Saturday, December 22, 2012

Call him 'He Who Talks About Self'


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

PRINCESS BARRY WAS HOPING TO JUST FOCUS ON HIS 2ND CORONATION.  FOR PRINCESS BARRY THE FOCUS MUST ALWAYS BE ON HIM.

SO WHEN HE DASHED OVER TO THE FUNERAL OF AN 88-YEAR-OLD MAN, HE THOUGHT HE WAS DOING THE WORLD A FAVOR BY SHARING A FEW THOUGHTS ON THE LIFE OF PRINCESS BARRY.  IT DID NOT GO OVER WELL:


Someone needs to tell Barack Obama—it must get particularly confusing this time of year—that his own birth is not Year One, the date around which all other events are understood. His much-noted, self-referential tic was on cringe-worthy display Friday when the president gave his eulogy for the late Sen. Daniel Inouye, who served in Congress for half a century representing Obama’s birth state of Hawaii.
Inouye was a Japanese-American war hero (he lost an arm in World War II, destroying his dream of becoming a surgeon), and as a senator he served on the Watergate committee, helped rewrite our intelligence charter after scandals, and was chairman of the Senate committee that investigated the Iran-Contra affair. It’s the kind of material any eulogist could use to give a moving sense of the man and his accomplishment. But President Barack Obama’s remarks at Inouye’s funeral service were a bizarre twirl around his own personal Kodak carousel.
Obama likes to see events through the lens of his own life’s chronology. Thus we learn that Inouye was elected to the Senate when Obama was 2 years old. Now you could make this relevant by describing how Inouye worked to send federal dollars (you don’t have to call it “pork” at a funeral) to transform Hawaii’s roads and schools, for example, so that the Hawaii Obama grew up in had the kind of facilities people on the mainland had long taken for granted. But no, we simply learn that Inouye was Obama’s senator until he left the state to go to college—something apparently more momentous than anything Inouye did during his decades in office.


ALONG WITH TURNING YET ANOTHER EVENT INTO ALL ABOUT BARRY, PRINCESS BARRY ALSO DISRESPECTED THE MAN BEING BURIED BY REPEATEDLY CALLING HIM "DANNY," AS BETTY POINTED OUT.


FROM THE TCI WIRE:


 
In Iraq, it's seasonal tidings.  Yes, that time of the year when Nouri uncorks The Crazy.  How bad is it?  So bad that rumors attach War Criminal Henry Kissinger's name to the current crisis.   Or, with a take from a different angle,  conservative Max Boot (Commentary) proclaims, "Ho hum, another holiday season, another power grab by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki."  AFP says the new crisis "threatens to reignite a long-running feud between the secular, Sunni-backed Iraqiya bloc" and Nouri and his State of Law political slate.  What the heck are we talking about?  Look at this Reuters photo (individual photographer is not credited by the news agency or we'd note him or her by name) of the thousands who turned out to protest in Falluja today demanding Nouri al-Maliki resign as prime minister.
 


After morning prayers, Kitabat reports, protesters gathered in Falluja to protest the arrests and Nouri al-Maliki.  They chanted down with Nouri's brutality and, in a move that won't change their minds, found themselves descended upon by Nouri's forces who violently ended the protest.  Before that, Al Mada reports, they were chanting that terrorism and Nouri are two sides of the same coin.  Kitabat also reports that demonstrations also took place in Tikrit, Samarra, Ramdia and just outside Falluja with persons from various tribes choosing to block the road connecting Anbar Province (Falluja is the capitol of Anbar) with Baghdad.  Across Iraq, there were calls for Nouri to release the bodyguards of Minister of Finance Rafie al-Issawi.  Alsumaria notes demonstrators in Samarra accused Nouri of attempting to start a sectarian war.


So what happened yesterday?  Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reports:


Iraq's Finance Minister Rafei al-Essawi said Thursday that "a militia force" raided his house, headquarters and ministry in Baghdad and kidnapped 150 people, and he holds the nation's prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki, responsible for their safety.
 Members of the al-Essawi's staff and guards were among those kidnapped from the ministry Thursday, the finance minister said. He also said that his computers and documents were searched at his house and headquarters. He said the head of security was arrested Wednesday at a Baghdad checkpoint for unknown reasons and that now the compound has no security.
 
 
 
Kitabat explains that these raids took place in the Green Zone, were carried out by the Iraqi military and that Nouri, yesterday evening, was insisting he knew nothing about them.    In another report, Tawfeeq quotes al-Essawi stating, "My message to the prime minister: You are a man who does not respect partnership at all, a man who does not respect the law and the constitution, and I personally hold you fully responsible for the safety of the kidnapped people." BBC News adds, "Rafie al-Issawi, a prominent member of the al-Iraqiyya political bloc, said about 150 of his bodyguards and staff members had been arrested on Thursday."  Nine in some reports, the Ministry of the Interior states 10.  So al-Essawi's just a liar?
 
 
No.  What appears to have happened is what Nouri practices, it's disgusting and it's illegal and the White House looks the other way every damn time.
 
What appears to have happened was that about 150 people were kidnapped.  Of those 150, 10 or so were arrested on charges of 'terrorism.'  And the rest?
 
They're being held.  They're being 'questioned' which, in Nouri's Iraq, means they're being tortured.  At least one of Tareq al-Hashemi's bodyguards was tortured to death -- beaten so badly he had kidney failure.  Two women who were part of Tareq's office staff were held for weeks, kidnapped and held for weeks, to get them to 'confess.'  Nouri did the same thing in October when he 'fired' (he didn't have that power) Sinan al-Shabibi as Govenor of the Central Bank of Iraq.  Suddenly, al-Shabibi's staff was rounded up and 'detained.'
 
We now have to drop back to the March 22nd snapshot:
 
Since December, those working for Tareq al-Hashemi have been rounded up by Nouri's forces.  At the end of January, Amnesty International was calling for the Baghdad government "to reveal the whereabouts of two women arrested earlier this month, apparently for their connection to the country's vice-president.  Rasha Nameer Jaafer al-Hussain and Bassima Saleem Kiryakos were arrested by security forces at their homes on 1 January.  Both women work in the media team of Iraqi Vice-President Tareq al-Hashemi, who is wanted by the Iraqi authorities on terrorism-related charges."  Yesterday, al-Hashemi noted that his bodyguard had died and stated that it appeared he had died as a result of torture.
 
 Alsumaria notes Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi is calling for the international community to call out the death of his bodyguard, Amer Sarbut Zeidan al-Batawi, who died after being imprisoned for three months. al-Hashemi has stated the man was tortured to death. The photo Alsumaria runs of the man's legs (only the man's legs) appear to indicate he was tortured, welts and bruises and scars.  They also report that the Baghdad Operations Command issued a statement today insisting that they had not tortured al-Batawi and that he died of chronic renal.  They also insist that he was taken to the hospital for medical treamtent on March 7th and died March 15th. Renal failure would be kidney failure.  And that's supposed to prove it wasn't torture?
 
