iraqi Justice Ministry said, while 25 inmates and 14 guards were wounded." Mona Mahmood and Peter Beaumont (Guardian) report:
Yousef Ali had just sat down at his home near Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison at shortly after 9pm on Sunday evening to break his Ramadan fast when he was startled by the sound of explosions from the direction of the prison. "We began to hear mortars and gunfire, followed by two car bombs," he said. "We could tell there was a big fight inside the prison. We could see aircraft hovering above the prison and nearby areas."
The scope and magnitude of the attacks drawfed earlier attempts at breaking out which is another reason that the prison attacks and break outs are news. Also making the events news? The issue of how and the issue of what it says about the state of Iraq today as well as the issue of the attempt to locate the escapees. On the last one, Carol J. Williams (Los Angeles Times) reports, "Iraqi security forces on Tuesday set up dragnets at airports and along highways leading out of the country in a hunt for hundreds of Al Qaeda-allied militants broken out of jail by a massive, coordinated assault on two prisons near Baghdad, Arab media reported." NBC News' Richard Engel reported (video and text) on the prison break this morning for NBC's Today:
Checkpoints were set up Tuesday as the search continued for up to 500 militants freed by the attack, which followed the deaths of 250 Iraqis in 10 days of violence.
[. . .]
They added that checkpoints had been set up around Abu Ghraib, as the search for the escapees continued.
Both attacks took place exactly a year after The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant's most senior leader, Sheikh Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, launched a campaign dubbed "Breaking the Walls" to make freeing imprisoned members a top priority.
“The mujahideen brigades set off after months of preparation and planning to target two of the biggest prisons of the Safavid government," the group said in the statement, Tuesday.
Suada al-Salhy (Reuters) also quotes that section of the statement from the Islamic State of Iraq, "In response to the call of the mujahid (holy warrior) Sheikh Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to seal the blessed plan of 'Breaking the Walls'... the mujahideen brigades set off after months of preparation and planning to target two of the biggest prisons of the Safavid government." David Blair (Telegraph of London) offers this on the statement and its meaning:
No Iraqi would have missed the subliminal message of al-Qaeda’s triumphant announcement yesterday. When the movement’s leaders claimed credit for two audacious prison breaks outside Baghdad, they declared how “months of preparation and planning” had culminated in these blows against a “Safavid government”.
The Safavids have not actually been in government for a while – for a good 300 years, in fact. They were a Persian dynasty that dominated Iran and its empire, including a big slice of present-day Iraq, in the 16th and 17th centuries. Under their founder, Shah Ismail I, the Safavids managed the extraordinary feat of making Shia Islam the state religion in Iran, while imposing their faith on conquered peoples living between the Tigris and Euphrates.
Iraqis will grasp the analogy: al-Qaeda’s Sunni zealots believe that the Shia politicians who dominate Baghdad today are heirs to foreign invaders. Once, the violence in Iraq was directed towards the Anglo-American occupiers; today, the killing has become a sectarian struggle between a Shia majority that holds the reins of power and a beleaguered Sunni minority.
Let's move on to the questions of how the two attacks were carried out. Colin Freeman (Telegraph of London) notes that questions are being asked about the hows of the attack and break out:
Questions were also asked as to why it took the Iraqi government 10 hours to send in helicopter gunships to quell the fighting at Abu Ghraib, a delay that some said suggested poor command and control within the security establishment.
One Iraqi politician, who asked not to be named, claimed that the assault on the prison at Taji was planned simply to divert security forces from what was to be the main strike at Abu Ghraib, where an estimated 15,000 inmates are held.
He added that a number of senior Sunni guards at Abu Ghraib had gone missing since, and that it was possible that they had been acting as "inside men". Other reports claimed that inmates had started riots just prior to the attacks to distract the guards, and had been armed with weapons.
Adam Schreck (AP) observes, "The attacks, among the most stunning in Iraq since a surge in violence began in April, have provoked sharp criticism from opposition lawmakers of the government's efforts to keep the country's safe." All Iraq News notes that cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr has declared the prison attacks are the "beginning of the terrorist attacks and the biggest security breach in Iraq." He is calling for Nouri and others to appear before the Parliament for questioning. Ibrahim al-Jaafari is the head of the Iraqi National Alliance. He is also a former prime minister of Iraq and, had the White House not stepped in, but would have been renamed prime minister for a second term. (Instead, in 2006, the Bush White House insisted Nouri be named prime minister; just as, in 2010, the Barack White House insisted Nouri get a second term despite the will of the voters.) All Iraq News reports that al-Jaafari is calling for an investigation into the prison attacks and escape. Comments are also coming in from US observers. RT offers:
However, despite widespread claims that the escapees are largely affiliated with Al-Qaeda, there is no way of knowing, says Sara Flounders, head of the International Action Center. She also told RT that not much is known about Abu Ghraib itself after the US handed over control to the Iraqi government, following its withdrawal from the country.
“The state of security hasn’t substantially improved since. We know also there are many operatives left in Iraq that continue US policy aims. There’s a lot that’s uncertain and unknown today in Iraq. We do know there was a prison break. But before we rush to label everyone Al-Qaeda, let’s be aware that Abu Ghraib itself as a prison was notorious for US torture techniques… it was turned back over to the Iraqi government and we have no idea if any conditions improved.”
But ultimately, Flounders concludes that the international audience shouldn’t be surprised at the news, because Western efforts in Iraq have not shown any signs of addressing the actual spread of sectarian violence after the toppling of Saddam Hussein, while billions of dollars were misspent – an opinion shared by defense consultant Moeen Raoof.
“The Iraqi government isn’t controlling anything… [It] hasn’t been spending its oil funds on security… the toppling of Saddam Hussein was a fatal, fatal mistake,” one that will be repeated in Afghanistan, after complete US withdrawal, he believes.
And there's is criticism from a US Senator. Lauren Fox (US News and World Reports) notes:
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., blamed the Obama Administration Tuesday for the massive prison break in Abu Ghraib outside of Baghdad.
"It's the result of our failure to leave a residual force behind. The whole place is unraveling," McCain says. "We won the peace and lost the war. It is really tragic. And those people who are out of Abu Ghraib now, they are heading right to Syria."
Press TV finds someone who also feels the US government is to blame -- along with the British government:
“This is a legacy of the occupation of Iraq by the United States and the British for the past ten years or so,” said Sabah Jawad in a Tuesday interview.
“They recruited a lot of pro-Ba’athists within the security system. There [are] a lot of people in the security system who do not feel allegiance to Iraq as such,” he added.
The analyst highlighted links between the terrorists in Iraq and other parts of the Middle East, including in Syria, and said, “They (terrorists) have links with the regional powers. They are part and parcel of the whole plan to destabilize and divide the Middle East on sectarian lines as well.”
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Iraq continues to unravel"
"The Drone War"
"How we have destroyed Iraq"
"A lot of courage"
"Detroit"
"the revisionary 'love' for helen thomas"
"Mistresses"
"The Drone War"
"Barack's Drone War"
"Mistresses"
"Why Helen Thomas' peers killed her in 2010"
"Congress wants to give more money to warfare"
"Once upon a time . . ."
"THIS JUST IN! ANGST!"
Tuesday, July 23, 2013
Once upon a time . . .
BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE
CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O CONGRATULATED KATE MIDDLETON AND PRINCE WILLIAM ON THE BIRTH OF THEIR BABY PRINCE.
HE THEN BROKE DOWN SOBBING WONDERING, "IF I'M NOT THE YOUNG PRINCE ANYMORE WHAT AM I?"
WHITE HOUSE PLUS SPOKESMODEL JAY CARNEY AND TOKEN LITTLE PERSON VALERIE JARRETT RUSHED TO ASSURE HIM HE WAS STILL CELEBRITY IN CHIEF AND BELOVED BY ALL IN THE VILLAGE BUT BARRY O WAS HAVING NONE OF IT.
"IF I'M NOT THE FAIREST OF THEM ALL, I'M NOTHING!" BARRY O WAILED.
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
How bad are things in Iraq today? So bad that the issue was actually raised to State Dept press spokesperson Jen Psaki in today's briefing:
QUESTION: Iraq?
QUESTION: You don’t think that you’re trying to avoid anything here?
MS. PSAKI: I think this has become a game, so I’m moving on to the next question.
QUESTION: Yeah. Insurgents in Iraq attacked two prisons during the weekend and freed more than 1,000 prisoners, most of them from al-Qaida. Are you aware of that? And to what extent you are concerned?
MS. PSAKI: I’m not – I haven’t seen this report that you’re referring to, but I’m happy to look into it.
QUESTION: Well, still on Iraq.
QUESTION: Jen --
MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
QUESTION: On Iraq?
MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
QUESTION: Yeah. Okay. This morning, I saw Mr. Martin Kobler, the Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary General in Iraq. It’s his last day. He paints a very bad picture of what’s going on in Iraq. And the feeling – not from him, but from others – I’m getting that the United States actually is not involved. It’s looking sort of neutrally at all this violence that’s going on.
MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm. Well, I would refute that, Said. We are deeply concerned by the levels of violence. We’re encouraged that many political and religious leaders have taken a strong stance against this violence, which is very important, and that they’ve continued to explore ways to address ongoing political and security issues. We welcome recent political developments, including the reciprocal visits in Erbil and Baghdad between Prime Minister Maliki and Iraqi Kurdistan Region President Barzani, discussions by Iraqi leaders to address issues arising from recent protests in western Iraq, and legislative initiatives in the Iraqi parliament.
In terms of our involvement, U.S. officials in Baghdad and Washington remain intensely engaged with senior Iraqi leaders to support their efforts to resolve differences through direct dialogue and the political process. The level of our engagement is reflected even recently by calls placed last week by Vice President Biden to Iraqi leaders, and we’ll continue to work with leaders to overcome the threat of terrorism and their efforts to bring justice to those who continue to perpetrate* such despicable crimes.
We should all be very disturbed that the State Dept spokesperson had no idea on Monday afternoon about the prison attacks Sunday evening. Iraq has seen many prison breaks in the last year. But yesterday saw two attacks which were rather spectacular:
Meanwhile in Iraq, NINA notes that unidentified gunmen began "simultaneously attacking the Taji and Abu Ghraib prisons" with gun fire, "improvised explosive devices and RPG launchers." They also report that the military and the police ("supported with helicopters") were surrounding the prisons. Jack Phillips (Epoch Times) adds:
Al Jazeera reported on its front page that the attack was taking place on Sunday night, and involved assailants with rocket-propelled grenades, but it did not offer more details.
The Associated Press also confirmed there were clashes at the prison on Sunday.
Charles Lister, with IHS Jane’s Terrorism & Insurgency Centre–an intelligence organization, wrote that a “senior ISIS commander claims Abu Ghraib & Taji prison attacks have been a success. Convoys of escaped prisoners now en route to ‘safety.’” At around 6 p.m., Lister added that “several jihadi sources claim fighting is over at Abu Ghraib.”
Jane Arraf (Al Jazeera -- report is text and video) notes of the attacks, "[Abu Ghraib prison] is now home to several high-ranking al-Qaeda prisoners, as is the prison in Taji. It appears to be an attempt to free those prisoners." All Iraq News reports that the prison attacks have been stopped. Alsumaria adds that, during the attack, prisoners in Abu Ghraib rioted and burned portions of the prison.
Again, how does the US State Dept, spending billions in Iraq, not know of the events from Sunday. Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) observes, "Security forces battled militants outside two major penitentiaries near the Iraqi capital of Baghdad and thwarted prison breaks, the Justice Ministry said Monday." Press TV notes, "Initial reports said the attacks on prisons had been foiled, and no casualties had been reported." But today, AFP reports, "Militants attacked two Iraqi prisons including the notorious Abu Ghraib in a bid to free inmates, sparking all-night clashes in which at least 41 people, officials said on Monday." France 24 adds, "Commentors on micro-blogging website Twitter, including some accounts apparently operated by jihadists, claimed thousands of prisoners had escaped." National Iraqi News Agency reports on a press conference in Baghdad today in which MP Hakim al-Zamili declaring "that between 500 to one thousand prisoners escaped from Abu Ghraib prison."
What prompted the attacks? No one knows at this point. But Saturday, as NINA reported, Nouri had the army raid Badush Prison at dawn in Nineveh Province and that a prison source "explained that the inspections included all sections including the women's and events' prison, noting that those forces warned prisoners from the use of any of these arms and machines and mobile devices inside the compound. The source did not mention if these things had been confiscated or not." It is possible that the raid on Badush Prison prompted the raids (out of concern for those in the two prisons -- out of concern that future plans would be foiled, whatever).
The Press Trust of India notes, "Iraq is witnessing its worst eruption of violence in five years." BBC News observes, "United Nations figures released earlier in July showed that more than 2,500 Iraqis were killed in violent attacks in the three months from April to June." Through Saturday, Iraq Body Count counts 584 violent deaths for the month of July thus far. Sunday on Al Jazeera, Jane Arraf offers observations on the violence.
Jane Arraf: And really, it's the scope of the targets, the widening of the targets, and the coordinated nature of the attacks such as the eleven car bombs that hit the capital last night that really have people worried. When you think of the amount of coordination that would have to go into that, these security checks they bypassed, the sheer amount of money and then the suicide bombers who have been blowing themselves up lately, it all really points, according to most Iraqis, to an alarming rise in violence here that security forces can't handle.
Ahlul Bayt News Agency reports, "The main causes of terrorism in Iraq and other regional nations are not ignorant or jobless people, but the Global Arrogance, headed by the US and Israeli regime that have extremism under their control and use it in their own favors, Sheikh Khalid al-Mala told al-Alam on Monday."
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Violence slams Iraq"
"The desperation in the continued persecution of Br..."
"Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "The Birthday R..."
"Hejira"
"Iraq slammed by violence"
"I Hate The War"
"Cynthia McKinney"
"Jobs?"
"Filner"
"spying and the state dept gets ready to screw over the palestinians"
"General Carter Ham and Benghazi"
"Most members of Congress knew"
"Under The Dome (CBS fails again)"
"Snowden"
"Helen Thomas"
"Isaiah, Norman Pollack, Third"
"35 years is the key phrase"
"THIS JUST IN! HE NEEDS A REST!"
CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O CONGRATULATED KATE MIDDLETON AND PRINCE WILLIAM ON THE BIRTH OF THEIR BABY PRINCE.
HE THEN BROKE DOWN SOBBING WONDERING, "IF I'M NOT THE YOUNG PRINCE ANYMORE WHAT AM I?"
WHITE HOUSE PLUS SPOKESMODEL JAY CARNEY AND TOKEN LITTLE PERSON VALERIE JARRETT RUSHED TO ASSURE HIM HE WAS STILL CELEBRITY IN CHIEF AND BELOVED BY ALL IN THE VILLAGE BUT BARRY O WAS HAVING NONE OF IT.
"IF I'M NOT THE FAIREST OF THEM ALL, I'M NOTHING!" BARRY O WAILED.
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
How bad are things in Iraq today? So bad that the issue was actually raised to State Dept press spokesperson Jen Psaki in today's briefing:
QUESTION: Iraq?
QUESTION: You don’t think that you’re trying to avoid anything here?
MS. PSAKI: I think this has become a game, so I’m moving on to the next question.
QUESTION: Yeah. Insurgents in Iraq attacked two prisons during the weekend and freed more than 1,000 prisoners, most of them from al-Qaida. Are you aware of that? And to what extent you are concerned?
MS. PSAKI: I’m not – I haven’t seen this report that you’re referring to, but I’m happy to look into it.
QUESTION: Well, still on Iraq.
QUESTION: Jen --
MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
QUESTION: On Iraq?
MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.
QUESTION: Yeah. Okay. This morning, I saw Mr. Martin Kobler, the Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary General in Iraq. It’s his last day. He paints a very bad picture of what’s going on in Iraq. And the feeling – not from him, but from others – I’m getting that the United States actually is not involved. It’s looking sort of neutrally at all this violence that’s going on.
MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm. Well, I would refute that, Said. We are deeply concerned by the levels of violence. We’re encouraged that many political and religious leaders have taken a strong stance against this violence, which is very important, and that they’ve continued to explore ways to address ongoing political and security issues. We welcome recent political developments, including the reciprocal visits in Erbil and Baghdad between Prime Minister Maliki and Iraqi Kurdistan Region President Barzani, discussions by Iraqi leaders to address issues arising from recent protests in western Iraq, and legislative initiatives in the Iraqi parliament.
In terms of our involvement, U.S. officials in Baghdad and Washington remain intensely engaged with senior Iraqi leaders to support their efforts to resolve differences through direct dialogue and the political process. The level of our engagement is reflected even recently by calls placed last week by Vice President Biden to Iraqi leaders, and we’ll continue to work with leaders to overcome the threat of terrorism and their efforts to bring justice to those who continue to perpetrate* such despicable crimes.
We should all be very disturbed that the State Dept spokesperson had no idea on Monday afternoon about the prison attacks Sunday evening. Iraq has seen many prison breaks in the last year. But yesterday saw two attacks which were rather spectacular:
Meanwhile in Iraq, NINA notes that unidentified gunmen began "simultaneously attacking the Taji and Abu Ghraib prisons" with gun fire, "improvised explosive devices and RPG launchers." They also report that the military and the police ("supported with helicopters") were surrounding the prisons. Jack Phillips (Epoch Times) adds:
Al Jazeera reported on its front page that the attack was taking place on Sunday night, and involved assailants with rocket-propelled grenades, but it did not offer more details.
The Associated Press also confirmed there were clashes at the prison on Sunday.
Charles Lister, with IHS Jane’s Terrorism & Insurgency Centre–an intelligence organization, wrote that a “senior ISIS commander claims Abu Ghraib & Taji prison attacks have been a success. Convoys of escaped prisoners now en route to ‘safety.’” At around 6 p.m., Lister added that “several jihadi sources claim fighting is over at Abu Ghraib.”
