He chose war

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

FADED CELEBRITY BARRY O FOUND A NEW WAY TO GRAB ATTENTION AND STOP THE SLOW FADE TO OBSCURITY: GO TO WAR ON IRAQ.

WHITE HOUSE SPOKESPERSON JOSH EARNEST, WHO IS ALREADY TICKED OFF THAT BARRY O KEEPS CALLING HIM "NEW JAY," TOLD THESE REPORTERS THAT IT WAS BETWEEN BOMBING IRAQ OR "GIVING PUTIN A ROSE."

BARRY O, EARNEST SAYS, REALLY WANTED TO GIVE PUTIN A ROSE "AND A RUSTY TRUMBONE SO WE'RE COUNTING THIS AS A WIN."


FROM THE TCI WIRE:

It was a rough day for State Dept spokesperson Marie Harf, she had to field questions on Iraq at today's State Dept press briefing (here for it in full -- and we've excerpted the Iraq section here).



QUESTION: ISIL seized this dam up in Mosul and I was wondering if you all could put that in perspective in terms of developments there. Also, what can you tell us about the Administration’s thoughts about how to help these trapped Iraqi civilians, these religious minorities that are kind of in trouble? There’s some discussion right now about humanitarian aid and whether or not that might include airstrikes or – what can you tell us about that?


MS. HARF: Well, I’ll start with the dam and then let’s go to the broader question. Obviously, the situation on the ground remains fluid, but the latest information is that ISIL has advanced on Mosul Dam and taken control of it. We are extremely concerned by this development. The dam is a vital part of Iraq’s infrastructure, as it controls water levels on the Tigris River. It is also a key source of water and electricity generation for the Iraqi people. So we’re closely coordinating with the Iraqis – with Iraqi officials in both Baghdad and Erbil to counter this development. But also writ large, I’d just say a few points. I know there’s a lot of interest out there on this today, a lot of questions and information floating around.  We are actively considering what we could do in support of Iraqi efforts – what more we could do – and particularly to provide additional support for the Yezidis, also the Christian communities we’ve talked about. Look, this is a huge humanitarian crisis. You have thousands and thousands of people at risk of death from starvation. We’re reviewing what more we can do. Obviously, we’ve talked a lot about this over the past few weeks. We’re working politically with the Iraqis on the government formation process. We’ve seen some progress, and hopefully we’ll see more. But we are right now actively considering what else we can do given the extremely grave humanitarian situation that we see on the ground. You’ve heard my colleague at the White House who I think just talked about this as well, so we’re looking at options.

I want to establish a point here so let's stay with the above and then move quickly through other sections on Iraq from today's briefing.



QUESTION: A few questions. Marie, on the question of the Yezidis, do we have any estimate of the – a number of people in peril?


MS. HARF: It’s a good question. I’m trying to get some information from our folks on that. We know it’s – there – I’ve seen reports of 15,000.


QUESTION: Right.


MS. HARF: I’ve seen a number of reports. I’m trying to get a little more clarity from our folks, and let me see if I can do that after the briefing. We do know it’s not just the Yezidis, though. It’s also these Christian communities. I mean, ISIL has come out and said they have a desire to kill people because of their sect or their ethnicity or their religion, and that they’ve been doing so. And so what we’ve seen on the ground is just really horrific, and that’s why right now, immediately, we are trying to find more ways to help.


QUESTION: And is – policy-wise, is stopping ethnic cleansing or is fear of potential ethnic cleansing a core national security interest of this Administration?


MS. HARF: I think you’ve seen throughout this Administration that when we have the ability to prevent humanitarian crises, or when we have the ability to help once there is a humanitarian crisis, ease the suffering of people through whatever means possible, right – we have a number of tools at our disposal – that has been a core principle for what guides our action. It’s certainly not the only one.

[. . .]


QUESTION: But ISIL could continue its advance. It could turn on the Yezidis; it could turn on the Christian minority.


MS. HARF: It already has.


QUESTION: It – yeah. Well, it could step it up.


MS. HARF: That’s true.


Marie Harf says IS is turning on Yazidis and Christians.  Does she say much else?

I really don't think this would fly under Secretary of State Hillary Clinton or, for that matter, under Secretary of State Condi Rice.

If a group is being attacked, they need to be defended.

Did Marie issue a statement expressing outrage over the asaults?


In the entire press briefing, she used the term Yazidis only once and the only time she mentioned Christians was with the phrase "Christian communities" -- she used that phrase twice.

Given the chance to amplify outrage or register objection, a bored Marie takes a pass, mustering all the enthusiasm to decry religious intolerance as she'd offer deciding between roasted cherry and candy-shell red at her next manicure.

This is exactly how the administration has ended up with such a lousy reputation among many Christians, Jews and other groups.  The argument goes, a video on YouTube insults Muslims and Barack and others (including Hillary) are all over the media expressing dismay.  But Yazidis and Christians in Iraq are not targeted with videos, they're targeted with bullets, bombs, knifes, etc.  They're being killed not misentertained.

And where is the administration?

Why isn't Barack back on The View?  Why isn't he denouncing this religious persecution the same way he does a video on YouTube?

I don't disagree that Barack has many things to do on any day.  But if it's a question of too little time in his day, that's all the more reason that spokespeople like Marie Harf need to be strongly objecting.  (For those wondering why we're not quoting Josh Earnest, White House spokesperson, the White House needs to stop being so lazy and post text and video of today's press briefing.  They're lazy and embarrassing.  It's Thursday and their most recent posted briefing is from Tuesday.)

There is a cultural difference that is repeatedly ignored.  Most Americans have the attitude of get-over-it when a joke misfires or offends.  So the notion that you would apologize -- as a leader of the free world -- over some video posted to YouTube when you won't speak out loudly and condemn killing people for their religious beliefs?

I'm sorry, Barack chose to be president of the United States.  That does require you understand groups of people, not just your personal favorites.

And it is not shocking that some Christians in the US are dismayed by Barack's inability to address religious persecution -- especially when it is expressed in violence.

The gathering storm was finally spotted by the White House today.