If you work for an outlet that just spits out what you are told and didn't actually learn a profession, yes.  Anyone with half a brain, however, apparently that's half more than the average journalist possess today knows to go to science.  The Oxford Journal is scientific. This is from the Abstract for GH Malik, AR Reshi, MS Najar, A Ahmad and T Masood's "Further observations on acute renal failure following physical torture" from 1994:
 
Thirty-four males aged 16–40 (mean 25) years in the period from August 1991 to February 1993 presented in acute renal failure (ARF), 3–14 (mean 5) days after they had been apprehended and allegedly tortured in Police interrogation centres in Kashmir. All were beaten involving muscles of the body, in addition 13 were beaten on soles, 11 were trampled over and 10 had received repeated electric shocks.
 
Out of that group? 29 did live. Five died.  I don't think the Baghdad Command Operations created any space between them and the charge with their announcement of renal failure as the cause of death.  But, hey, I went to college and studied real topics -- like the law and political science and sociology and philosophy -- and got real degrees not glorified versions of a general studies degree with the word "journalism" slapped on it.  So what do I know?
 
We have to note that -- all of that -- because one of the worst outlets on Iraq decided to 'report' today and they didn't get one damn fact right.  We'll get back to it. 
 
Now if Bully Boy Bush were in office currently, I would honestly cut him some slack here because he can't call out Nouri for rounding up innocent people, not after he ordered US troops to pick up the wives and mothers of various supposed criminals, not after he ordered US troops to 'talk tough' to these women, not after he ordered US troops to let them think they would be raped and tortured if they did not talk.  (As far as is known, no woman was raped or tortured by US troops to give up information on a family member.  But many Iraqi women were threatened and bullied into believing that would happen.  There is a word for that: "Terrorism.")  So if Bully Boy Bush were still occupying the White House, I'd understand why he couldn't call out actions so similar to his own.  But President Barack Obama is a different person -- one who supposedly hasn't decided that the US government should demonstrate less scruples than the mafia -- so I'm having a real hard time understanding why the current White House can't call out these clear violations of the law and of human rights.
 
We all need to grasp and acknowledge what's happening.  AFP's quoting Abdelsattar Bayraqdar ("Higher Judicial Council spokesman") stating that the commander of the bodyguards has "confessed" -- these are forced confessions.  And it's past time that Nouri's screwed up 'justice' system in Baghdad was called out.  The judiciary does not issue statements on guilt before any trial.  They did that with Tareq al-Hashemi as well (with multiple judges holding that press conference and one 'objective' judge telling reporters present that Tareq had tried to kill him).  This is a joke but it's a sad one because Iraqis have to live with this.  It's yet another failure of the US government's war on Iraq.
 
 
As a result of these actions, Al Mada reports, Sahwa leader Ahmed Abu Risha has called for Nouri to apologize (and do so within 24 hours) and to release the hostages.  He floated the notion that Nouri's refusal could relate in the international highway that links Iraq to Jordan being cut off.  Al Mada also notes that a member of the Sadr bloc spoke to the media to note that this is yet another political crisis, yet another one created by Nouri in his six years in office, that the way this was carried out makes people lose trust/faith in the government, that this seems to be an echo of the divisions Nouri started last year with the targeting of Tareq al-Hashemi, that the operation was unobjective and unprofessional and that the lack of respect shown to Minister al-Issawi is a worry and threat to all the political blocs.   The article notes that Iraqiya repeated their assertion from a few weeks back that Nouri creates these crises to distract from his failure as head of state.  That's not all Iraqiya is doing.  The Iraq Times reports that they have formed two delegations.  The one headed by Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi will go to Erbil and discuss this latest crisis with various Kurdish officials including KRG President Massoud Barzani.  A second delegation (the head of which is not noted but is most likely Saleh al-Mutlaq) will remain in Baghdad and meet with cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr and with the head of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq Ammar al-Hakim. 
 
Al Arabiya reports he held a press conference today with Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi and Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq standing by his side as al-Issawi declared, "I call on the prime minister to resign, because he did not behave like a man of state."

Rafei al-Essawi is a Sunni.  He is also a member of Iraqiya, the political slate that came in first in the March 2010 parliamentary elections.  Nouri's State of Law came in second.  Per the Constitution, Iraiqya should have had first crack at forming a government and one of their members named prime minister-designate.  However, Barack Obama decided -- the will of the Iraqi voters, democracy and the Iraqi Constitution be damned -- he wanted Nouri to have a second term instead.   From John Barry's "'The Engame' Is A Well Researched, Highly Critical Look at U.S. Policy in Iraq" (Daily Beast):



Washington has little political and no military influence over these developments [in Iraq]. As Michael Gordon and Bernard Trainor charge in their ambitious new history of the Iraq war, The Endgame, Obama's administration sacrificed political influence by failing in 2010 to insist that the results of Iraq's first proper election be honored: "When the Obama administration acquiesced in the questionable judicial opinion that prevented Ayad Allawi's bloc, after it had won the most seats in 2010, from the first attempt at forming a new government, it undermined the prospects, however slim, for a compromise that might have led to a genuinely inclusive and cross-sectarian government."
In Iraqi eyes, it's actually even worse than that as one report maintains that Nouri was in conversations with former US Secretary of State and noted War Criminal Henry Kissinger.  That may not be an accurate rumor.  Whether it's true or not doesn't matter.  The fact that it's being passed around goes to the distrust Iraqis now have with the US government and, if it's not true, the selection of Kissinger is especially meant to offend.
 
 

RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Nouri uncorks The Crazy again"
"First Lady provides an update on President Talaban..."
"Brad Sherman"
"Howard Berman's fuzzy figures (Ava)"
"Inouye's funeral"
"Holiday thoughts"
"Mayan calendar"
"Christmas work party"
"noam chomsky rips apart his image again"
"Waste at the State Dept. is okay (Wally)"
"Gary Ackerman, Embarrassing Ass"
"Benghazi questions must still wait"
"The naive Jonathan Cook"
"F**k you, Bill Van Auken"
"Conversion therapy"
"Tapper goes to CNN, Roeper hugs racism, and more"
"Monkey Business"
"Unemployment"
"Full On Federline"
"Heads up"
"Fringe 'Black Blotter'"
"The end of the what?"
"Tapping and slapping"
"THIS JUST IN! PRINCESS LOVES PSY!"

Friday, December 21, 2012

Tapping and slapping


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

PRINCESS BARRY O CAN NOT LIVE DOWN PSY NO MATTER HOW HARD SHE TRIES TO SWALLOW.

GIRLFRIEND MET WITH PSY TWO WEEKS AGO, DESPITE, AS FUSE TV NOTES;

A lot of questions swirled around Psy's recent visit to the White House to meet President Obama. To some, it was, will Obama bring up the "Gangnam Style" singer's past lyrics about "killing fu-cking Yankees" and murdering "their daughters, mothers, daughters-in-law, and fathers"? To others, it was more pressing issues, wondering aloud if the Leader of the Free World has performed the most popular dance of 2012.