Jane Arraf (Al Jazeera -- report is text and video) notes of the attacks, "[Abu Ghraib prison] is now home to several high-ranking al-Qaeda prisoners, as is the prison in Taji. It appears to be an attempt to free those prisoners." All Iraq News reports that the prison attacks have been stopped. Alsumaria adds that, during the attack, prisoners in Abu Ghraib rioted and burned portions of the prison.
Again, how does the US State Dept, spending billions in Iraq, not know of the events from Sunday. Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) observes, "Security forces battled militants outside two major penitentiaries near the Iraqi capital of Baghdad and thwarted prison breaks, the Justice Ministry said Monday." Press TV notes, "Initial reports said the attacks on prisons had been foiled, and no casualties had been reported." But today, AFP reports, "Militants attacked two Iraqi prisons including the notorious Abu Ghraib in a bid to free inmates, sparking all-night clashes in which at least 41 people, officials said on Monday." France 24 adds, "Commentors on micro-blogging website Twitter, including some accounts apparently operated by jihadists, claimed thousands of prisoners had escaped." National Iraqi News Agency reports on a press conference in Baghdad today in which MP Hakim al-Zamili declaring "that between 500 to one thousand prisoners escaped from Abu Ghraib prison."
What prompted the attacks? No one knows at this point. But Saturday, as NINA reported, Nouri had the army raid Badush Prison at dawn in Nineveh Province and that a prison source "explained that the inspections included all sections including the women's and events' prison, noting that those forces warned prisoners from the use of any of these arms and machines and mobile devices inside the compound. The source did not mention if these things had been confiscated or not." It is possible that the raid on Badush Prison prompted the raids (out of concern for those in the two prisons -- out of concern that future plans would be foiled, whatever).
The Press Trust of India notes, "Iraq is witnessing its worst eruption of violence in five years." BBC News observes, "United Nations figures released earlier in July showed that more than 2,500 Iraqis were killed in violent attacks in the three months from April to June." Through Saturday, Iraq Body Count counts 584 violent deaths for the month of July thus far. Sunday on Al Jazeera, Jane Arraf offers observations on the violence.
Jane Arraf: And really, it's the scope of the targets, the widening of the targets, and the coordinated nature of the attacks such as the eleven car bombs that hit the capital last night that really have people worried. When you think of the amount of coordination that would have to go into that, these security checks they bypassed, the sheer amount of money and then the suicide bombers who have been blowing themselves up lately, it all really points, according to most Iraqis, to an alarming rise in violence here that security forces can't handle.
Ahlul Bayt News Agency reports, "The main causes of terrorism in Iraq and other regional nations are not ignorant or jobless people, but the Global Arrogance, headed by the US and Israeli regime that have extremism under their control and use it in their own favors, Sheikh Khalid al-Mala told al-Alam on Monday."
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Violence slams Iraq"
"The desperation in the continued persecution of Br..."
"Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "The Birthday R..."
"Hejira"
"Iraq slammed by violence"
"I Hate The War"
"Cynthia McKinney"
"Jobs?"
"Filner"
"spying and the state dept gets ready to screw over the palestinians"
"General Carter Ham and Benghazi"
"Most members of Congress knew"
"Under The Dome (CBS fails again)"
"Snowden"
"Helen Thomas"
"Isaiah, Norman Pollack, Third"
- Truest statement of the week
- Truest statement of the week II
- A note to our readers
- Editorial: Helen Thomas and the importance of Iraq...
- Media: The wall-to-wall so-called 'discussion'
- Roundtable
- News you might have missed
- There Is No Black Leadership
- News you might have missed
- Saving which children?
- Jim's World
- Summer TV worth watching
- That's the way the faux opposition crumbles (David...
- Are there non-disclosure agreements on Benghazi?
- Highlights
"35 years is the key phrase"
"THIS JUST IN! HE NEEDS A REST!"
Saturday, July 20, 2013
35 years is the key phrase
BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE
CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O HAS FOUND A CLIMATE MATE: CHINA.
REACHED FOR COMMENT BY THESE REPORTERS, BARRY O TOLD THESE REPORTERS, "NO ONE SHOULD BE SURPRISED BY THIS. CHINA IS ME, 35 YEARS AGO. CHINA COULD HAVE BEEN MY BROTHER."
AT THIS MOMENT, WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMODEL JAY CARNEY RUSHED INTO THE ROOM, MUMBLED SOMETHING ABOUT BARRY O BEING "VERY TIRED" ANDHUSTLED HIM OUT OF THE ROOM.
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
Good for US State Dept spokesperson Marie Harf who did something unheard of today.
Happy Friday. Welcome to the daily briefing. I have something to read at the top, and then happy to open it up to your questions. The United States condemns in the strongest terms the terrorist bombing inside a mosque today in Diyala province in Iraq. Attacks against innocent people are reprehensible. That this attack occurred in a place of worship and during the Holy Month of Ramadan is especially despicable and cowardly and exposes the nature of those perpetrating these attacks. Our condolences go out to the victims of these attacks and their families.
That is how she opened today's press briefing. This was not in response to a question, that is how she opened. Good for Harf, good for the US State Dept. The Congress is giving them billions for Iraq, they need to be noting the country in some manner regularly.
While the State Dept was front and center on the bombing, Nouri's forces were otherwise occupied.
Iraqi Spring MC reports that Nouri's SWAT forces spent the morning forcing Baquba stores to close. Maybe if they had been focused on doing actual work and not terrorizing shop owners, Iraqi Spring MC wouldn't have been reporting the Abu Bakr Mosque in Diyala's Wajihiya district was bombed? This morning, Reuters counted 20 dead and NINA counted at least 60 injured. It's not as though Nouri's SWAT forces contributed nothing however, Iraqi Spring MC notes that they are preventing concerned Iraqis from making blood donations to help the victims of the bombing.
Yang Lina (Xinhua) reports, "The attack occurred around midday when dozens of worshippers were observing the Friday weekly Muslim prayer at the mosque of Abu Bakr al-Sideeq, in the town of Wajihiyah, northeast of the provincial capital city of Baquba, some 65 km northeast of the Iraqi capital of Baghdad, a provincial police source told Xinhua on condition of anonymity." Steve Nolan (Daily Mail) adds, "The blast went off on the left side of the mosque, which was filled with men and children, as worshippers were kneeling during prayers, said 30-year-old Mohammed Faleh, who was praying inside." Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) notes, "The bomb had been hidden under a podium from which an imam was speaking in the mosque, located in al-Wajihiya in the largely Sunni province of Diyala, said police officials in the nearby provincial capital of Baquba." KUNA reports there were two bombings -- the one Tawfeeq has noted and a suicide bomber who detonated outside as people were rushing out. BBC News notes a suicide bomber as well as does All Iraq News. So does Mustafa al-Tuwaijri (AFP) who quotes Omar Mundhir (whose leg was injured in the attack) stating, "I was sitting near the main entrance of the mosque when a huge explosion happened. I was sitting near the imam and the mosque was full of dozens of people when a big explosion happened, and the place went completely dark."
Prensa Latina observes, "The explosion took place in Wajihiya city, Diyala province, with a population of Sunni majority, and came after a series of attacks which have taken the lives of 460 people so far this month, according to official figures." Qassim Abdul-Zahra (AP) adds, "AP television footage of the aftermath showed the interior of the mosque near the bomb site charred black and shrapnel damage peppering the walls." AP counts 27 dead. EFE notes that, among the many wounded, "27 are in grave condition."
If only someone had seen Diyala as a hotbed, maybe Nouri's forces could have done an actual job. But alas, no one saw a problem in Diyala . . . Oh, wait. From Wednesday's snapshot:
NINA reports, "Speaker Osama Najafi called for holding a public hearing on Thursday in parliament in order to deter violators and terrorists in Diyala province and easing tensions to overcome the crisis and stop the forced displacement of citizens in a number of areas of the province." Alsumaria adds that the Free Patriotic Movement is joining the call as explained by their leader Massoud Zangana who states that the citizens of Diyala are in need of help.
The hearing was held. At the Parliament's website, they note 236 MPs attended, a number of issues were addressed and, with regards to Diyala Province, they commissioned a group to work on the issue with Nouri's office overseeing the security forces in Diyala Province. That didn't work out well for anyone today.
The US Embassy in Baghdad issued the following:
The mosque bombing wasn't Iraq's only violence today. NINA reports a Tikrit bombing left 2 soldiers dead and another injured, a western Baghdad bombing claimed 1 life and left another person injured, a Falluja home invasion left a woman and her two daughters injured, a Falluja motorcycle drive-by left one police officer and one Iraqi citizen injured, a suicide bomber to the south of Mosul blew himself up and left one police officer injured, and a Hilla suicide bomber claimed the life of 1 police officer and left five worshipers en route to the Al Mustafa shrine injured. Alsumaria adds 1 corpse was discovered in Ramadi (gunshot wounds to head and chest). All Iraq News notes that a Mosul suicide bomber left Colonel Ahmed Abbas injured.