Sky News reports, "A US official has said an 'effort has begun' to make humanitarian air drops over northern Iraq in the wake of ongoing jihadist offensive."  Benjamin Landy (MSNBC) adds, "The U.S. has been flying F-18 fighter jets, B-1 bombers and Predator drones over Iraq for several weeks on surveillance missions, which could be used as cover for the humanitarian mission or to protect the 40 U.S. personnel currently in Irbil."  David Jackson and Jim Michaels (USA Today) explain, "Iraqi aircraft have attempted to air drop supplies to the Yazidis but with limited success. Dropping supplies, particularly on a mountain top, is difficult as packages of food and water break open on impact. The U.S. Air Force has extensive experience with air dropping supplies, which they regularly do in the mountains of Afghanistan with accuracy."



RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"She doesn't know the meaning of precedent but want..."
"IAVA Joins President as VA Reform Bill Signed Into..."
"More towns fall in Nouri's Iraq"
"Saved by the what?"
"Worse than the websites gone . . ."
"What do we do?"
"Glen Ford dishes"
"Iraq"
"Barack gets rolled again"
"Mouser and Glory Hog"
"Tori Amos"
"Huge Bionic Woman fan"
"why this is news?"
"You have to be a bro to have a bro"
"THIS JUST IN! BRO CODE BREAKS!"

You have to be a bro to have a bro

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

FADED CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O IS BEING CALLED A LIAR YET AGAIN -- THIS TIME BY HIS HALF-BROTHER.

LITTLE BRO NOTES THAT BARRY O DREAMED OF HIS FATHER -- SOME SAY LUSTED FOR -- SO MUCH THAT HE OVERLOOKS THE FACT THAT BARRY SR. WAS A NASTY DRUNK WHO BEAT WOMEN.

BUT THAT'S WHO BARRY O DREAMS OF.

AND BOY DOES IT SHOW.

FROM THE TCI WIRE:

The Yazidis remain targeted in Iraq.  In fact, 40,000 are said to be trapped on a mountain  Laura Smith-Spark (CNN) explains:

 When radical Islamist fighters stormed the northern Iraqi town of Sinjar over the weekend, the Yazidi minority who call it home fled into the surrounding mountains in fear of their lives.

Now, trapped without food, water or medical care in the summer heat, thousands of families are in desperate need of help.

It's already too late to save dozens of children who've died of thirst.

Martin Chulov (Guardian) notes that 40,000 are thought to be at the top of Mount Sinjar and quotes UNICEF's Juliette Touma stating, "It's not like this is a one-off incident.  We are almost back to square zero in terms of the preparedness and the supplies.  Enormous numbers of people have been crossing the border since June.  The stresses are enormous, dehydration, fatique, people sometimes having to walk for days.  The impact on kids is very physical, let alone the psychological impact."

We should note that Nouri reportedly attempted to drop supplies -- including water -- on the mountain top over the weekend.  The drops failed.  They missed the targets.

This does not instill confidence in Iraq's pilots.  (Why helicopters were not used in the attempt is not known.  Nouri used planes.  Today, Al Jazeera reports helicopters were used by Nouri on Tuesday.)

Meanwhile the Financial Times' Borzou Daragahi Tweets:

Borzou Daragahi ‏@borzou 15h

You don't need to understand Arabic to be moved by #Iraq lawmaker breaking down in tears describing Yazidi plight http://english.alarabiya.net/en/webtv/reports/2014/08/06/Iraqi-politician-breaks-down-in-parliament-urges-solidarity.html …

Cairo, Egypt

Expand

• Reply
• Retweet
• Favorite

Glen Carey (Bloomberg News) speaks with Housam Salim ("head of the Solidarity and Brotherhood Yezidi Organization") who states, "It is a humanitarian tragedy.  Men were executed in the streets, women were kidnapped and raped. When we are captured, they kill us immediately, and they take our women."  Time magazine's Bobby Ghosh (Quartz) points out, "Leaders of all these minority groups have sent increasingly desperate pleas—to the Maliki government, to the US, to the UN—for help. But while some appeals have gone viral online, and the UN has engaged in its usual pro-forma hand-wringing, the SOS has gone largely unanswered as the world focused on Gaza. Now that the ceasefire there appears (fingers crossed) to be holding, there’s no excuse not to respond."

The US government could help but US President Barack Obama chooses not to.  This isn't about sending US forces into Iraq.  This is about dropping supplies onto a mountain.

Mick Krever and Ken Olshansky (Amanpour, CNN) report:

The foreign minister of Iraqi Kurdistan on Wednesday issued a desperate plea for American and Western intervention to halt the advance of ISIS extremists.
“We are left alone in the front to fight the terrorists of ISIS,” Falah Mustafa Bakir told CNN’s Fred Pleitgen, in for Christiane Amanpour.

“I believe the United States has a moral responsibility to support us, because this is a fight against terrorism, and we have proven to be pro-democracy, pro-West, and pro-secularism.”


Tuesday, US Permanent Representative to the United Nations Samantha Power issued the following statement:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

I condemn in the strongest possible terms the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant’s (ISIL) recent attacks on Sinjar and Tal Afar in Ninewa province that have reportedly led to the displacement of tens of thousands of people, many from vulnerable minority communities, deepening Iraq’s already acute humanitarian crisis. ISIL’s reported abuse, kidnapping, torture and executions of Iraq’s religious and ethnic minorities and its systematic destruction of religious and cultural sites are appalling.
The United States supports the Iraqi Security Forces and Peshmerga Forces working to defend these areas against ISIL. We urge all parties to the conflict to allow safe access to the United Nations and its partners so they can deliver lifesaving humanitarian assistance, including to those Iraqi families reportedly encircled by ISIL on Mount Sinjar. The United States is committed to helping the people of Iraq as they confront the security and humanitarian challenges in their fight against ISIL. Iraq’s leaders must move swiftly to form a new, fully inclusive government that takes into account the rights, aspirations and legitimate concerns of all of Iraq’s communities. All Iraqis must come together to ensure that Iraq gets back on the path to a peaceful future and to prevent ISIL from obliterating Iraq’s vibrant diversity.

###

That I don't like Samantha Power should be a known -- I've called her out here and in pieces at Third.  I don't care for her.

But I'm not going to pick apart her statement (a) at least she said something and (b) I don't really expect to be as one mentally with Samantha.

But if the US 'stands' with Iraqis, why can't they organize an air drop for those suffering on top of the mountains?

It makes no sense, the refusal.  Yes, US planes (commercial) are flying at higher altitudes over Iraq due to safety concerns, but the military could easily do a drop.

Not only would it be a humanitarian mission, it could also be used to do some spying on various groups as it passed over a portion of Iraq.