IN OTHER WORDS, HE TAPPED IT, HE SLAPPED IT GANGNAM STYLE. 

AND PRETTY PRINCESS BARRY O LAID BACK AND ENJOYED IT.

COME ON MEN AND WOMEN OF THE AMERICAN MILITARY, ARE YOU GOING TO DENY PRINCESS BARRY HER CHANCE TO GET SLUTTY?

FROM THE TCI WIRE:


US House Rep Mike Kelly:  Ambassador Burns, when you talk about resources -- only 1% of the budget -- so what is 1$ of the budget?  So what is our budget?

Thomas Nides:  Our budget is $50 billion.

US House Rep Mike Kelly:  Fifty-billion dollars.

Thomas Nides:  That's right.  Approximately 8% of the defence budget.

US House Rep Mike Kelly:  Okay.  So when people hear "1%" it doesn't sound like a lot of money but fifty billion is certainly a lot of money.  When we talk about resources -- and I'm trying to understand because I've listened to a couple of different briefings, I've heard  Mr. Pickering and Adm Mullen, I've heard you gentlemen today and  think maybe you're not the folks that should be here because, as Mr. Johnson pointed out, you weren't really part of the decision making process.  But what I'm trying to understand, what I can't get my mind wrapped around is everybody says this was a very unstable and highly volatile area.  Then why, for God's sake, would we take out the best trained people we have?  Why? Why did we move the SST team?  Was it because of money

Thomas Nides: Well as you're aware, as we spoke about earlier --

US House Rep Mike Kelly: It's just a yes or a no.  Was it because of money?


Thomas Nides:  No, it --


US House Rep Mike Kelly:  No, it wasn't because of money. Because we know the SST team really came out of the Department of Defense budget, right?  So it didn't have anything to do with your budget --


Thomas Nides:  The SST, as you are aware were in Tripoli and --


US House Rep Mike Kelly: No, I'm aware where they were.  And I'm also aware that Lt Col Woods had begged to stay there.  Mr.  Nordstrom, the regional officer, had begged to stay there. Ms. Lambe said it wasn't because of money that they couldn't stay, somebody made a really bad decision.  Now I don't have any idea of the voting registration of Ambassador [Chris] Stevens, of Sean Smith,  Mr. [Tyrone] Woods, Mr. [Glen] Doherty.  I have no idea how any of these folk registered.   It's not a matter of it being a partisan issue.  We have four dead Americans.  I'm trying for the life of me to understand how, when we say, [. . .]   You know what everybody says about the area?  It's a wild west show, nobody's in charge.    We're in a host country that can't supply us with the assets that we need?  What in the world were we thinking?  Why would we pull out people and make our ambassador more vulnerable?  And who made the decision?  And if neither one of you made the decision, say 'I didn't have anything to do with it.'  Because, what I'm finding out in this administration is that nobody had anything to do with it.   If you had anything to do with it, just say I had something to do with it and I made the decision.

Thomas Nides: No, we didn't.  We did not have anything to do with it.  That said we do need to make sure of --

US House Rep Mike Kelly:  Okay.  Are you aware of a GAO request from 2009 to do a review because they thought it was woefully -- a strategic review of our embassies were not taken and it was a strategic problem, a security problem, anyone of you aware of that?  We had a hearing on October the 10th, the GAO said that to this day the Department has not responded or done the review.  I find it interesting now we're going to do the review.  It's a little bit late.  So that hasn't taken place.  Now, I want to ask you, in addition to the four dead Americans, how many people were wounded that night?


William Burns: I think there were three Americans who were wounded that night and one of the wounded is still in Walter Reed Hospital and --


US House Rep Mike Kelly:   Just one of them?


William Burns:  I'm not certain.  I --


US House Rep Mike Kelly:  Any idea of how bad they were injured?


William Burns:  Yes, sir, the gentleman, our colleague, who's at Walter Reed was injured very badly --


US House Rep Mike Kelly:  Very badly.  Okay.


That's from this afternoon's House Committee on Foreign Affairs hearing.  Deputy Secretary of State William J. Burns and Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Thomas R. Nides appeared before the Committee to address the findings from the investigation by former Ambassador Thomas Pickering and Retired General Mike Mullen (former Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) into the events of September 11, 2012 when the US Consulate in Benghazi was attacked and Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, Tyrone Woods and Chris Stevens were killed.  There are two versions of the report -- the classified one and the unclassified.  The unclassified version has been [PDF format warning] posted online at the State Dept's website.

Senator John Kerry: I also want to emphasize that every member of this committee felt the loss of Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team in a very personal way.  We knew Chris Stevens well before he came before us for confirmation.  He had been a Pearson Fellow for Senator Lugar and the Committee.  We knew the depth of his character, of his intelligence and his dedication.  His death was a horrible blow in personal terms to the Committee as well as to the country and his family.  It evoked an outpouring of emotion on our Committee from the condolence book in our office in the Capitol to the private gestures of members of this Committee who shared their grief in private ways at Senate 116 signing the condolence books, touching the picture, saying a prayer.  Equally tragic was the loss of three courageous men whom I personally never met but whose families I had the chance to greet and hug when the military brought their loved ones' remains back, one last time, to Andrews Air Force Base.  That heartbreaking and solemn ceremony brought home the impact of our nation's loss.  Glen Doherty was a former Navy SEAL.  He was also from my home state and I talked a couple of times with his family.  Tyrone Woods was a former SEAL, Sean Smith an Air Force veteran, all people for whom service to country was their life.  So today we again say "thank you" to all of them, to the fallen and the families.  They all gave to our nation and we are grateful beyond words for their service and their sacrifice.

That was also today.  No, the Senator didn't show up at the House hearing.  John Kerry is also the Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Burns and Nides appeared before his Committee this morning.  The two were appearing in place of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who had planned to attend but then passed out over the weekend, injured herself in her fall and is on doctor's orders to work out of her home.  (Actually, she was ordered to be on rest.  She got her doctor to agree to allow her to work out of her home.)  Chair John Kerry noted that the plan was for her to now appear before the Committee in January (she can't appear this month, this was the last hearing for the Committee this year).  US House Rep Ileana Ros-Lehtinen is the outgoing Chair of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.  (Outgoing because the Republicans impose term limits, she'll remain in Congress, she was re-elected in November.)  Chair Ileana Ros-Lehtinen noted that Hillary  is also scheduled to appear before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs in January.

A few observations about the hearings.  Burns was a good witness.  Nides was testy and combative in the afternoon (House hearing).  That may make 'sense' to some.  And if you want to be simplistic (and stupid) you can assume that a Democrat being in the White House, the witnesses had an easier time in the morning when a Democrat controls the Committee (Kerry) than in the afternoon when a Republican controls the Committee (Ros-Lehtinen).  But that wasn't the case.  (And both Chairs conducted their hearings professionally.)  Nides was most testy when being questioned by US House Rep Russ Carnahan.  Carnahan is a Democrat and an easy going person in a hearing.  It was never clear why Nides decided to get rude but it was uncomfortable and Ros-Lehtinen tried to smooth it over after by thanking Carnahan for a photo of his grandfather (former US House Rep A.S.J. Carnahan) serving on the House Foreign Relations Committee decades ago.  (Russ Carnahan is the son of former Senator Jean Carnahan who was appointed to the Senate to fill her husband's seat after Senator Mel Carnahan passed away while in office.)  Repeating, there was no visible reason for Nides to have been rude to US House Rep Russ Carnahan.