Neither the violence nor the holy month has prevented the ongoing protests. Iraqi Spring Media notes protests took place in Baghdad and in Falluja, in Maysan Province, Mosul and in Jalawla. These protests have been ongoing since December 21st.
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Tony Blair, David Kelly, mosque bombing kills at l..."
"Snowden, Spying and Jimmy Carter"
"Easy Green, Greek Salad in the Kitchen"
"Park 666"
"Media thoughts"
"palestinians get screwed over again"
"DoD 'finds' general for Benghazi hearings"
"Jackie Collins and books"
"Bradley Manning"
"The Conjuring"
"Isaiah's comic and more"
"The Drone War"
"This is the intelligence community?"
"THIS JUST IN! MISSING THE POINT!"
CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O HAS FOUND A CLIMATE MATE: CHINA.
REACHED FOR COMMENT BY THESE REPORTERS, BARRY O TOLD THESE REPORTERS, "NO ONE SHOULD BE SURPRISED BY THIS. CHINA IS ME, 35 YEARS AGO. CHINA COULD HAVE BEEN MY BROTHER."
AT THIS MOMENT, WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMODEL JAY CARNEY RUSHED INTO THE ROOM, MUMBLED SOMETHING ABOUT BARRY O BEING "VERY TIRED" ANDHUSTLED HIM OUT OF THE ROOM.
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
Good for US State Dept spokesperson Marie Harf who did something unheard of today.
Happy Friday. Welcome to the daily briefing. I have something to read at the top, and then happy to open it up to your questions. The United States condemns in the strongest terms the terrorist bombing inside a mosque today in Diyala province in Iraq. Attacks against innocent people are reprehensible. That this attack occurred in a place of worship and during the Holy Month of Ramadan is especially despicable and cowardly and exposes the nature of those perpetrating these attacks. Our condolences go out to the victims of these attacks and their families.
That is how she opened today's press briefing. This was not in response to a question, that is how she opened. Good for Harf, good for the US State Dept. The Congress is giving them billions for Iraq, they need to be noting the country in some manner regularly.
While the State Dept was front and center on the bombing, Nouri's forces were otherwise occupied.
Iraqi Spring MC reports that Nouri's SWAT forces spent the morning forcing Baquba stores to close. Maybe if they had been focused on doing actual work and not terrorizing shop owners, Iraqi Spring MC wouldn't have been reporting the Abu Bakr Mosque in Diyala's Wajihiya district was bombed? This morning, Reuters counted 20 dead and NINA counted at least 60 injured. It's not as though Nouri's SWAT forces contributed nothing however, Iraqi Spring MC notes that they are preventing concerned Iraqis from making blood donations to help the victims of the bombing.
Yang Lina (Xinhua) reports, "The attack occurred around midday when dozens of worshippers were observing the Friday weekly Muslim prayer at the mosque of Abu Bakr al-Sideeq, in the town of Wajihiyah, northeast of the provincial capital city of Baquba, some 65 km northeast of the Iraqi capital of Baghdad, a provincial police source told Xinhua on condition of anonymity." Steve Nolan (Daily Mail) adds, "The blast went off on the left side of the mosque, which was filled with men and children, as worshippers were kneeling during prayers, said 30-year-old Mohammed Faleh, who was praying inside." Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) notes, "The bomb had been hidden under a podium from which an imam was speaking in the mosque, located in al-Wajihiya in the largely Sunni province of Diyala, said police officials in the nearby provincial capital of Baquba." KUNA reports there were two bombings -- the one Tawfeeq has noted and a suicide bomber who detonated outside as people were rushing out. BBC News notes a suicide bomber as well as does All Iraq News. So does Mustafa al-Tuwaijri (AFP) who quotes Omar Mundhir (whose leg was injured in the attack) stating, "I was sitting near the main entrance of the mosque when a huge explosion happened. I was sitting near the imam and the mosque was full of dozens of people when a big explosion happened, and the place went completely dark."
Prensa Latina observes, "The explosion took place in Wajihiya city, Diyala province, with a population of Sunni majority, and came after a series of attacks which have taken the lives of 460 people so far this month, according to official figures." Qassim Abdul-Zahra (AP) adds, "AP television footage of the aftermath showed the interior of the mosque near the bomb site charred black and shrapnel damage peppering the walls." AP counts 27 dead. EFE notes that, among the many wounded, "27 are in grave condition."
If only someone had seen Diyala as a hotbed, maybe Nouri's forces could have done an actual job. But alas, no one saw a problem in Diyala . . . Oh, wait. From Wednesday's snapshot:
NINA reports, "Speaker Osama Najafi called for holding a public hearing on Thursday in parliament in order to deter violators and terrorists in Diyala province and easing tensions to overcome the crisis and stop the forced displacement of citizens in a number of areas of the province." Alsumaria adds that the Free Patriotic Movement is joining the call as explained by their leader Massoud Zangana who states that the citizens of Diyala are in need of help.
The hearing was held. At the Parliament's website, they note 236 MPs attended, a number of issues were addressed and, with regards to Diyala Province, they commissioned a group to work on the issue with Nouri's office overseeing the security forces in Diyala Province. That didn't work out well for anyone today.
The US Embassy in Baghdad issued the following:
The United States Condemns Diyala Mosque Bombing
July 19, 2013
The United States condemns in the strongest terms the terrorist bombing inside a mosque today in Diyala province. Attacks against innocent people are reprehensible. That this attack occurred in a place of worship and during the holy month of Ramadan is especially despicable and cowardly and exposes the nature of those perpetrating these attacks. Our condolences go out to the victims of these attacks and their families.
The mosque bombing wasn't Iraq's only violence today. NINA reports a Tikrit bombing left 2 soldiers dead and another injured, a western Baghdad bombing claimed 1 life and left another person injured, a Falluja home invasion left a woman and her two daughters injured, a Falluja motorcycle drive-by left one police officer and one Iraqi citizen injured, a suicide bomber to the south of Mosul blew himself up and left one police officer injured, and a Hilla suicide bomber claimed the life of 1 police officer and left five worshipers en route to the Al Mustafa shrine injured. Alsumaria adds 1 corpse was discovered in Ramadi (gunshot wounds to head and chest). All Iraq News notes that a Mosul suicide bomber left Colonel Ahmed Abbas injured.
Neither the violence nor the holy month has prevented the ongoing protests. Iraqi Spring Media notes protests took place in Baghdad and in Falluja, in Maysan Province, Mosul and in Jalawla. These protests have been ongoing since December 21st.
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Tony Blair, David Kelly, mosque bombing kills at l..."
"Snowden, Spying and Jimmy Carter"
"Easy Green, Greek Salad in the Kitchen"
"Park 666"
"Media thoughts"
"palestinians get screwed over again"
"DoD 'finds' general for Benghazi hearings"
"Jackie Collins and books"
"Bradley Manning"
"The Conjuring"
"Isaiah's comic and more"
"The Drone War"
"This is the intelligence community?"
"THIS JUST IN! MISSING THE POINT!"
Friday, July 19, 2013
This is the intelligence community?
BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE
YESTERDAY IN ASPEN, DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE ASH CARTER DECLARED A MISTAKE HAD BEEN MADE IN THE NSA'S SECRET SPYING ON AMERICANS . . . IT WAS TOO EASILY AVAILABLE TO CONTRACTORS AND THE GOVERNMENT WOULD BE FIXING THAT.
YES, BECAUSE THAT WAS THE PROBLEM. AMERICANS WERE OUTRAGED THAT ED SNOWDEN COULD SEE VARIOUS INFORMATION -- NOT BECAUSE THE SPYING ITSELF WAS TAKING PLACE, RIGHT?
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
Starting with NSA whistle-blower Ed Snowden who remains in Russia. Kasie Hunt and Kelly O'Donnell (NBC News) report US Senator Lindsey Graham "has told NBC News that the United States should consider boycotting the upcoming Winter Games if Russian President Vladimir Putin grants leaker Edward Snowden asylum -- a suggestion that a top U.S. Olympic official quickly rejected." First off, Putin has no say in temporary asylum. The process involves one ministry only. As we noted Tuesday, "Putin wouldn't have a formal voice in temporary asylum. In fact, he should have no role in the decision. Again, that's per State Dept friend, however, that's how the process is supposed to work and government processes don't always work as they are supposed to." The temporary process also moves quickly. As from Graham's suggestion?
Stupidest thing in the world. Unless he's trying to get kicked out of the Senate. In 1980, the US boycotted the summer Olympics in Moscow. Jimmy Carter was President of the United States then. The decision was costly in so many ways. First off, US citizens have been training for four years. Second off, this politicizes the Olympics which are not supposed to be politicized. Third, do you realize how much money is at play right now? NBC suits will not be forgiving (NBC is carrying the Winter Olympics). That's a ton of ad revenue at stake and they've got nothing currently to plug into the schedule if the US doesn't compete. (And if the US doesn't compete, they could still air the Olympics but the US ratings would be in the toilet.)