I don't care for Samantha Power, I think she argues for death and murder at the drop of a hat, I think she grossly misunderstood Rawanda as well as the after-effects.  But a drop of supplies, is not a call for war.  And if the administration cares, why is it Catholic Samantha speaking and only her?

What's happening to the Yazidis echoes what is happening to the Christians who were forced out of Mosul.  Mike Stechschulte (Catholic News Service) reports the attack on the Mosul Christians led to a march this month in Detroit where participants shouted, "Obama, Obama, where are you?  Iraqi Christians need you!"  Another CNS report notes Chaldean Bishop Francis Kalabat in Southfield, Michigan:

Bishop Kalabat had especially pointed words for President Barack Obama, whom he said has not done much to address the problem.
"I don't understand President Obama's words, 'The situation is an Iraqi problem.' Since when? How many thousands of American soldiers were sacrificed? Bloodied, lost limbs, lost their souls, lost their lives. How is this not an American problem?" Bishop Kalabat said.
He said the inaction by the White House has prompted the Chaldean community to pursue direct humanitarian aid instead, including via bills currently before Congress.
"This community, you have responded in the most beautiful way," he said, referring to a $60,000 collection taken up by local Chaldean parishioners about a month ago. "It was a drop in the bucket (compared to what's needed), but it did help."
He thanked the senators and representatives who traveled to Iraq to visit with refugees, especially from Michigan and San Diego, where the two largest concentrations of Chaldeans exist in the United States.


Unlike Barack, some members of Congress have been willing to speak out.  Catholic San Francisco notes a rally in San Francisco earlier this month:

Assyrian Catholics came via bus from the Central Valley and San Jose. Republican Rep. Jeff Denham of Fresno, whose district has 25,000 Assyrian Catholics, also spoke, criticizing leaders “for allowing a genocide to go on against the Christians of Iraq and Syria at the hands of ISIS without any action,” DeKelaita said.

But Barack won't address it and, as we saw in a State Dept press briefing this week, even when the targeting of religious minorities is raised to the State Dept, the spokesperson prefers to ignore the issue.




RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Nouri threatens to open 'the gates of hell' if he ..."
"When they close shop"
"What they're Tweeting on Iraq"
"no movement"
"Cling Wrap in the Kitchen"
"What to do when you're tired?"
"James Van Der Beek"
"Ay-yi-yi"
"Go away, Nouri!"
"Nouri attacks"
"Highlight"
"Little Noah likes the wimps"
"THIS JUST IN! NOAH'S MAD FOR THE WIMPY BOYS!"

Little Noah likes the wimps

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


SPREADING HIS LEGS WIDE AND HOLDING HIS BUTT CHEEKS APART, 'PROFESSOR' NOAH SMITH CUMS TO PRAISE THE DRONE WAR AND, MOST OF ALL, FADED CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O.

BARRY O -- COWARDLY NOAH INSISTS -- IS NOT A WIMP.

PROVING ONLY THAT THERE AREN'T A LOT OF TOUGH GUYS AT STONY BROOK UNIVERSITY.

IF THERE WERE, THEY'D ALL BE KICKING NOAH'S ASS.



FROM THE TCI WIRE:




Each day, things get worse in Iraq.  In an essay for The London Review of Books entitled "Isis consolidates," Patrick Cockburn offers:


In Baghdad there was shock and terror on 10 June at the fall of Mosul and as people realised that trucks packed with Isis gunmen were only an hour’s drive away. But instead of assaulting Baghdad, Isis took most of Anbar, the vast Sunni province that sprawls across western Iraq on either side of the Euphrates. In Baghdad, with its mostly Shia population of seven million, people know what to expect if the murderously anti-Shia Isis forces capture the city, but they take heart from the fact that the calamity has not happened yet. ‘We were frightened by the military disaster at first but we Baghdadis have got used to crises over the last 35 years,’ one woman said. Even with Isis at the gates, Iraqi politicians have gone on playing political games as they move ponderously towards replacing the discredited prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki.
‘It is truly surreal,’ a former Iraqi minister said. ‘When you speak to any political leader in Baghdad they talk as if they had not just lost half the country.’ Volunteers had gone to the front after a fatwa from the grand ayatollah, Ali al-Sistani, Iraq’s most influential Shia cleric. But these militiamen are now streaming back to their homes, complaining that they were half-starved and forced to use their own weapons and buy their own ammunition. The only large-scale counter-attack launched by the regular army and the newly raised Shia militia was a disastrous foray into Tikrit on 15 July that was ambushed and defeated with heavy losses. There is no sign that the dysfunctional nature of the Iraqi army has changed. ‘They were using just one helicopter in support of the troops in Tikrit,’ the former minister said, ‘so I wonder what on earth happened to the 140 helicopters the Iraqi state has bought in recent years?’
Probably the money for the missing 139 helicopters was simply stolen. There are other wholly corrupt states in the world but few of them have oil revenues of $100 billion a year to steal from.

That's a look at Iraq today.

The prime minister is the chief thug Nouri al-Maliki.  In 2006, Bully Boy Bush refused to allow Ibrahim al-Jafaari to have a second (non-consecutive) term as prime minister, arguing the 'new' Iraq (post 2003-invasion) was too young to survive a two-term prime minister, that it would be too easy to slip in a new Saddam that way.  So the Bully Boy Bush administration began demanding the prime minister be Nouri -- who had passed several tests with administration officials (including Zalmay Khalilzad) and with the CIA (who felt his paranoia would make him very easy to control).  And that's how nobody Nouri ended up becoming prime minister the first time.

Barack Obama was elected president in November of 2008.  We're doing a very simplistic time line here.  In 2010, Iraq holds elections.  Nouri al-Maliki's State of Law loses to Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya.

Last week, Frontline (PBS) served up "Losing Iraq."  One of the people they spoke with was Zalmay Khalizad.  He's generally considered to be a neocon and he was a supporter of the Iraq War as well as the US Ambassador to Iraq from 2005 to 2007.


Zalmay Khalizad: Then at the same time, the Iraqi election was front and center. And once the Iraqi election had occurred, Mr. [Ayad] Allawi’s party, called Iraqiya, won more seats than Maliki’s party.
I felt the success of those two parties also showed political progress in Iraq, the waning of sectarianism and the rise of cross-sectarianism, because Iraqiya was a secular party that had a lot of Sunni support but had some Shia support as well. For it to go from 25 seats in the previous election to 92 seats in the 2009 election showed increased support for secular or cross-sectarian and less support for sectarian parties.
And Maliki, who had been the leader of a religious party, a Shia religious party by one of its leaders, adapted by establishing a new party called the State of Law, which had nothing to do with a sect as such, and he was the second largest party. He too moved away from being sectarian.
These two were the two biggest political forces, the State of Law and the Iraqiya, afterward. So government formation became a preoccupation of the administration as well.