It was not a good day for Democrats period.   If I'm a member of Congress who got damn lucky that the FBI waited until after the election to round up a member of my staff who was a sex offender (waited until after the election on the orders of Homeland Security), I really don't think I'd be on a high horse about how much I value accountability.  Especially since I didn't take accountability for providing a sex offender with the prestige to brag that he was working for a US Senator.  So, if I were that member of the Senate,  I think I'd try to keep a low profile.  Fortunately, that's the only embarrassing moment for the Senate Dems in today's hearing.   In the House?  Four embarrassing moments.  We'll note Priss-Priss.  If US House Rep Gerry Connolly wants to waste everyone's time with crap, well let's hope his constituents hold him accountable.  But in the halls of Congress, you're not a little girl or a boy going through puberty.  No one needs to hear your voice breaking as you go higher and higher.  Your mincing as you attempt to be rude hurts the ears and it doesn't come off stately or professional.  And your mocking of other members of the Congress was extremely unprofessional and something you should be ashamed of.


US House Rep Jeff Fortenberry would later declare, "I don't care to be lectured to about the need to be bi-partisan particularly in such an intolerant and uncivil tone. Now this is an important hearing.  There are serious questions here and to suggest that our motives are a ruse for political motivation to me is disrespectful and discourteous and I think unworthy of the levity of this important matter."  Though he spoke much later (he was the last to speak), he was referring to Connolly.  Fortenberry is correct that it was intolerant and uncivil.  


One of the embarrassing moments in the House will be covered by Ava tonight  at Trina's site, Wally's going to note money tonight at Rebecca's site and Ruth's covering the House hearing at her site tonight.
.


The Senate was more civil and more focused on getting answers to questions.  There was no speechifying or pretending you were actually a spokesperson for the White House (that happened in the House hearing).  Senator Barbara Boxer, if she's at the top of her game in a hearing, usually hits a note that others will pick up on in the weeks and months to come.  It was Boxer who, in April 2008 (April 8, 2008), wanted to know why the Iraqi government wasn't paying for the Sahwa?  She is the one who asked why these fighters who were paid to stop fighting the installed Iraqi government and the US forces were being paid by US tax payers -- $182 million a year.  Had Boxer not raised the issue, it might never have been raised and the US taxpayers might still be footing that bill. 


Near the end of her questioning, she slipped in the following.

Senator Barbara Boxer:  May I ask one last quick question? Thank you.  Was it appropriate to rely so heavily on Libyan militias to guard American personnel?  How was that decision made and how do we avoid these types of failures?  Are there standard policies and procedures for the hiring of contract guards?  Was Libya an anomaly or are there other embassies around the world where we're relying on the same type of forces?


Thomas Nides:  Well, as you know, Senator Boxer, we rely upon the Vienna Convention which we have for over 200 years.  The reali -- the fact for us on the ground is to rely on the local governments to protect us.  We can -- We have to do that because we do not have the ability to have enough troops on the ground and most of the countries would not allow us to so we are -- One of the tasks that Secretary Clinton asked us to do when we send out the assessment teams is to ask two very clear questions: A country's intent to protect us and their ability to protect us.  Sometimes those two are different.  And as we see what we refer to as the new normal, we have to constantly ask ourselves those questions.

Senator Barbara Boxer: Would you write to us and let us know if there are any other facilities that are relying on militia.  Thank you.  I thank you.

Again, when Boxer's at the top of her game, there's usually one key exchange that demonstrates where things are headed, how the issue will be seen by the Congress.  It's very likely that is the big takeaway from the attack: Why are militias being used, should we be using them?  (This will be addressed more in tomorrow's snapshot as we continue the coverage of the hearings.)

Thomas Nides was the disappointment from the State Dept.  The report Mullen and Pickering came up with had a list of recommendations, twenty-nine of them in fact, as Nides would declare to the Committee.  Yet he came before the Committee to talk about this report and its recommendations and he can't tell you how many items State has broken the recommendations down into?

This isn't a minor issue.  Nides, "The Task Force has already met to translate the recommendations into about 60 specific action items.  We have assigned every single one to a responsible bureau for immediate implementation and several will be completed by the end of the calendar year."

"About 60"?  If the recommendations have been broken down into action items and these action items have been assigned throughout the department, he should know how many there are.

And if you disagree with me on that he should know the exact number and not "about 60" since he's testifying to Congress, then maybe this will change your mind.  He also told the Committee, "Secretary Clinton has charged my office with leading a task force that will ensure that all 29 are implemented quickly and completely -- and to pursue steps above and beyond the board's report."

If he's in charge of that, he should know the exact number.  Supposedly, these have been assigned.  Then he should know the exact number.  Not only because he was appearing before Congress but also because he's the person Hillary has tasked to be responsible for ensuring the implementations are made.


Senator Boxer had another important issue that might take over the one above so we'll also note it.


Senator Barbara Boxer:  Secondly, the troubling thing here is that there were repeated requests to implement security upgrades in Tripoli and Benghazi and, as we look at this report, we know what happened.  And I would like to know, do you intend to put it to process -- Sorry, to put into place a process that would allow for a second review of these requests by another body in the State Dept?  Because it seems like what happened was the requests came and went to one particular individual or desk and then it never saw the light of day.


Thomas Nides:  Senator, the answer to that is yes. 

That's going to be it for today due to space issues.  To move from the Congress to Iraq, let's note US House Rep Mike Ross.  Roby Brock (City Wire) notes that the Democrat is ending his 12 years in Congress (he lost the election in November) and an interview he gave to Talk Business.  Among the topics he discusses in the interview is Iraq, "I regret my vote on going to war in Iraq. I sat in the White House with the President [Bush] and I'll never forget what he said. He said Sadaam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and if military force is required, it will be 'swift' was the word he gave us… Look, there's evil dictators all over the world. There's no doubt Sadaam was an evil guy, but he didn't have nuclear weapons, he didn't have weapons of mass destruction, and you know America has paid the price through the loss of lives, through soldiers that are injured in ways that will forever change their lives, and through the enormous amount of money we spent which helped contribute to this debt that we have today. Fighting in that war, and like I said, there's evil dictators all over the world, but we can't police the world. I think had we not done what we did in Iraq, I think we could have perhaps been more focused on what we were doing in Afghanistan, which I certainly supported."