Again, if Graham's trying to retire from the Senate, this is the way to do it. He will be publicly vilified for weeks should this take place. Chris Moody (Yahoo News) reports US House Speaker John Boehner has responded, stating, "Listen, I love Sen. Graham. We've been close friends for 20 years. But I think he's dead wrong. Why would we want to punish U.S. athletes who have been training for three years to compete in the Olympics over a traitor who can't find a place to call home?"
Traitor? A traitor would be someone, for example, in Congress who took an oath to uphold the Constitution and then worked to secretly destroy the Bill of Rights. That would qualify as a traitor. Ed Snowden? Nope. But Boehner's remarks put him in the same camp as the editor of The Moscow Times' Michael Bohm. In other words, Boehner's talking like the Kremlin. How strange it must be for his home district.
Roger Runnigen (Bloomberg News) reports the White House's stomping feet and pity party may mean that a September summit with Putin is called off, "Canceling the Putin meeting, announced in June, would deal a blow to administration efforts to bolster already strained relations with Russia and would be a direct challenge to the Russian’s prestige on the world stage." Whether the meeting is on or off isn't the only thing the White House is staying silent on. Spencer Ackerman (Guardian) reports:
The Obama administration is refusing to say whether it will seek to renew a court order that permits the National Security Agency's bulk collection of phone records on millions of Verizon customers when it at the end of this week.
Officials declined to discuss what action they intend to take about the order at the center of the current surveillance scandal, which formally expires at 5pm Friday.
Yesterday PBS' The NewsHour (link is video, audio and text) featured a debate on the topic between whistle-blower Daniel Ellsberg (Pentagon Papers) and former Attorney General Michael Mukasey
DANIEL ELLSBERG, former State Department official: Pardon me, but listening to that just now, I have to smile at the thought that our friends will be very upset about the thought that Snowden had exposed that we were spying on them, which he has done.
I must say, I think a lot of them would be envious of our capability. I think Russia and China would be envious of our capability, the NSA capabilities. It's exactly what they want in countries that aren't exactly democratic.
My concern is that the very existence of this kind of capability chills free speech in a disastrous way. I cannot see how there can be investigative reporting of the national security community, when the identity, the location, the metadata, and really the contents of every communication between a journalist and every source, every journalist, every source, is known to the executive branch, especially one that has been prosecuting twice as many journalist -- sources as any president before.
Moreover, my even larger concern is, I don't see how democracy can survive when one branch, the executive branch, has all the personal communications of every member of Congress, and every judge, every member of the judiciary, as well as the press, the fourth estate that I have just been describing.
I don't see how the blackmail capability that's involved there can be -- will not be abused, as it has happened in the past, including to me, by the way, and to other -- and to journalists.
Without that freedom to investigative or bring checks and balances, we won't have a real democracy. That's my concern.
But Snowden's whistle-blowing is having an impact on Americans. Mark Clayton (Christian Science Monitor) reports:
Roughly 70 lawsuits have been filed since 2005 alleging that secret US surveillance programs violated someone's constitutional rights, but federal judges have dismissed most of the cases before the merits of the charges were ever heard, these experts say. In particular, plaintiffs have stumbled over the challenge of gaining legal standing to even bring suit against the government, primarily because they could not identify the secret surveillance program that they claimed had harmed them.
But fugitive leaker Edward Snowden, who in June divulged to reporters top-secret documents about two US surveillance programs run by the National Security Agency (NSA), may have provided a way to get around that hurdle, constitutional lawyers say. Since the Snowden leak (and US officials' subsequent confirmation that the documents are real), at least five lawsuits have been filed, the latest on Tuesday, alleging that the NSA program to track all Americans' telephone records violates the US Constitution.
Ed Snowden's whistle-blowing had made a real impact. Yesterday's House Judiciary Committee hearing would not have taken place without those revelations. Committee Chair Bob Goodlatte asked near the start of the hearing, "Why not simply have told the American people that we're engaging in this type of activity in terms of gathering the information?"
Asking a simple question, it turns out, is much easier than getting an answer. Ali Watkins (McClatchy Newspapers) reports: US House Rep Jerrold Nadler stating, "The fact that a secret court unaccountable to public knowledge of what it’s doing . . . may join you in misusing or abusing the statutes is of no comfort whatsoever. So to tell me you go to the FISA court is irrelevant."
The hearing was on the spying and the FISA court. The first panel was made up of DoJ's James Cole, NSA's John C. Inglis, Office of Director of National Intelligence's Robert S. Litt and the FBI's Stephanie Douglas. The second panel was Steptoe & Johnson, LLP's Stewart Baker, the ACLU's Jameel Jaffer and CNSS' Kate Martin. We covered it in yesterday's snapshot, Kat covered it in "FISA rulings," Wally covered it in "Proof that we should be thanking Ed Snowden (Wally)" and Ava covered it in "House Judiciary Committee hearing."
Ranking Member John Conyers attempted to get some straight answers.
Ranking Member John Conyers: If only relevant conversations can be secured under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act, then why on earth would we find now that we are collecting the names of everybody in the United States of America who made any calls for the last 6 years or more?
Stephanie Douglas: Sir, we're not collecting names. 215 only collects phone numbers, the time and date of the phone call and the duration of the phone call.
Ranking Member John Conyers: Well how do you consider that to be relevant to anything if there is only collecting the names. I mean, look, if this is an innocent pastime we just do to keep busy or for some other reason why on earth would be collecting just the numbers of everybody in the United States of America for at least six years?
Stephanie Douglas: I can speak to the, uhm, applications against investigations and, in this case for 216, it would be specific to counterterrorism investigations, uhm, that information enables us to, uh, search against connections to other, uh, if there's a communication between a US-based phone number and a phone number that is overseas related to terrorism. And I know that Mr. Inglis explained to you the reasonable articula -- articulable suspicion standard by which we have to search against those phone numbers.
Ranking Member John Conyers: Well here-here we're faced with the fundamental problem in this hearing. We're not questioning access, we're talking about the collection in the first instance. In the first instance when you collect the phone numbers of everybody in the United States for over six years, there wasn't anything relevant in those conversations. Now you have them. What I've been getting out of all of this is that they may -- "This access may become valuable, Mr. Ranking Member, and so that's why we do it this way." But I maintain that the Fourth Amendment to be free from unreasonable search and seizure to mean that this mega data collected in such a super aggregated fashion can amount to a Fourth Amendment violation before you do anything else. You've already violated the law, as far as I am concerned. And that is, in my view, the problem. And of course to further document the first question that the Chairman of this Committee asked -- is why didn't we just tell everybody about it -- is because the American people would be totally outraged -- as they are getting now as they become familiar with this -- that every phone number that they've ever called is already a matter of record. And we skip over whether the collection was a Fourth Amendment violation, we just say that the access proved, in one case or two, that it was very important and that's why we did it this way.
The witnesses' non-answers and rationalizing was frustrating throughout the hearing. James Risen (New York Times) observes:
Last night, Ava noted the disrespect shown the Committee by the witnesses on the first panel. She wrote about how the Committee members were talked down to and she's correct. The witnesses were not respectful and they behaved as if they owned the House. Sari Horwitz and William Branigin (Washington Post) report, "The sharp and sometimes angry questioning stood in stark contrast to the tone of hearings on the surveillance programs by congressional intelligence committees in recent weeks."
In the House (as in the Senate), during rounds of questioning, each member of the Committee is limited to a set time. (It's five minutes in the House.) Conyers' time had expired and he wrapped up -- or thought he had when he was interrupted.
Ranking Member John Conyers: This is unsustainable, it's outrageous and must be stopped immediately.
John Inglis: Sir, if I may compliment the answer Ms. Douglas gave, uh, with respect to the question of relevance, of course it must be legally relevant and it must therefore have operational relevance. I'd like to address the operational relevance and then defer to my colleagues.
Ranking Member John Conyers: Well you don't -- Wait a minute. We're handling this discussion. I, uh, I asked her. Maybe somebody else can do it. But my time has expired. And I appreciate you're volunteering to help out here but it's clear to me that we have a very serious violation of the law in which the Judiciary Committee deliberately put in the issue of relevance. And now you're going to help me out and defer to somebody else?
John Inglis: No, sir, I meant to actually provide additional information. I'd be happy to take the question for the record if time is not allowing that.
Ranking Member John Conyers: Well in all fairness --
Committee Chair Bob Goodlatte: Without exception, the gentleman is recognized for an additional minute to allow another member of the panel to answer the question if he so chooses.
Ranking Member John Conyers: No, I don't so choose. I'm satisfied exactly with what I've gotten from the witness I asked the question to.
Former US Senator Gordon Humphrey wrote POLITIO about Ed Snowden, "Respectfully, I say to Sweden, ‘\'America has done wrong in this instance. Stand up to her. Grant Edward Snowden asylum. You will do the people of the United States a great favor to resist their government in this matter and at this moment.."
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "The Lemon On T..."
"18 dead, 19 wounded in Iraq as Iranian President v..."