[. . .]

Frontline:  So the 2010 election takes place. The United States basically backs Maliki, is the one to sort of name the new government, despite the fact that he had less seats. Is that important? Some people say that’s a turning point, that if Allawi had been allowed to set up the government, if Maliki had been pushed out of the prime minister role, it might have allowed more of a chance for power sharing, more of a secure Iraq moving forward, alleviating some of what happens afterward that we’re seeing today.

Zalmay Kahlilzad: It would have been very important, in my view, to follow the constitution of Iraq in order to maintain support for the process and to show that being cross-sectarian pays off. It has political consequence.
And to ask Allawi to form the government, he may have or he may not have succeeded in forming a government. Although he was the largest bloc, he wasn’t the majority, and therefore he would have had to convince some Shia, Kurds and some of the Sunnis who had separate parties of their own to vote for him.
But that did not happen. Instead Maliki maneuvered, used the judiciary in a politicized way by getting a judgment from the court that said the bloc that even forms after the election, if it’s larger than the bloc that won the election, as they were before the election, can lead in forming the government. And we kind of bandwagoned with that, rather than pushing back and saying the constitution had to be followed.
And an even bigger mistake, in my view, was in retrospect, that once the government had been formed with Maliki leading, … the package that was part of the agreement on the staffing of the government — establishment of this new position of a senior group of a strategic council that Ayad Allawi was to chair — was never formed.
Some of the other agreements that were in place on policy issues did not occur, and we became much more disengaged after intense engagement in the formation of the government with a vice president and the president being hands-on, calling. Then we didn’t push, pursue, cajole to have these other elements also be implemented.
Then add to that the absence of a SOFA and total withdrawal and the deterioration of the region, all of this then impacted Iraq.

There are things I disagree with in the above (State of Law nonsectarian?) but in terms of a sweeping summary, it's better than most. The agreement he's speaking of is The Erbil Agreement -- the one giving Allawi a position over national security.  For over eight months, Nouri refused to step down.  In doing so, he brought the government to a standstill.  The political stalemate set a world record at the time for the longest period of time between elections and the formation of a government.

Nouri would not have been able to pull that off without backing from the White House.  Some point to Iran as well.  And they did support Nouri.  They did not, however, ensure his second term as prime minister.  The White House did.  The Parliament finally met (and named a president, a speaker and a prime minister-designate all in one day) the day after the US-brokered Erbil Agreement was signed.

The agreement was a contract -- a binding contract, US officials told the leaders of each political bloc.  In writing, the leaders agreed to give Nouri a second term as prime minister in exchange for concessions from him -- such as Allawi's national security appointment, the Kurds wanted Article 140 of the Constitution implemented, etc.

Nouri didn't win.

There was no reason for him to be prime minister.

The legal contract was how the US government got people on board with a second term.

And then Nouri refused to implement it and the White House played dumb.

In 2011, he's not implemented it.  By that summer, the Kurds, cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr and Iraqiya are among those publicly calling for Nouri to implement the agreement.

We need to wrap this section up -- it's all prelude to another portion of the snapshot -- so let's big picture it.

Nouri does not keep his word.  Not on The Erbil Agreement.  Not on the White House benchmarks.  Not on this, not on that.

I have called out Barack repeatedly here for refusing to stand up to Nouri.  A friend who left the administration in 2013 tells me I'm wrong.  Barack gave many firm words to Nouri over the years especially November 1, 2013.

Okay, I'm fine with being wrong on that.

The man who's all talk scolded the man who can't keep his word.  And nothing ever followed because Nouri can't keep his promise and Barack thinks empty words solve everything.

Barack should have long ago made clear that if X isn't met then the US pulls support.

By not doing so?

Peter Sullivan (The Hill) notes the results of the latest NBC News - Wall St. Journal poll including, "Respondents rated Obama's handling of foreign policy even lower, with 36 percent approving, also an all-time low for the president."  This a day after Connie Cass and Jennifer Agiesta (AP) reported on the latest AP-GfK poll which finds "38 percent find the situation in Iraq of pressing importance; 57 percent disapprove of Obama's handling of it."

Barack ran for the Democratic Party's 2008 presidential nomination on the lie that he was 'right' about Iraq.  (Barack protested it before the war started.  Once it started, he was supporting it.  That's public record.  I also knew this for a fact long before Boston in the summer of 2004 -- when Barack spoke to the New York Times.  He had already told Elaine and I at a fundraiser that 'we're there now' so opposition to the war no longer mattered.)

He deserved your vote, he insisted, because he was right about Iraq.

Does he look right now?

He took over in 2009 as violence was dropping and all he's done is throw gas on a fire to keep it going and to make it grow larger.


Does he look right now?

Andy Piascik (Connecticut Post) observes, "True to his preference for violence over diplomacy, Obama has sent a strike force to Iraq which grows larger by the day."

Barack's 'superior judgment' never was all that and events on the ground in Iraq threaten Barack's very image and power base.

The ongoing failure that is the failed state of Iraq is a reflection on Barack and, as usual, the dim bulbs of the administration have somehow managed to repeatedly overlook that fact.

The public doesn't appear to be.  The low marks Barack's getting have to do with his false advertising being revealed to be false.


RECOMMENDED:  "Iraq snapshot"
"The Palestinian Genocide by Israel (Francis A. Boy..."
"MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX CONDUCT INVITES NON-VI..."
"The political solution gets forgotten as quickly a..."
"They suffer because of Nouri"
"a day of action"
"Biggest vice of the summer"
"Look who's telling jokes"
"Skeleton needs to be sent home"
"Of course he's White"
"Psaki is more than a little tacky"
"TV and poverty"
"Promise"
"Global Day of Prayer for Peace"
"Blow out the candles"
"THIS JUST IN! IT'S ALL ABOUT HIM!"

Blow out the candles

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

CONCERNED ABOUT THE MIDDLE EAST?

NOT FADED CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O.