Recommended: "Iraq snapshot"
"Talabani in Germany as people wonder what's next?"
"Chris Matthews' War Mongering and Bisexual Breakth..."
"And the world has turned my world upside down"
"ObamaCare"
"How bad are things really?"
"good going for penny marshall"
"They focused on extraction, not rescue"
"Dianne, Carl and John, shut the f**k up"
"Sam Donaldson The Drunk"
"Debra Sweet, kiss my Black ass"
"World Can't Wait jumps off the deep end"
"Oh, ObamaCare!"
"THIS JUST IN! THERE'S NO DRONE CONTROL!"
"When do we get Drone Control?"

Thursday, December 20, 2012

When do we get Drone Control?


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


PRINCESS BARRY O WENT TO CONNECTICUT -- WHICH IS ALMOST LIKE GOING TO THE STORM RAVAGED NEW JERSEY OR NEW YORK, RIGHT? -- YESTERDAY TO DECLARE THAT GUN VIOLENCE IN THE U.S. WAS UNACCEPTABLE.

MEANWHILE IN PAKISTAN, THE PEOPLE OF THE WORLD RESPOND THAT PRINCESS BARRY O'S DRONE ATTACKS ARE UNACCEPTABLE.


PRINCESS BARRY O IS PROMISING TO HAVE GUN CONTROL BEFORE THE U.S. CONGRESS IN 2 WEEKS

WHEN WILL THE PRINCESS STOP MURDERING INNOCENT CHILDREN IN PAKISTAN?  WHEN WILL PRINCESS BARRY O PRACTICE DRONE CONTROL?


FROM THE TCI WIRE:


Today a report was released on the September 11, 2012 attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi that resulted in the deaths of Tyrone Woods, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty and Chris Stevens. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee had a classified briefing today on the report. The unlcassified version has been [PDF format warning] posted online at the State Dept's website.
 
 
 
It's a damning and disturbing report that will probably most disturb those State Dept employees stationed overseas and their families -- including the largest State Dept mission overseas, the one in Iraq. As noted on page two of the report, "With State Department civilians at the forefront of U.S. efforts to stabilize and build capacity in Iraq, as the U.S. military draws down in Afghanistan, and with security threats growing in volatile environments where the U.S. military is not present -- from Peshawar to Bamako -- the Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS) is being stretched to the limit as never before."
 
 
 
It's hard to tell which details are the most disturbing? Take the death of the Ambassador Chris Stevens. His body can't be found -- is he alive or dead, at this point no one knows -- and, page 25 notes, after "many and repeated attempts to retrieve the Ambassador having proven fruitless and militia members warning them the SMC could not be held much longer, the Annex team departed the SMC, carrying with them the body of IMO [Sean] Smith." They left before Stevens was found -- dead or alive. Six people (presumably Libyans, labeled "good Samaritans" in the report) would find him later in the same area that "many and repeated attempts" failed to find him. He would be taken to the Benghazi Medical Center (the report states he was dead when he arrived but doctors attempted to revive him for 45 minutes) and when the US Embassy in Tripoli was notified that Stevens had been taken to the hospital? "There was some concern that the call might be a ruse to lure American personnel into a trap. With the Benghazi Medical Center (BMC) believed to be dangerous for American personnel due to the possibility attackers were being treated there, a Libyan contact of the Special Mission was dispatched to the BMC and later confirmed the
Ambassador's identity and that he was deceased."
 
 
It was not safe for American diplomats and those working with the diplomatic coprs to be stationed in Libya. It was not safe and they should not have been there. Magnify that 100 times and you have Iraq where the State Dept has its largest presence.
 
 
It was so dangerous in Libya that when the call came in that Ambassador Stevens was at the hospital -- remember, his whereabouts were unknown for hours -- the US was unable to send an American to a hospital to see if it was Stevens and if was alive or dead. That is appalling. That is a sign of how tremendously unsafe it was.
 
 
 
The report notes that Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods were killed in "an Annex building," which "came under mortar and RPG attack." Sean Smith and Chris Stevens apparently died from smoke inhalation. The description of the two of them them in a so-called safe house which was under fire and with only one ARSO-I (Assistant Regional Security Officer-Investigator) to attempt to protect them is shocking and chilling.
 
 
 
Among the findings in the investigation led by former Ambassador Thomas Pickering and Retired General Mike Mullen (former Chair of the Joint Chiefs)?
 
 
The attacks were security related, involving arson, small arms and machine gun fire, and the use of RPGs, grenades, and mortars against U.S. personnel at two separate facilities -- the SMC [Special Mission Compound] and the Annex -- and en route between them. Responsibility for the tragic loss of life, injuries, and damage to U.S. facilities and property rests solely and completely with the terrorists who perpetrated the attacks. The board concluded that there was no protest prior to the attacks, which were unanticipated in their scale and intensity.
 
 
 
There is so much incompetence on display. Let's note one section.
 
 
About 2150 local [time], the DCM was able to reach Ambassador Stevens, who briefly reported that the SMC was under attack before the call cut off. The Embassy notified Benina Airbase in Benghazi of a potential need for logistic support and aircraft for extraction and received full cooperation. The DCM contacted the Libyan Presidnt and Prime Minister's office to urge them to mobilize a rescue effort, and kept Washington apprised of post's efforts. The Embassy also reached out to Libyan Air Froce and Armed Forces contacts, February 17 leadership, and UN and third country embassies, among others. Within hours, Embassy Tripoli charted a private airplane and deployed a seven-person secruity team, which included two U.S. military personnel to Benghazi.
At the direction of the U.S. military's Africa Command (AFRICOM), DoD moved a remotely piloted, unarmed surveillance aircraft relieved the first, and monitored the eventual evacuation of personnel from the Annex to Benghazi airport later on the morning of September 12.
 
 
 
Let's again note this is the unclassified report. Additional details are in the classified report. If there are additional details to the above, they need to be revealed immediately because, as it stands, everything in the two paragraphs above except for Chris Stevens' phone call, is wrong -- not a little wrong, life-threatening wrong.
 
 
The scramble being described above is for an extraction. As the public report reads, extraction was the priority. A US Ambassador is on the phone with you telling you that his consulate is under attack and the line goes dead and your first throught is "extraction"?
 
 
No, not if you're following protocol. Protocol wasn't followed as the unclassified report presents events. Let's be clear, even with the extraction, protocol wasn't followed. The scramble being described for several hours inside Libya but outside Benghazi? Did no one receive training or did they just ignore training? There are SOPs in writing [Standard Operation Procedure outlines] of what to do in these cases. There should have been no scramble on extraction, the existing SOP should have been followed and if someone was too stupid to know what that was, again, it is written down. But extraction shouldn't have been the Tripoli staff's chief concern. A consulate was under attack and the safety of the people at the consulate (and annex) should have been the primary concern. Doesn't matter if a number of them were CIA (and there were a number of CIA present). Attempting to secure their safety should have been the primary focus for Tripoli with extraction being the secondary focus -- a distant second.
 
 
 
There was no knowledge of what was going on, who was alive, who was dead, and you're focused on extraction? Let's remember too that Tripoli wasn't under attack.
 