"Officials disrespect House Judiciary Committee"
"Has Ralph Nader said a word about Ed Snowden?"
"Curisoity and other things"
"What we should have had instead of ObamaCare"
"the lawless barack"
"Are witnesses being prevented from talking?"
"Rolling Stone"
"The dreaded ObamaCare"
"The Emmys"
"War Hawk Youth Mentor"
"NSA spying never ends"
"Has he got a deal for you!"
"THIS JUST IN! SMILING BARRY HAS THE BEST PRICES!"
YESTERDAY IN ASPEN, DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE ASH CARTER DECLARED A MISTAKE HAD BEEN MADE IN THE NSA'S SECRET SPYING ON AMERICANS . . . IT WAS TOO EASILY AVAILABLE TO CONTRACTORS AND THE GOVERNMENT WOULD BE FIXING THAT.
YES, BECAUSE THAT WAS THE PROBLEM. AMERICANS WERE OUTRAGED THAT ED SNOWDEN COULD SEE VARIOUS INFORMATION -- NOT BECAUSE THE SPYING ITSELF WAS TAKING PLACE, RIGHT?
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
Starting with NSA whistle-blower Ed Snowden who remains in Russia. Kasie Hunt and Kelly O'Donnell (NBC News) report US Senator Lindsey Graham "has told NBC News that the United States should consider boycotting the upcoming Winter Games if Russian President Vladimir Putin grants leaker Edward Snowden asylum -- a suggestion that a top U.S. Olympic official quickly rejected." First off, Putin has no say in temporary asylum. The process involves one ministry only. As we noted Tuesday, "Putin wouldn't have a formal voice in temporary asylum. In fact, he should have no role in the decision. Again, that's per State Dept friend, however, that's how the process is supposed to work and government processes don't always work as they are supposed to." The temporary process also moves quickly. As from Graham's suggestion?
Stupidest thing in the world. Unless he's trying to get kicked out of the Senate. In 1980, the US boycotted the summer Olympics in Moscow. Jimmy Carter was President of the United States then. The decision was costly in so many ways. First off, US citizens have been training for four years. Second off, this politicizes the Olympics which are not supposed to be politicized. Third, do you realize how much money is at play right now? NBC suits will not be forgiving (NBC is carrying the Winter Olympics). That's a ton of ad revenue at stake and they've got nothing currently to plug into the schedule if the US doesn't compete. (And if the US doesn't compete, they could still air the Olympics but the US ratings would be in the toilet.)
Again, if Graham's trying to retire from the Senate, this is the way to do it. He will be publicly vilified for weeks should this take place. Chris Moody (Yahoo News) reports US House Speaker John Boehner has responded, stating, "Listen, I love Sen. Graham. We've been close friends for 20 years. But I think he's dead wrong. Why would we want to punish U.S. athletes who have been training for three years to compete in the Olympics over a traitor who can't find a place to call home?"
Traitor? A traitor would be someone, for example, in Congress who took an oath to uphold the Constitution and then worked to secretly destroy the Bill of Rights. That would qualify as a traitor. Ed Snowden? Nope. But Boehner's remarks put him in the same camp as the editor of The Moscow Times' Michael Bohm. In other words, Boehner's talking like the Kremlin. How strange it must be for his home district.
Roger Runnigen (Bloomberg News) reports the White House's stomping feet and pity party may mean that a September summit with Putin is called off, "Canceling the Putin meeting, announced in June, would deal a blow to administration efforts to bolster already strained relations with Russia and would be a direct challenge to the Russian’s prestige on the world stage." Whether the meeting is on or off isn't the only thing the White House is staying silent on. Spencer Ackerman (Guardian) reports:
The Obama administration is refusing to say whether it will seek to renew a court order that permits the National Security Agency's bulk collection of phone records on millions of Verizon customers when it at the end of this week.
Officials declined to discuss what action they intend to take about the order at the center of the current surveillance scandal, which formally expires at 5pm Friday.
Yesterday PBS' The NewsHour (link is video, audio and text) featured a debate on the topic between whistle-blower Daniel Ellsberg (Pentagon Papers) and former Attorney General Michael Mukasey
DANIEL ELLSBERG, former State Department official: Pardon me, but listening to that just now, I have to smile at the thought that our friends will be very upset about the thought that Snowden had exposed that we were spying on them, which he has done.
I must say, I think a lot of them would be envious of our capability. I think Russia and China would be envious of our capability, the NSA capabilities. It's exactly what they want in countries that aren't exactly democratic.
My concern is that the very existence of this kind of capability chills free speech in a disastrous way. I cannot see how there can be investigative reporting of the national security community, when the identity, the location, the metadata, and really the contents of every communication between a journalist and every source, every journalist, every source, is known to the executive branch, especially one that has been prosecuting twice as many journalist -- sources as any president before.
Moreover, my even larger concern is, I don't see how democracy can survive when one branch, the executive branch, has all the personal communications of every member of Congress, and every judge, every member of the judiciary, as well as the press, the fourth estate that I have just been describing.
I don't see how the blackmail capability that's involved there can be -- will not be abused, as it has happened in the past, including to me, by the way, and to other -- and to journalists.
Without that freedom to investigative or bring checks and balances, we won't have a real democracy. That's my concern.
But Snowden's whistle-blowing is having an impact on Americans. Mark Clayton (Christian Science Monitor) reports:
Roughly 70 lawsuits have been filed since 2005 alleging that secret US surveillance programs violated someone's constitutional rights, but federal judges have dismissed most of the cases before the merits of the charges were ever heard, these experts say. In particular, plaintiffs have stumbled over the challenge of gaining legal standing to even bring suit against the government, primarily because they could not identify the secret surveillance program that they claimed had harmed them.
But fugitive leaker Edward Snowden, who in June divulged to reporters top-secret documents about two US surveillance programs run by the National Security Agency (NSA), may have provided a way to get around that hurdle, constitutional lawyers say. Since the Snowden leak (and US officials' subsequent confirmation that the documents are real), at least five lawsuits have been filed, the latest on Tuesday, alleging that the NSA program to track all Americans' telephone records violates the US Constitution.
Ed Snowden's whistle-blowing had made a real impact. Yesterday's House Judiciary Committee hearing would not have taken place without those revelations. Committee Chair Bob Goodlatte asked near the start of the hearing, "Why not simply have told the American people that we're engaging in this type of activity in terms of gathering the information?"
Asking a simple question, it turns out, is much easier than getting an answer. Ali Watkins (McClatchy Newspapers) reports: US House Rep Jerrold Nadler stating, "The fact that a secret court unaccountable to public knowledge of what it’s doing . . . may join you in misusing or abusing the statutes is of no comfort whatsoever. So to tell me you go to the FISA court is irrelevant."
The hearing was on the spying and the FISA court. The first panel was made up of DoJ's James Cole, NSA's John C. Inglis, Office of Director of National Intelligence's Robert S. Litt and the FBI's Stephanie Douglas. The second panel was Steptoe & Johnson, LLP's Stewart Baker, the ACLU's Jameel Jaffer and CNSS' Kate Martin. We covered it in yesterday's snapshot, Kat covered it in "FISA rulings," Wally covered it in "Proof that we should be thanking Ed Snowden (Wally)" and Ava covered it in "House Judiciary Committee hearing."
Ranking Member John Conyers attempted to get some straight answers.
Ranking Member John Conyers: If only relevant conversations can be secured under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act, then why on earth would we find now that we are collecting the names of everybody in the United States of America who made any calls for the last 6 years or more?
Stephanie Douglas: Sir, we're not collecting names. 215 only collects phone numbers, the time and date of the phone call and the duration of the phone call.
Ranking Member John Conyers: Well how do you consider that to be relevant to anything if there is only collecting the names. I mean, look, if this is an innocent pastime we just do to keep busy or for some other reason why on earth would be collecting just the numbers of everybody in the United States of America for at least six years?
Stephanie Douglas: I can speak to the, uhm, applications against investigations and, in this case for 216, it would be specific to counterterrorism investigations, uhm, that information enables us to, uh, search against connections to other, uh, if there's a communication between a US-based phone number and a phone number that is overseas related to terrorism. And I know that Mr. Inglis explained to you the reasonable articula -- articulable suspicion standard by which we have to search against those phone numbers.
Ranking Member John Conyers: Well here-here we're faced with the fundamental problem in this hearing. We're not questioning access, we're talking about the collection in the first instance. In the first instance when you collect the phone numbers of everybody in the United States for over six years, there wasn't anything relevant in those conversations. Now you have them. What I've been getting out of all of this is that they may -- "This access may become valuable, Mr. Ranking Member, and so that's why we do it this way." But I maintain that the Fourth Amendment to be free from unreasonable search and seizure to mean that this mega data collected in such a super aggregated fashion can amount to a Fourth Amendment violation before you do anything else. You've already violated the law, as far as I am concerned. And that is, in my view, the problem. And of course to further document the first question that the Chairman of this Committee asked -- is why didn't we just tell everybody about it -- is because the American people would be totally outraged -- as they are getting now as they become familiar with this -- that every phone number that they've ever called is already a matter of record. And we skip over whether the collection was a Fourth Amendment violation, we just say that the access proved, in one case or two, that it was very important and that's why we did it this way.