FRESH FACED WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMODEL JOSH EARNEST EXPLAINED THAT THE BATTLES IN GAZA, IRAQ AND ELSEWHERE ARE SEEN BY BARRY O AS "FIREWORKS" SET OFF TO NOTE HIS BIRTHDAY ON MONDAY.

"WE THOUGHT ABOUT TELLING HIM THE TRUTH BUT THEN WE THOUGHT ABOUT HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE TO EXPLAIN IT TO HIM, HOW WE'D NEED HAND PUPPETS AND PROBABLY A SLIDE SHOW SO WE JUST SAID, 'THAT'S RIGHT, MR. PRESIDENT, THAT'S RIGHT'."

FROM THE TCI WIRE:


For nearly a month now, the Israeli government has ordered an attack on Gaza.  The government's actions have led other governments to criticize -- including the US where State Dept spokesperson Jen Psaki has stated, "The United States is appalled by today's disgraceful shelling outside an UNRWA school in Rafah sheltering some 3,000 displaced persons." Mick Krever (CNN -- link is text and video) notes Israel's Minister of Intelligence Yuval Steinitz spoke with Christiane Amanpour for her CNN program and responded to criticism by some governments with the following,  "Sometimes I feel there is some hypocrisy in the criticism. Maybe [the] United States, Britain, France, and NATO forces can teach us from their experience how to minimize collateral damage -- for example, in their experience in Belgrade; their experience in Iraq; in Fallujah in Iraq; or in Afghanistan."


No, there was no minimizing of collateral damage in Falluja.  You can even argue that the November 2004 assault on Falluja -- using conventional weapons as well as chemical ones -- was all about expanding collateral damage as much as possible. There was no concern for safety.  Young boys, for example, were judged to be 'fighters' -- merely because they were male -- and not allowed to leave the city, forced to remain for the assault.

Pointing to the US' crimes and culpability does not mitigate those of the Israeli government but they do expose hypocrisy on the part of the US government.

And they expose stupidity.

Stupidity on the part of Yuval Steinitz.

He tells Amanpour, "This idea that if they are launching rockets from civilian neighborhoods or nearby, unfortunately, some schools or hospitals, then we cannot or should not defend ourselves? You know, what alternative to we have?"

The alternative you have is to not attack schools or hospitals or other places where civilians are.

Doing so to kill an element that may or may not be gathered among the civilians?

That's Collective Punishment and it's a War Crime -- it's a War Crime that no one in the Israeli government should be confused over.

But the stupidity here is the Collective Stupidity when it comes to Iraq.

Since the first of January of this year, Nouri has been using Collective Punishment, he's been bombing the residential neighborhoods of Falluja -- killing and wounding civilians.

These are War Crimes.

If Steinitz wants to object that the Israeli government is being wrongly criticized, he shouldn't be reaching back to 2004 or the past.  He should simply note that for 8 months now, Iraq's chief thug and hopefully outgoing prime minister has been killing civilians, committing War Crimes, and the White House, England's Prime Minister, etc., have all refused to demand Nouri stop these War Crimes.


Bombing hospitals?  Nouri's bombed Falluja General as well as Falluja's teaching hospital.




If you've not noticed in the last ten years, I do prefer precision from news outlets.  I try to be sensitive to all religions and especially to religious minorities.  But I am troubled by headlines claiming "thousands" of Yazidis were just slaughtered.

Thousands?

Thousands are being targeted and threatened.

But were thousands slaughtered?

If so, the body of your article should have backed that up at some point with a number.

If you didn't, your article's suspect.  And if you're claiming 'thousands slaughtered' in anticipation of thousands being killed, don't expect to be believed if/when thousands are killed since you've already stated that it happened.

Rudaw has numbers.  They say there are approximately 300,000 Yazidis in Iraq today with "thousands" having fled due to the violence and the refugee population of "Yezidi Kurds and [. . .] Assyrian and Chaldean Christians" have seen the deaths of 20 children from hunger while many of the elderly population have "collapsed from exhaustion in the summer heat."

What we do know is that the Yazidis in northern Iraq were threatened yesterday when three towns fell to fighters/rebels/militants/et al.  Adam Chandler (The Wire) noted Sunni fighters "swept across northern Iraq over the weekend, reportedly defeating Kurdish forces for the first time, and was rumored to have captured a vital dam near Mosul." Alan Duke (CNN) explained, "ISIS took control of Iraq's largest hydroelectric dam on Iraq's Tigris River, which provides power to the city of Mosul about 50 kilometers (31 miles) to the south, the commander of the Peshmerga Kurdish fighters who had been defending the facility said Sunday."



RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"The continued religious persecution in Iraq"
"Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "The Exhibitio..."
"Hejira"
"IAVA CEO: Passage of VA Bill only a ‘Band-Aid’"
"They can't all be terrorists"
"Mahdi reports"
"ObamaCare the nightmare"
"spider-woman"
"The lawsuit"
"Music"
"Impulse Buys"
"It takes a sexist (named Ed Rampell)"
"Snack Pack delivers"
"A few summer dressing tips"
"Barack's faux modesty"

• Truest statement of the week
• Truest statement of the week II
• A note to our readers
• Editorial: Foreign Policy in Focus and their stupi...
• TV: The Judges, The Juries
• Roundtable
• Open toes, closed mouths
• From The TEST Test Kitchen
• IAVA CEO: Passage of VA Bill only a ‘Band-Aid’
• August 6th Global Day of Prayer for Peace
• Green Party of Michigan says no robbing general fu...
• The targeting of Iraqi Christians
• On the picket line
• Highlights

"Torture Accessory"
"THIS JUST IN! TORTURED QUEEN TWISTS IN THE WIND!"

Torture Accessory

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

FADED CELEBRITY PRINCESS BARRY O ANNOUNCED LAST WEEK THAT "SOME FOLKS" HAD BEEN "TORTURED."

SINCE TORTURE IS A CRIME AND BARRY O IS ACKNOWLEDGING IT TOOK PLACE, THE ISSUE NOW IS FOR BARRY O TO ORDER HIS JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TO PURSUE THE LAW, TO OPEN UP INVESTIGATIONS AND BRING CHARGES AGAINST THOSE WHO BROKE THE LAW BY TORTURING "SOME FOLKS."

FAILURE TO DO SO WILL MAKE BARRY O HIMSELF GUILTY AS AN ACCESSORY.