 
Valerie Plame's husband, former Ambassador Joe Wilson, wouldn't have made the mistakes that appear to have been made (the classified report will have more details and may explain the above). When he was going up against Sadam Hussein, he wouldn't have been channeling all efforts into an extraction while other Americans in the country were under attack. This is appalling.
This is disgusting for the message it currently sends State Dept employees who are overseas. Let's take Iraq. There's an attack on the US in Basra. Baghdad gets the call and instead of addressing the attack and trying to ensure the security and safety of those under attack, Baghdad runs around like a chicken with its head cut off trying to figure out how to order an extraction for Baghdad.
 
 
That is insane. Public hearings start tomorrow. This needs to be addressed and US diplomatic staff and those working to protect them in foreign countries need to know that, if an attack takes place, the response will be to rescue them, not for the unattacked to figure how to quickly leave the country.
 

Wednesday, December 19, 2012

Somerby's big lie gets rejected


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

THESE REPORTERS SEMI LEAVE THE SNARK THAT IS THE HALLMARK OF OUR SITES TODAY TO GET A LITTLE SERIOUS -- OR RATHER TO UNLEASH A CAN OF SERIOUS WHOOP-ASS ON BITCH BOI BOB SOMERBY.

FOR MONTHS NOW, THE DUMB ASS HAS INSISTED THE MOST INSANE THINGS ABOUT THE SEPTEMBER 11, 2012 ATTACK ON THE U.S. CONSULATE IN BENGHAZI WHICH RESULTED IN THE DEATHS OF GLEN DOHERTY, SEAN SMITH, TYRONE WOODS AND CHRIS STEVENS.  THE DUMB ASS HAS SEIZED ON A BAD REPORT IN THE NEW YORK TIMES -- IMAGINE THAT! A BAD REPORT ON INTEL IN THE NEW YORK TIMES! WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT IT! ONLY ANYONE READING THE DAMN PAPER BACK WHEN IT WAS SELLING THE IRAQ WAR!

AND EVERY ONE ELSE WAS WRONG BECAUSE THE STUPID LITTLE BITCH BOI READ AN ARTICLE.


"Iraq snapshot," "Iraq snapshot,"  "Iraq snapshot," "2 disgrace in the Committee hearing," "The White House's Jimmy Carter moment" and "What we learned at today's hearing


WHAT'S THAT?

THAT IS THIS COMMUNITY'S REPORTING ON A HEARING ON BENGHAZI, THE FIRST HEARING CONGRESS HELD, THAT C.I., AVA, KAT AND ONE OF OF US (WALLY) ATTENDED.  THAT HEARING SET THE OUTLINES PROVIDED BY THE STATE DEPT.  THAT HEARING ALSO REVEALED A GREAT DEAL AS JASON CHAFFETZ NOTED REPEATEDLY WHEN IT REVEALED MORE THAN HAD BEEN DECLASSIFIED.

THE WITNESSES WERE SUPPLIED BY THE STATE DEPARTMENT.  THEY WERE STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES.

FOR MONTHS NOW, THOSE OF US AT THE HEARING AND THOSE OF US WHO READ THE ACTUAL REPORTING ON THE HEARING HAVE ROLLED OUR EYES AS VARIOUS LITTLE BITCH BOIS LIKE BOB SOMERBY HAVE SEIZED ON CREATIVE DETAILS A REPORTER SUPPLIED HERE OR THERE AND PRETENDED THEY WERE FACTS.  THEY WERE NO SUCH THING.

AND AS ELAINE NOTED IN "BOBBY DUMB F**K," HE PAINTED HIMSELF INTO A CORNER ON THE LIE ABOUT A PROTEST TAKING PLACE AND WOULD NEVER ADMIT HE WAS WRONG.

TODAY CNN REPORTS ON THE GOVERNMENT FINDINGS FROM THE INVESTIGATION LED BY RETIRED ADM. MIKE MULLEN (FORMER CHAIR OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF) AND FORMER AMBASSADOR THOMAS PICKERING.  NOTE THIS FACT:

The report said "there was no protest prior to the attacks," which it described as "unanticipated in their scale and intensity."

GET IT?  FOR MONTHS LITTLE BITCH BOIS LIKE BOB SOMERBY HAVE LIED TO YOU, HAVE TREATED YOU LIKE IDIOTS AND FOOLS AND SAID THERE WAS A PROTEST.  THERE WAS NO PROTEST.  THAT WAS ESTABLISHED IN THE FIRST CONGRESSIONAL HEARING BACK IN OCTOBER.

BUT APPARENTLY YOU DON'T NEED TO ACTUALLY DO THE WORK TO STAND AROUND AND LIE WHICH IS WHAT BOB SOMERBY HAS DONE FOR MONTHS NOW.

WILL HE NOW CORRECT HIS LIE?

HELL NO.  BUT DAMNED IF HE WON'T CONTINUE WHINING ABOUT THE MEAN PRESS TREATING HIS COLLEGE ROOMMATE AL GORE BADLY.

THERE WAS NO PROTEST.

THIS COMMUNITY GOT THE COVERAGE ON BENGHAZI RIGHT AND WE DID SO BECAUSE WE ATTENDED THE CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS.  WE (C.I., AVA, KAT AND WALLY) SAT THROUGH THEM, WE TOOK NOTES AND WE REPORTED ACCURATELY AND IN DEPTH ON WHAT TOOK PLACE.

HAVING NOT ATTENDED A SINGLE HEARING AND APPARENTLY NOT EVEN CATCHING ONE ON C-SPAN, BOB SOMERBY JUST KNEW HE KNEW BEST ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED BECAUSE HIS WET DREAMS OUTWEIGH FACTS.

NO, HIS WET DREAMS ARE JUST EMBARRASSING.

IT'S PAST TIME FOR THE BLOWHARD TO TAKE A HARD LOOK AT HIMSELF.

THIS IS WORSE THAN WHEN HE ATTACKED FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR JOE WILSON AND CIA AGENT VALERIE PLAME.  THERE HE LIED ABOUT THE TWO BECAUSE HE WAS FRIENDS WITH FAILED REPORTER MATTHEW COOPER (WHOM THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION HAD OUTED VALERIE PLAME TO AND MATTHEW COOPER DIDN'T WANT TO TELL THE TRUTH ON THAT).  SO TO DEFEND HIS FELLOW BITCH BOI, BOB SOMERBY ATTACKED WILSON AND PLAME OVER AND OVER.

THAT WAS DISGUSTING.

BUT IT HAS BEEN NOTHING COMPARED TO THE LAST THREE MONTHS AS HE HAS 'CREATED' DETAILS ABOUT BENGHAZI THAT WERE REPEATEDLY IN CONFLICT WITH WHAT GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS TOLD CONGRESS IN PUBLIC HEARINGS.

TOMORROW WE WILL AGAIN BRING ON THE SNARK.  TODAY WE WANT TO POINT OUT THAT BITCH BOI BOB SOMERBY HAS BEEN ABOUT AS FACTUAL AS MSNBC PRIME TIME WHEN IT CAME TO BENGHAZI.  HE NEEDS TO TAKE A GOOD HARD LOOK AT HIMSELF.