The witnesses' non-answers and rationalizing was frustrating throughout the hearing. James Risen (New York Times) observes:
While administration officials defended the surveillance during the hearing, several lawmakers said that the data collection was unsustainable, and that Congress would move to either revoke the legislative authorization for the bulk collection now or at least refuse to renew it when it expires in 2015. Mr. [James] Sensenbrenner interrupted James Cole, a deputy attorney general, to say, “Unless you realize you’ve got a problem, that is not going to be renewed.”
Last night, Ava noted the disrespect shown the Committee by the witnesses on the first panel. She wrote about how the Committee members were talked down to and she's correct. The witnesses were not respectful and they behaved as if they owned the House. Sari Horwitz and William Branigin (Washington Post) report, "The sharp and sometimes angry questioning stood in stark contrast to the tone of hearings on the surveillance programs by congressional intelligence committees in recent weeks."
In the House (as in the Senate), during rounds of questioning, each member of the Committee is limited to a set time. (It's five minutes in the House.) Conyers' time had expired and he wrapped up -- or thought he had when he was interrupted.
Ranking Member John Conyers: This is unsustainable, it's outrageous and must be stopped immediately.
John Inglis: Sir, if I may compliment the answer Ms. Douglas gave, uh, with respect to the question of relevance, of course it must be legally relevant and it must therefore have operational relevance. I'd like to address the operational relevance and then defer to my colleagues.
Ranking Member John Conyers: Well you don't -- Wait a minute. We're handling this discussion. I, uh, I asked her. Maybe somebody else can do it. But my time has expired. And I appreciate you're volunteering to help out here but it's clear to me that we have a very serious violation of the law in which the Judiciary Committee deliberately put in the issue of relevance. And now you're going to help me out and defer to somebody else?
John Inglis: No, sir, I meant to actually provide additional information. I'd be happy to take the question for the record if time is not allowing that.
Ranking Member John Conyers: Well in all fairness --
Committee Chair Bob Goodlatte: Without exception, the gentleman is recognized for an additional minute to allow another member of the panel to answer the question if he so chooses.
Ranking Member John Conyers: No, I don't so choose. I'm satisfied exactly with what I've gotten from the witness I asked the question to.
Former US Senator Gordon Humphrey wrote POLITIO about Ed Snowden, "Respectfully, I say to Sweden, ‘\'America has done wrong in this instance. Stand up to her. Grant Edward Snowden asylum. You will do the people of the United States a great favor to resist their government in this matter and at this moment.."
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "The Lemon On T..."
"18 dead, 19 wounded in Iraq as Iranian President v..."
"Officials disrespect House Judiciary Committee"
"Has Ralph Nader said a word about Ed Snowden?"
"Curisoity and other things"
"What we should have had instead of ObamaCare"
"the lawless barack"
"Are witnesses being prevented from talking?"
"Rolling Stone"
"The dreaded ObamaCare"
"The Emmys"
"War Hawk Youth Mentor"
"NSA spying never ends"
"Has he got a deal for you!"
"THIS JUST IN! SMILING BARRY HAS THE BEST PRICES!"
Thursday, July 18, 2013
Has he got a deal for you!
BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE
CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O WILL SPEAK TO THE PRESS TODAY TO ADVOCATE IN FAVOR OF OBAMACARE.
IF YOU NEVER GOT BEFORE WHAT A WASTE OF TIME BARRY O'S GIFT TO INSURANCE COMPANIES WAS, GRASP THAT HE WASTED HIS FIRST TERM TRYING TO PASS OFF THIS LEMON AS 'UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE' AND HE'S NOW WASTING TIME IN HIS SECOND TERM ON IT AS WELL.
THIS LEMON JUST REFUSES TO LEAVE THE LOT.
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
This morning, US House Rep Ted Deutch noted he worries "about the balance between legitimate security needs and the constituationally protected rights of all Americans" and declared, "I believe it's time to rexemine the Patriot Act, insert greater accountability into the FISA court and ensure our laws cannot be interpreted behind the backs of the American public."
He was speaking at the House Judiciary Committee hearing on FISA. The Committee Chair is Bob Goodlatte and the Ranking Member is John Conyers. The first panel was made up of DoJ's James Cole, NSA's John C. Inglis, Office of Director of National Intelligence's Robert S. Litt and the FBI's Stephanie Douglas. The second panel was Steptoe & Johnson, LLP's Stewart Baker, the ACLU's Jameel Jaffer and CNSS' Kate Martin.
Storyteller Stewart Baker babbled before the House Judiciary Committee and made the claim that FISA was 'constrained' under Bill Clinton and this resulted in the "wall" between intelligence and law enforcement which prevented the capture of the 9-11 hijackers. Jamie Gorelick, tear down this wall! Are we really back to that nonsense? (If there was a wall, it dates back to the Reagan era.) Baker loves fairy tales. Let's deal with how the so-called wall allegedly caused 9-11. From SourceWatch:
Coleen Rowley, who served as chief counsel of the FBI's Minneapolis field office, "in a 13-page memo, outlined how FBI headquarters thwarted agents' attempts to investigate Zacarias Moussaoui, the alleged 20th hijacker. The 'bombshell memo' led bureau chief Robert Mueller to reorganize the agency. Rowley testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee in June about the FBI bureaucracy that frustrates agents' attempts at innovative investigation and mires them in paperwork." [1]
From Rowley's May 21, 2002 letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller:
Ranking Members John Conyers was a rare bright spot on the hearing. He noted, for example, of the secret spaying, "If it weren't for a couple of people leaking, we wouldn't know any of this, as far as I'm concerned."
His concerns included the legality of the collecting of data, more so than "the uses to which it is put." He declared tracking everyone in the country "for at least six years" was "probably the most disturbing aspect."
As noted Jameel Jaffer (ACLU) testified. He has posted his prepared testimony (opening remarks) and we'll note it:
Over the last six weeks it has become clear that the NSA is engaged in far-reaching, intrusive, and unconstitutional surveillance of Americans' communications.
That the NSA is engaged in this unconstitutional surveillance is the result of defects both in the law itself and in the current oversight system.
Because the problem Congress confronts today has many roots, there is no single solution to it. But there are a number of things that Congress should do right away:
Thank you.
Many, like Chair Gooelatte, didn't grasp why the officials continued to insist that thei was a foreign affairs matter when it came to spying on Americans making phone calls or sending e-mails to other Americans, and both parties being inside the United States? Many words were used to justify that, none of which made sense.
What's the take away? US House Rep Blake Farenthold noted that the Fourth Amendment was seen as not being violated by the spying and the First Amendment was not seen as being violated by the spying so possibly the only time he has a reasonable expectation of privacy is with "a letter i hand deliver to my wife in a schiff,"
Recommended: "Iraq snapshot"
"Holy month hit by non-stop violence"
"They go after whistle-blowers, don't they?"
"House Judiciary Committee hearing"
"Hillary Is 44"
"Ms. magazine's bad blog post"
"Proof that we should be thanking Ed Snowden (Wally)"
"Mistresses"
"FISA rulings"
"Michael Kors and Rolling Stone"
"Mistresses"
"Iraq"
"Adam Kokesh"
"Who needs jobs!"
"THIS JUST IN! WE DON'T NEED NO STINKING JOBS!"
CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O WILL SPEAK TO THE PRESS TODAY TO ADVOCATE IN FAVOR OF OBAMACARE.
IF YOU NEVER GOT BEFORE WHAT A WASTE OF TIME BARRY O'S GIFT TO INSURANCE COMPANIES WAS, GRASP THAT HE WASTED HIS FIRST TERM TRYING TO PASS OFF THIS LEMON AS 'UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE' AND HE'S NOW WASTING TIME IN HIS SECOND TERM ON IT AS WELL.
THIS LEMON JUST REFUSES TO LEAVE THE LOT.
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
This morning, US House Rep Ted Deutch noted he worries "about the balance between legitimate security needs and the constituationally protected rights of all Americans" and declared, "I believe it's time to rexemine the Patriot Act, insert greater accountability into the FISA court and ensure our laws cannot be interpreted behind the backs of the American public."
He was speaking at the House Judiciary Committee hearing on FISA. The Committee Chair is Bob Goodlatte and the Ranking Member is John Conyers. The first panel was made up of DoJ's James Cole, NSA's John C. Inglis, Office of Director of National Intelligence's Robert S. Litt and the FBI's Stephanie Douglas. The second panel was Steptoe & Johnson, LLP's Stewart Baker, the ACLU's Jameel Jaffer and CNSS' Kate Martin.