REACHED FOR COMMENT, BARRY O TOLD THESE REPORTERS, "OH, I HAVE LOTS OF ACCESSORIES.  SOMETIMES I USED THEM TO SNAZZY UP A TIRED SUIT, SOMETIMES I JUST NEED THE EXTRA SPARKLE."


FROM THE TCI WIRE:



Iraqi Christians continue to be targeted.  Bishop Suriel, the Bishop of Melbourne - Coptic Orthodox Church, Tweeted:

Mosul, the cradle of Christianity in Iraq since the first centuries, is now purged of its entire Christian population. The ruthless and purposeful savagery of the attacks by the fundamentalist Muslim terrorist organization The Islamic State (IS) formerly known as Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), is truly inconceivable. Yet, most world leaders remain silent in the face of the murder of innocent children and horrific beheadings of civilians. We question why the media has not highlighted the unprecedented systematic eradication of the city’s entire Christian population. We also question why the Australian government have yet to comment and condemn this gross deprivation of human rights.


There is only silence.


Silence, that sends a resounding message of indifference to the murders of innocent lives at the hands of extremist Muslim groups. Silence, which attributes lesser value to the lives of Christians in the Middle East. Silence, that surrenders to the power of radicalism and the inhumane brutality of groups such as IS.

The silence has included the White House which waited until yesterday to have an official meet with representatives of Iraqi Christians.

We've been noting the White House needed to get active for some time.

Now it's becoming an issue with US House Rep Trent Franks releasing the following statement.




For those who are not helped by streaming video, here's the transcript of what's being said.

US House Rep Trent Franks:  Mr. President, last month, 55 colleagues of mine and myself sent you and Secretary Kerry a letter asking that you actively prioritize security and humanitarian support for the Christian community in Iraq.  We specifically warned you of the dangers and brutality of the terrorist group ISIS who are now rampaging across Iraq and terrorizing the vulnerable Christian population.  In the letter, we specifically pointed out that "parts of Syria and Iraq that have previously fallen under the rule of ISIS have witnessed summary executions, beheadings and even crucifixions."  And that "absent immediate action, we will most certainly witness an annihilation of a faith community from the lands they've inhabited for centuries."  Tragically, Mr. President, you simply ignored us again -- as you've done so many times before.  And now ISIS, the group you once likened to a junior varsity basketball team, is beheading its way across Iraq and has declared that there will be "nothing for the Christians but the sword" if they do not convert.  Mr. President, last week, ISIS torched an 1800-year-old church in Mosul and deliberately and insidiously destroyed the historic tomb of Jonah.  Last Sunday, for the first time in 1600 years, there was no mass in Mosul.  The head of Iraq's Christian community said, "For the first time in the history of Iraq, Mosul is now empty of Christians."  And now images of ISIS' beheadings, crucifixions, rape, torture and mass execution are all over the internet and social media.  Just yesterday, I met with a group of NGOs based in Iraq who told me that ISIS recently beheaded 6 Christians and then proceeded to play soccer with their decapitated heads.  Mr. President, ISIS's targeting of Christians has been systematic and horrifying and Iraq's Christians in the area are now nearly extinct.  It can rightly be called "targeted religious cleansing."  And, sir, it is a crime against humanity.  And yet, Mr. President, we have not heard a single word from you -- even as a literal Christian genocide is taking place at this very moment, you have not uttered even one syllable about what your administration is doing or planning to do to relieve or protect these persecuted Christians in Iraq.  So now speaking with you and pleading with you directly, sir, I once again repeat the words we wrote in our letter to you a month ago: "We urge you and your administration to urgently and actively engage with the Iraqi central government and the Kurdistan Regional Government to prioritize additional security support for these particularly vulnerable populations and provide emergency humanitarian assistance to those effected communities.  Absent immediate action, we will most certainly witness the annihilation of ancient faith community from the lands they've inhabited for centuries.  Mr. President, if you continue to ignore this Christian genocide in Iraq, history will record that it was you who idly stood on the sidelines and knowingly let it happen.


We have repeatedly noted the perception issue.

Maybe we should have spelled it out for the hard headed ones in denial?

Barack can't lose religious support in the US and have any chance of accomplishing anything in his second term.

He's had a religious problem throughout his national career.

He claimed Jeremiah Wright as an inspiration.  Then when Wright's sermons got a little bit of examination, Barack began to walk away and he (and Michelle) flat out attacked Wright on national television in response to Wright's remarks that Barack was just a typical politician.

Prior to Wright, Barack appears to have had no real encounters with a church.

Certainly, after becoming President, he failed to attend a church regularly.

Some of Barack's supporters state and write publicly that Barack doesn't really believe in God.

If that's true, there's nothing wrong with that.  Unless, of course, you go around insisting you do believe and you are a Christian.

Barack already has one religious problem -- what's going on in Gaza and how to respond without antagonizing certain elements of the US electorate.  He has another emerging religious problem that no one wants to talk about or acknowledge.

Barack is the deporter in chief.  That is registering in Catholic communities -- both due to the fact that a large number of Latinos and Latinas deported are Catholic and also because the Catholic faith has always had a strong activist wing. Barack is taking a hit there.

And now he's unable to decry the persecution of Christians.

He has stated he is a Christian, he has stated he was baptized and much more.

His failure to provide leadership on this issue hurts him.

Christians who care deeply about this issue, for example,  are left to wonder if Barack lied about his own faith?  Or if he just doesn't care about what happens to Iraqi Christians?

That's the thing about silence -- if you create it or foster it, others will rush in to fill the silence with something, anything.

And not everyone's been silent in the US.  Members of Congress have spoken out.  In fact, Tuesday, US House Rep Anna Eshoo's office issued the following.



WASHINGTON, D.C.—Congresswoman Anna G. Eshoo (D-Calif.) released the following statement after the House and Senate passed her bipartisan legislation to create a special envoy at the State Department to focus on the plight of religious minorities in the Middle East and South Central Asia. Co-sponsored by Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va.), the bill now awaits the President’s signature.

“Today the world is bearing witness to the persecution and eradication of religious minorities in some of the most imperiled regions on earth,” said Eshoo. “Christians in the Middle East and South Central Asia are being tortured, killed and live in fear simply because of their religion. The stories are countless, and the response has been meager.”

“With enactment of this legislation, America is appropriately stepping up its response and will be more capable in providing aid to religious minorities. A special envoy at the State Department will focus on the freedom and survival of religious minorities. Time is running out and this critical problem deserves to be treated as a high priority,” Eshoo concluded.