FROM THE TCI WIRE:


APA reports Turkey's "Prime Minister Recept Tayyip Erdogan has said Turkey is prepared to bring Iraqi President Jalal Talabani to a hospital in Turkey after he suffered a heart attack".  A heart attack?  A stroke?  A coma?  Details shift depending upon the outlet.
What is known is that Jalal Talabani was taken to the hospital last night.  All Iraq News noted a statement from his office stated that it was a health emergency and that the President of Iraq was fatigued due to the recent political crisis and from his efforts to mediate the crisis between Baghdad and Erbil.  Alsumaria also noted the statement that it states he was exhausted.  Aaad Abedine (CNN) was among the first to note it was a stroke and in the most recent update quotes Kurdistan Alliance MP Mahmoud Othman stating, "His health condition is not very good."  However, Talabani's office throughout the day did not say "stroke."
By 3:00 pm Baghdad time, Suadad al-Salhy, Isabel Coles, Patrick Markey and Michael Roddy (Reuters) were citing unnamed "government sources" declaring Talabani in "critical but stable condition."  They weren't the only one citing government sources at that time.  For example, Alsumaria reports Talabani's health is deteriorating and that he is now in a coma according to "government sources."  Kitabat went with an unnamed medical source who stated that Talabani was "clinically dead.".  All Iraq News was noting that he has not regained conscious and that brain damage is feared.  They also noted that Talabani's office has issued a new statement declaring the emergency health condition -- again, Talabani's office avoided specifics  -- was a result of the hardening of his arteries and repeat the statement that his condition is stable.
Again, that was what was in the news cycle earlier today (it was morning in the US).  It's already Wednesday in Iraq, early morning hours, and details are not any clearer nor any more concrete.  In their headline, the Independent of London states "Stroke leaves President in a coma" (the text of the report doesn't mention a coma).  Adam Schreck and Qaasim Abdul-Zahara (AP) call it a stroke and note that some reports "say Talabani may be in a coma."  BBC News reports, "Well-placed Kurdish sources say he remains in a coma."  As American Enterprise Institute's Michael Rubin points out at CNN's Global Public Square, "The president's health has long been shaky; Talabani has made a half dozen trips to Minnesota's Mayo clinic in recent years for various ailments exacerbated by obesity and diabetes, compounded by years of excessive smoking and drinking. Talabani's extended absences have become commonplace. Just this past summer, Talabani was absent from Iraq for almost two months after suffering complications from knee surgery."
With the lack of clarity as to Talabani's condition, focus turns to what happens if he passes away or is unable to continue as president?  All Iraq News cites the Constitution and explains that should the office of president become vacant, the vice president would preside for no more than 30 days.  There would be an election (elected by the Parliament) within 30 days to determine who would be the next president.  We'll come back to that in a minute.  Kitabat notes politicians are discussing succession issues and, should Talabani step down, pass away or be unable to continue in office, most are stating that Talabani's deputy in the PUK, Barham Salih, would be the next elected president of Iraq.  Conservative Michael Rubin offers his belief that there will also be a push for Hoshyar Zebari.  Hoshyar Zebari is a Kurd (like Talabani and Salih) and he is in his second term as Foreign Minister of Iraq.  In that role he has traveled regularly to meet with various foreign officials (such as Euopean Union High Commissioner Catherine Ashton, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, etc.).  Lack of clarity also prompted Osama al-Nujaifi to return home.  All Iraq News reports the Speaker of Parliament was in the midst of his scheduled trip to India when he learned of Talabani's hospitalization and he ended his official visit to return to Iraq.  Though al-Nujaifi returned on his own, it is also true that as one the "three presidencies" noted in the Constitution (the others are the prime minister and the president), the Speaker of Parliament does need to be present in Iraq during a time of national uncertainty.
And if "national uncertainty" seems a bit much to some, please note that Alsumaria reports the Islamic Union of Kurdistan (a minor political party in the KRG) used today to launch a verbal attack on both Talabani and KRG President Massoud Barzani.
Jalal is in his second term as president of the constitutional republic of Iraq, his first term began in April of 2006.  Per the Iraqi Constitution, he cannot seek a third term.  (Jalal was also president in 2005 prior to the writing and ratification of the Constitution.)  He is a leader not only of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (one of the KRG's two major political parties) but also of the Talabani tribe.   While his official power derives from the Constitution, his prominence on the world stage results from his personal biography as well as that of his wife Hero Ibrahim Ahmed, First Lady of Iraq.  Dropping back to the December 5th snapshot:

Like many notable Iraqis, her family has a long history of involvement in Iraqi politics and in being persecuted.  Novelist Ibrahim Ahmad was her father.  He was also a judge and one of the first chairs of the Kurdistan Democratic Party (the first after it changed its name).  Moving up the political chain in Iraq has always meant creating enemies.  He would end up in Abu Ghraib prison for two years.  He would go on to become an editor of a newspaper and, more importantly to the political situation, the voice of the KDP following it's split into two parties -- the other, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, would be headed by Mustafa Barzani.    Today the PUK is headed by Massoud Barzani who is also the President of the Kurdistan Regional Government.  He is the son of the late Mustafa Barzani.  Mustafa's grandson is KRG Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani. 
Jalal and Hero have been married for over thirty years -- by all accounts a happy marriage -- and their own personal histories and experiences go to why Jalal has been an international presence. When Parliament votes in a new president, which may not be until 2014 when Talabani's term expires, it is very doubtful that anyone with the same national or international stature will be the president.  (Although Hero Ibrahim Ahmed would obviously have a similar stature and the Talabani tribe has long supported women politicians.  It was nieces of Jalal's that were most vocal in decrying Nouri's  Cabinet in January 2011 for it's lack of women.)  The editorial board of  Lebanon's Daily Star observes, "Replacing Talabani with someone as charismatic and experienced, with the same skills of mediation, and with as few blemishes on his nationalism, will be no easy task, especially for a government's whose reputation has thus far been far from clean."

Jalal Talabani's name came up today at the US State Dept's press briefing when NPR's Jonathan Blakley asked State Dept spokesperson Victoria Nuland for a comment:
Jonathan Blakley: Can we move to Iraq?
Victoria Nuland: We can move to Iraq.
Jonathan Blakley: Okay. President Talabani, he's sidelined.  I'm wondering what you know about his health because there's been a lot of kind of wild speculation on how badly he is right now.  Apparently, it's a stroke.  And also, do you -- are you fearful that with him sidelined, could there be some instability up there in northern Iraq and Kurdistan?
Victoria Nuland: Well let me start by saying that our thoughts are with President of Iraq, Jalal Talabani, his family, and the people of Iraq.  We wish him a full recovery.  I frankly don't have any information beyond what his office has put out with regard to his health.  I think you know that we have been urging calm, we've been urging dialogue.  We were pleased with the initial agreement between Peshmerga and Iraqi forces.  We want that kind of calm to continue.  We want stability to be observed, obviously, up there.  But we'll just have to see how he is going forward.
Some will see -- I know I will -- more genuince concern in the US Embassy in Baghdad's Tweet than in all of Nuland's blathering.
The U.S. Embassy in Baghdad wishes President Talabani a quick and full recovery.