Storyteller Stewart Baker babbled before the House Judiciary Committee and made the claim that FISA was 'constrained' under Bill Clinton and this resulted in the "wall" between intelligence and law enforcement which prevented the capture of the 9-11 hijackers. Jamie Gorelick, tear down this wall! Are we really back to that nonsense? (If there was a wall, it dates back to the Reagan era.) Baker loves fairy tales. Let's deal with how the so-called wall allegedly caused 9-11. From SourceWatch:
Coleen Rowley, who served as chief counsel of the FBI's Minneapolis field office, "in a 13-page memo, outlined how FBI headquarters thwarted agents' attempts to investigate Zacarias Moussaoui, the alleged 20th hijacker. The 'bombshell memo' led bureau chief Robert Mueller to reorganize the agency. Rowley testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee in June about the FBI bureaucracy that frustrates agents' attempts at innovative investigation and mires them in paperwork." [1]
From Rowley's May 21, 2002 letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller:
1) The Minneapolis agents who responded to the call about Moussaoui's flight training identified him as a terrorist threat from a very early point. The decision to take him into custody on August 15, 2001, on the INS "overstay" charge was a deliberate one to counter that threat and was based on the agents' reasonable suspicions. While it can be said that Moussaoui's overstay status was fortuitous, because it allowed for him to be taken into immediate custody and prevented him receiving any more flight training, it was certainly not something the INS coincidentally undertook of their own volition. I base this on the conversation I had when the agents called me at home late on the evening Moussaoui was taken into custody to confer and ask for legal advice about their next course of action. The INS agent was assigned to the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force and was therefore working in tandem with FBI agents.
2) As the Minneapolis agents' reasonable suspicions quickly ripened into probable cause, which, at the latest, occurred within days of Moussaoui's arrest when the French Intelligence Service confirmed his affiliations with radical fundamentalist Islamic groups and activities connected to Osama Bin Laden, they became desperate to search the computer lap top that had been taken from Moussaoui as well as conduct a more thorough search of his personal effects. The agents in particular believed that Moussaoui signaled he had something to hide in the way he refused to allow them to search his computer.
3) The Minneapolis agents' initial thought was to obtain a criminal search warrant, but in order to do so, they needed to get FBI Headquarters' (FBIHQ's) approval in order to ask for DOJ OIPR's approval to contact the United States Attorney's Office in Minnesota. Prior to and even after receipt of information provided by the French, FBIHQ personnel disputed with the Minneapolis agents the existence of probable cause to believe that a criminal violation had occurred/was occurring. As such, FBIHQ personnel refused to contact OIPR to attempt to get the authority. While reasonable minds may differ as to whether probable cause existed prior to receipt of the French intelligence information, it was certainly established after that point and became even greater with successive, more detailed information from the French and other intelligence sources. The two possible criminal violations initially identified by Minneapolis Agents were violations of Title 18 United States Code Section 2332b (Acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries, which, notably, includes "creating a substantial risk of serious bodily injury to any other person by destroying or damaging any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property within the United States or by attempting or conspiring to destroy or damage any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property within the United States") and Section 32 (Destruction of aircraft or aircraft facilities). It is important to note that the actual search warrant obtained on September 11th was based on probable cause of a violation of Section 32.1 Notably also, the actual search warrant obtained on September 11th did not include the French intelligence information. Therefore, the only main difference between the information being submitted to FBIHQ from an early date which HQ personnel continued to deem insufficient and the actual criminal search warrant which a federal district judge signed and approved on September 11th, was the fact that, by the time the actual warrant was obtained, suspected terrorists were known to have highjacked planes which they then deliberately crashed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. To say then, as has been iterated numerous times, that probable cause did not exist until after the disasterous event occurred, is really to acknowledge that the missing piece of probable cause was only the FBI's (FBIHQ's) failure to appreciate that such an event could occur. The probable cause did not otherwise improve or change. When we went to the United States Attorney's Office that morning of September 11th, in the first hour after the attack, we used a disk containing the same information that had already been provided to FBIHQ; then we quickly added Paragraph 19 which was the little we knew from news reports of the actual attacks that morning. The problem with chalking this all up to the "20-20 hindsight is perfect" problem, (which I, as all attorneys who have been involved in deadly force training or the defense of various lawsuits are fully appreciative of), is that this is not a case of everyone in the FBI failing to appreciate the potential consequences. It is obvious, from my firsthand knowledge of the events and the detailed documentation that exists, that the agents in Minneapolis who were closest to the action and in the best position to gauge the situation locally, did fully appreciate the terrorist risk/danger posed by Moussaoui and his possible co-conspirators even prior to September 11th. Even without knowledge of the Phoenix communication (and any number of other additional intelligence communications that FBIHQ personnel were privy to in their central coordination roles), the Minneapolis agents appreciated the risk. So I think it's very hard for the FBI to offer the "20-20 hindsight" justification for its failure to act! Also intertwined with my reluctance in this case to accept the "20-20 hindsight" rationale is first-hand knowledge that I have of statements made on September 11th, after the first attacks on the World Trade Center had already occurred, made telephonically by the FBI Supervisory Special Agent (SSA) who was the one most involved in the Moussaoui matter and who, up to that point, seemed to have been consistently, almost deliberately thwarting the Minneapolis FBI agents' efforts (see number 5). Even after the attacks had begun, the SSA in question was still attempting to block the search of Moussaoui's computer, characterizing the World Trade Center attacks as a mere coincidence with Misseapolis' prior suspicions about Moussaoui.2
That's some of the letter. It is not about a 'wall,' it is about people not doing their jobs. That was too much reality for someone who chose to tell a fairy tale.
Ranking Members John Conyers was a rare bright spot on the hearing. He noted, for example, of the secret spaying, "If it weren't for a couple of people leaking, we wouldn't know any of this, as far as I'm concerned."
His concerns included the legality of the collecting of data, more so than "the uses to which it is put." He declared tracking everyone in the country "for at least six years" was "probably the most disturbing aspect."
As noted Jameel Jaffer (ACLU) testified. He has posted his prepared testimony (opening remarks) and we'll note it:
Over the last six weeks it has become clear that the NSA is engaged in far-reaching, intrusive, and unconstitutional surveillance of Americans' communications.
- Under Section 215 of the Patriot Act, the NSA is tracking every single phone call made by a resident of the United States—who they called, when they called them, for how long they spoke. Until recently it was tracking ordinary Americans' Internet activity as well.
- Under Section 702 of FISA, and on the pretext of monitoring people outside the United States, the NSA is using Section 702 of FISA to build massive databases of Americans' domestic and international communications—not just so-called metadata, but content as well.
That the NSA is engaged in this unconstitutional surveillance is the result of defects both in the law itself and in the current oversight system.
- The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act affords the government sweeping power to monitor the communications of innocent people.
- Excessive secrecy has made congressional oversight difficult and public oversight impossible.
- Intelligence officials have repeatedly misled the public, Congress, and the courts about the nature and scope of the government's surveillance activities.
- Structural features of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court have prevented that court from serving as an effective guardian of constitutional rights.
- And the ordinary federal courts have improperly used the "state secrets" and "standing" doctrines to place the NSA's activities beyond the reach of judicial review.
Because the problem Congress confronts today has many roots, there is no single solution to it. But there are a number of things that Congress should do right away:
- It should amend Sections 215 and 702 to expressly prohibit suspicionless or "dragnet" monitoring or tracking of Americans' communications.
- It should require the executive to release basic information about the government's use of foreign-intelligence-surveillance authorities, including those relating to pen registers and national security letters. The executive should be required to disclose, for each year:
- How many times each of these provisions was used
- How many individuals' privacy was implicated by the government's use of each provision
- And, with respect to any dragnet, generalized, or bulk surveillance program, the types of information that were collected.
- Congress should also require the publication of FISA court opinions that evaluate the meaning, scope, or constitutionality of the foreign-intelligence laws. The ACLU recently filed a motion before the FISA court arguing that the publication of these opinions is required by the First Amendment, but Congress need not wait for the FISA court to act. Congress has the authority and the obligation to ensure that Americans are not governed by a system of secret law.
- Finally, Congress—and this Committee in particular—should hold additional hearings to consider further amendments to FISA, including amendments to make FISC proceedings more transparent.
Thank you.
Many, like Chair Gooelatte, didn't grasp why the officials continued to insist that thei was a foreign affairs matter when it came to spying on Americans making phone calls or sending e-mails to other Americans, and both parties being inside the United States? Many words were used to justify that, none of which made sense.
What's the take away? US House Rep Blake Farenthold noted that the Fourth Amendment was seen as not being violated by the spying and the First Amendment was not seen as being violated by the spying so possibly the only time he has a reasonable expectation of privacy is with "a letter i hand deliver to my wife in a schiff,"
Recommended: "Iraq snapshot"
"Holy month hit by non-stop violence"
"They go after whistle-blowers, don't they?"
"House Judiciary Committee hearing"
"Hillary Is 44"
"Ms. magazine's bad blog post"
"Proof that we should be thanking Ed Snowden (Wally)"
"Mistresses"
"FISA rulings"
"Michael Kors and Rolling Stone"
"Mistresses"
"Iraq"
"Adam Kokesh"
"Who needs jobs!"
"THIS JUST IN! WE DON'T NEED NO STINKING JOBS!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)