While some emphasize the silence, others play the numbers in their own coverage.  Gwynee Dyer (London Free Press) explains, "There were still about 60,000 Christians in Mosul when the United States and its sidekicks invaded Iraq 11 years ago. By last year, it was down to 30,000. Only two months after the arrival of the ISIS extremists, there are none. Most have fled to Kurdistan with nothing more than the clothes on their backs. They are not going back, and if they can they will leave the Middle East entirely."  All Christians have not left Mosul.

We've noted that a number have had no choice but to remain and are in hiding.

I've also a missed a point of the hiding in plain sight.  My apologies for that.  Voice of the Martyrs explains, "There is another group of Christians in northern Iraq too: those that were born into Muslim families but have consciously made the choice to reject Islam and follow Jesus. It is important to understand that these believers do NOT have a choice to pay a tax and save their lives. These converts are, in the eyes of IS, apostates. If IS fighters learned of their faith, they would give these believers two choices: return to Islam or be killed."



RECOMMENDED: "I Hate The War"
"Drone Protester Aquitted by Jury"
"Iraq snapshot"
"Green Party of Michigan opposes millions being sto..."
"Psst, White House"
"Iraq snapshot"
"Stop the Wars, Stop the Warming!"
"Iraq snapshot"
"Idiot of the week"
"Guardians of the Galaxy"
"Janis Ian's Folk Is The New Black"
"Pizza tip in the Kitchen"
"Don't Drink The Water, DMB told you not to"
"Justice?"
"gaza and war criminal blair"
"Context with regards to Iraq"
"Silent but deadly"
"The dithering Barack"
"The Bill Ayers Foot In Mouth award goes to . . ."
"Tasteless"
"lower ratings"
"We used to be concerned about the environment"
"Those 'relateble' Clintons"
"Where did the dinos go?"
"Revenge"
"Gaza, Iraqi Christians and more"
"Your first clue Elizabeth Warren is a fake?"
"The attack on our rights"
" Phyllis Bennis, stop faking"
"Gaza, Iraqi Christians and more"
"Cindy boxes Boxer"
"Comic-con?"
"Crooked Lois Lerner"
"Spoilers: Lucy"
"Hotcakes"
"the digital rev was supposed to make life easier."
"Just what the world needed"
"Is she inspired or insane?"
"THIS JUST IN! WHINERS ARE UNHAPPY!"

Is she inspired or insane?

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

WILL SHE BE ADMIRED FOR STAYING AWAY FROM THE FRAY OR WILL SHE BE CRUCIFIED?

F.O.L. MICHELLE IS, THUS FAR, AVOIDING THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL.  THAT MIGHT BE A SMART MOVE FOR HER, SHE IS SUPPOSED TO BE F.O.L. OF THE ENTIRE U.S., NOT JUST ONE PARTY.

BUT SOME CRITICS -- SCARED OF LOSSES -- ARE CARPING.

REACHED FOR COMMENT. JEFF DISANTIS, MICHELLE NUNN'S CAMPAIGN MANAGER, WHINED, "WHY WON'T WHITE HOUSE MICHELLE CAMPAIGN FOR MY MICHELLE!  THEY'RE BOTH MICHELLES!  CAN'T A MICHELLE HELP A MICHELLE OUT!!!!"

FROM THE TCI WIRE:



At the US State Dept this morning, Secretary of State John Kerry pompously declared, "What is unfolding in Ukraine has already gone on for far too long. It’s well past time for the violence to stop and for the people of Ukraine to begin the process of rebuilding their country and rebuilding it in a way that can have a relationship with Russia, with the West."

What's going on in Ukraine "has already gone on for far too long"?

What about Iraq?

John Kerry does grasp that in the October 2011, the US mission in Iraq was handed off from the Defense Dept to the State Dept, right?

Of course he does.

He was the Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee when that happened.  As such, he and his committee provided direct oversight -- or were supposed to -- of the State Dept.

He is fully aware that the State Dept, since 2011, has received billions of US tax dollars to spend in Iraq.

So if he wants to stomp his feet on Ukraine or on Syria or whatever catches his cat's fancy for this or that 30-second period, when exactly does John plan to focus on Iraq.

Again, the US mission in Iraq is under the State Dept.  That hand off took place nearly three years ago and while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State at that time, as Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair, John Kerry was following what was happening.

And he should be following how the department he heads moves further and further away from a diplomatic mission in Iraq.  Dan Lamothe (Washington Post) reports on the continued decay of the US State Dept:


The State Department has approved the possible sale of 5,000 AGM-114K/N/R missiles and related parts and training, Pentagon officials said. The estimated cost of the deal would be about $700 million, and dwarf previous shipments of Hellfire missiles to Iraq.

Diplomacy is apparently dead -- as is compliance with the law and common sense.

The law prohibits the US government from supplying weapons to any government that terrorizes their own people.

How do Hellfire missiles help the Iraqi people?

They don't.

National Iraqi News Agency reports:

A source at Fallujah General Hospital said on Tuesday that the number of martyrs among civilians since the outbreak of the crisis by more than 7 months reached 672 martyrs, 17 percent of them are children and 19 percent of them women, while the total number of wounded civilians, 2174 wounded, 19 percent children and 21 percent women..

The source told the National Iraqi News Agency / NINA / that This is not the final outcome, noting that there were martyrs were buried without going back to the hospital, and wounded were treated at health centers close to their places.


And Barack's answer is more weapons to Nouri?

So that Nouri can kill more civilians?


Falluja is just one city.  Also being bombed of late is Jurf al-Sakhar.  Ali A. Nabhan and Nour Malas (Wall St. Journal) report:

The airstrikes on Monday reflected that policy. It is not clear how many among the dead were militants, but local media reported at least one child was killed. Human rights groups have begun to criticize the Iraqi government for bombing civilian areas in its campaign against insurgents.

Human Rights Watch last week said it documented at least 75 civilians killed and hundreds wounded in government airstrikes—at times using the crude improvised explosives known as barrel bombs—on the cities of Fallujah, Beiji, Mosul, and Tikrit since June 6.

So the law -- including the Leahy Amendment -- is being violated by the White House.

Common sense?