As Jalal's fate remains uncertain, Nouri al-Maliki, chief thug and prime minister of Iraq, continues targeting journalists.  We noted twice last week that Fakhri Karim is being targeted by Nouri -- Nouri's office issued a statement this week attacking the Al Mada editor -- because Karim believes Iraq can be and should be everything outlined in the country's Constitution.  For that, for faith in Iraq's future, Karim is being publicly attacked by Nouri al-Maliki.    Al Mada reports today that Fakhri Karim has received orders to evacuate his home immediately -- military orders.  And to try to enforce them, Nouri sent a convoy of troops to Fakhri's home.  Kitabat points out that Fakhri was calling on Iraqi President Jalal Talabani to intervene and get the order rescinded.  That's not happening now because Jalal's in the hospital from an apparent stroke.  This should scare many.  In fact, people should be shuddering over the not-so-distant memory it recalls.
Let's drop back to December 17, 2011 because clearly some need their memories jogged of when Nouri last turned the military on enemies in Baghdad:
Ines Tariq (Al Mada) reports on the controversy over whether or not the country's Supreme Court has issued an arrest warrant for Iraq's Sunni Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi. Reportedly, Nouri al-Maliki wants al-Hashemi arrested. Nouri's political slate is State of Law. They came in second in the parliamentary elections. Iraqiya came in first. al-Hashemi is a member of Iraqiya. Iraqiya made clear Friday that things were changing and today they walked out of the Parliament.
Meanwhile Al Rafidayn reports Nouri al-Malikis asking Parliament for a vote to withdraw confidence in Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq. Nouri states he al-Mutlaq is no longer able to hold office as a result of an interview he gave to CNN. Tuesday, Arwa Damon and Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reported:


Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki is amassing dictatorial power as U.S. troops leave the country, risking a new civil war and the breakup of the nation, his deputy warned
Tuesday.
Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq told CNN that he was "shocked" to hear U.S. President Barack Obama greet al-Maliki at the White House on Monday as "the elected leader of a sovereign, self-reliant and democratic Iraq." He said Washington is leaving Iraq "with a dictator" who has ignored a power-sharing agreement, kept control of the
country's security forces and rounded up hundreds of people in recent weeks.
[. . .]
"America left Iraq with almost no infrastructure. The political process is going in a very wrong direction, going toward a dictatorship," he said. "People are not going to accept that, and most likely they are going to ask for the division of the country. And this is going to be a disaster. Dividing the country isn't going to be smooth, because dividing the country is going to be a war before that and a war after that."

Like Tareq al-Hashemi, Saleh al-Mutlaq is a member of the Iraqiya political slate. Dar Addustour is reporting that the homes of al-Hashemi and al-Mutlaq as well as the home of Rafi Hiyad al-Issawi have been surrounded by "tanks and special forces." Dr. Rafi Hiyad al-Issawi was the previous Deputy prime minister (2007 through 2010). He was the head of Falluja General Hospital prior to that and he is currently the Minister of Finance. Like the other two, al-Issawi is a member of Iraqiya.
[. . .]
[. . .] Liz Sly (Washington Post) notes that the 'government' is "unraveling faster than had been anticipated Saturday." She also notes, "In recent days, the homes of top Sunni politicians in the fortified Green Zone have been ringed by tanks and armored personnel carriers, and rumors are flying that arrest warrants will be issued for other Sunni leaders." For days? Plural. "In recent days."
He's again using the military to surround and intimidate someone he has labeled an enemy, the editor of Al Mada newspaper.  That should alarm and bother everyone.  That should bother Iraqis because why the hell is the Iraqi military -- especially considering the last days of violence -- being stationed at Fakhri Karim's home?  How is the editor of a newspaper a military target?   This is an attack on the press and it's appalling and it's disgusting.  This morning I called out the Committee to Protect Journalists for refusing to stand up for Fakhri.  In doing so, I noted that they didn't have their Iraq count correct (they list only 3 murdered journalists for 2012) and their new report was wrong because it claims that there were no murdered journalists in 2012 and I went over a Saturday phone call I had with a CPJ friend over their silence  on Nouri using the military Friday to shut down satellite channel  Al-Baghdadi in Iraq.  The friend called later in the morning to angrily inform me  that late yesterday afternoon CPJ did issue a statement calling that out.  So let me include the link and now let me note that we argued on the phone (loudly) about this Saturday, Sunday and Monday morning.  I'm glad they finally decided to issue a statement and let me say I was wrong this morning when I said they hadn't issued one.  Let me further note that they did a much better job than I did (not very hard to do) by noting that the radio station was Radio Al-Mahaba (the press accounts I read and linked to had the radio station being part of Al-Baghdadia, it's not, it's an independent women's radio station).   So praise to you for that but, please CPJ, explain to me exactly how many phone calls need to take place and how loudly I need to scream into the phone for you to note Iraq because you still haven't noted Fakhri?
Yeah, you finally noted al-Baghdadi.  But it's closed.  Fakhri is alive and Al Mada is publishing.  At what point are you going to defend them?  And when are you going to call out turning the military loose on the media?  In what non-failed state is that suddenly acceptable?
But please do let me know exactly how long and how loud I need to yell over the phone to get concern expressed for Fakhri.  I don't know him, I've never met him.  I know the paper he's the editor of, Al Mada.  I know it does strong work and has consistently had strong reporting.  If it makes a mistake, it corrects it.  It's a responsible paper and one that does investigative reporting. It should be considered a national treasure and a point of pride for the international journalism community. 
Like most papers covering Iraq, it has been repeatedly targeted.  Back in July, we were noting how both it and Kitabat were hacked and "May 25th, Al Mada reported on how their website was experiencing daily attacks causing the site to crash.  They were down for the entire month of June.  When they came back up last week (they came up on Thursday, June 28th, they were able to add new content Friday, June 29th), they really hoped CloudFlare was going to help.  But it hasn't.  They've been down since Wednesday."
So Al Mada's on it's own?  Fakhri is on his own?  So much for some sort of 'family of journalists' around the world.  Apparently there's family and then there's step-family and the step-children will be ignored and left on their own as though this weren't the 21st century but instead some Grimm's fairy tale.




RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"CPJ looks the other way as Nouri threatens Fakhir ..."
"Jalal Talabani's health crisis"
"The idiot Glenn Greenwald"
"Ms. magazine is covering what?"
"Tuition rates don't bother everyone"
"guantanamo"
"Lack of diplomacy"
"Thoughts on the Stones"
"Gossip Girl as it should have ended"
"Movies"
"Stephen Zunes shows up late for the party"
"They can torture and then they can hide it"
"THIS JUST IN! DON KUSLER LIES FOR LOVE!"
"A fool in love"