Dropping back to the July 23rd snapshot for this from that day's House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing:


US House Rep Ileana Ros-Lehtinen:  Last month, Secretary [of State John] Kerry said nobody expected ISIL to capture Mosul.  Even if  our foreign military assistance had not  quite kicked in yet, shouldn't our information and intelligence gathering efforts have been able to get a better assessment, a more accurate assessment, of Samarra and Mosul?  And it has been widely reported that while taking control of Mosul, ISIL seized rather large quantities of US supplied foreign military assistance and made off with nearly half a billion dollars from the local banks -- in addition to tanks and humvees that were taken.  US officials were quick to deny the claims of ISIL-- that they captured advance weaponry such as Black Hawk helicopters.  Did they capture any caravan aircraft with advanced weapon platforms?  And did they take any other advanced weaponry like MPADS [Man-portable air-defense systems]?  US military equipment and hundreds of millions of dollars aren't the only items that ISIL has seized. The Iraqi government confirmed that ISIL took uranium from Mosul University.  What is the status of that uranium?  What could ISIL use that for?  


Common sense dictates that when you're losing uranium, weapons, millions of dollars, you're really not the person to supply with more weapons.

But there's not much common sense in the US government.




RECOMMENDED:  "Iraq snapshot"
"Nouri's killed 672 people in one city alone"
"Iraq snapshot"
"Nouri wants a third term and a nation of clones an..."
"Hejira"
"Wednesday: IAVA and Defense One Partner to Explore..."
"Senator Blunt’s Bill To Promote Religious Freedom ..."
"I Hate The War"
"Iraq snapshot"
"Like a bad odor, Nouri refuses to go away"
"Corporations corrupt space? (Extant)"
"Idiot of the week?"
"Extant the creepy"
"What happens"
"Lucy"
"Extant moves quickly"
"bryan singer"
"Linda Ronstadt talks many topics"
"How long will Carol Vogel have a job?"
"The legal mind"
" Mikey Likes It!"
"24"
"how the mighty have fallen"
"No, this is CNN"
"Be careful what you wish for"
"Who has rights?"
"Detroit"
"Favorite summer dips"
"50 shades of what?"
"Linda Ronstadt"

Golfing again

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

BARRY O GOES GOLFING AGAIN.

HE'S NOT VERY ENGAGED WITH WHAT'S GOING ON IN GAZA, IRAQ OR UKRAINE.

BUT HE'S A MENACE IN THE SAND TRAP.

REACHED FOR COMMENT, BARRY O TOLD THESE REPORTERS, "PUT PUT FOR THE FUN OF IT.  PUT PUT.  FOR THE FUN OF IT.  PUT PUT."


FROM THE TCI WIRE:



Wednesday morning, the State Dept's Brett McGurk and the Defense Dept's Elissa Slotkin appeared before the House Foreign Affairs Committee to talk about Iraq.  Thursday, they appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to talk again about Iraq.  We're going to spend another day on the Senate hearing and we'll kick things off with this lengthy exchange.


Senator John McCain: So if we did initiate an air to ground campaign, without including Syria, they would have a sanctuary in Syria.  Would you agree with that?

Brett McGurk: One of the reasons I defer to my colleague Elissa, we're focused on training the moderate opposition and have a face that's able to deny safe haven and deny space to the -- to the ISIL networks in Syria.

Senator John McCain:  Well probably so but the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have both stated publicly that the Iraqi security forces are not capable of regaining the territory they lost to ISIS on their own, without external assistance.  Do you agree with the Secretary of the Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs?

Brett McGurk: The Iraqi security forces have moved, uh, a little bit out of -- We had this snowballing effect out of --

Senator John McCain: Again, asking if you agree or disagree with the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who both stated publicly that the Iraq security forces are not capable of regaining the territory they've lost to ISIS on their own without external assistance?  Do you agree or disagree?

Brett McGurk:  They could not conduct combined operations -- which it would take -- without some enabling support.

Senator John McCain: So, since we all rule out boots on the ground, that might mean the use of air power as a way of assisting them.  Would you agree with that?

Brett McGurk:  Uh, Senator, I just -- uh, all of these options, potential options for the president, are being looked at and, as Elissa said, we're not going to crowd the table --

Senator John McCain: And how long have we been "looking at them," Mr. McGurk?

Brett McGurk:  Uh, well --

Elissa Slotkin: Sir, the assessments came in last week and --

Senator John McCain: So the assessments came in last week.  How long have we been assessing?

Elissa Slotkin:  I think we assessed for two solid weeks.

Senator John McCain:  I think it's been longer than that since the collapse of the -- of the Iraqi military, Ms. Slotkin.

Elissa Slotkin:  I think the president made his announcement on June 19th.  And then he instructed that assessors go to Baghdad.  They flew there and began their assessments immediately.

Senator John McCain: I see.  And so far we have launched no air strikes in any part of Iraq, right?

Elissa Slotkin:  That's correct.

Senator John McCain:  And you stated before that we didn't have sufficient information to know which targets to hit.  Is that correct?

Elissa Slotkin: I think we have adequately improved our intelligence --

Senator John McCain: But at the time, did you believe that we didn't have sufficient information in order to launch airstrikes?

Elissa Slotkin:  I think that we -- given our extremely deliberate process about launching any airstrike we would --

Senator John McCain:  You know, it's interesting.  I asked: Do you think at that we didn't have sufficient information to launch airstrikes against ISIS?

Elissa Slotkin: I think given the standards the United States has for dropping ordinance, no, we did not have the intelligence we would ever want at that time.

Senator John McCain: I find that interesting because none of the military that I've talked to, that served there -- and even those who flew there -- they're absolutely convinced, as I am, that when you have convoys moving across the desert in open train, you can identify and strike them.  We know that they were operating out of bases in Syria -- out in the open, in the desert.  So with those of us who have some military experience in the advocacy of air power, we heartily disagree.  And that isn't just me, it comes from military leaders who served there.   


There are a number of reasons to note the above.  One reason we did?

Jonathan S. Landay (McClatchy Newspapers) reports one aspect of the hearing:

Like the rest of the world, the U.S. government appeared to have been taken aback last month when Mosul, Iraq’s second largest city, fell to an offensive by jihadis of the Islamic State that triggered the collapse of five Iraqi army divisions and carried the extremists to the threshold of Baghdad.
A review of the record shows, however, that the Obama administration wasn’t surprised at all.

I don't like people who lie.

In the House hearing especially, there was a pretense of 'I am so shocked!'  Often with a claim of 'It turns out that late last year, Nouri al-Maliki asked the White House for air strikes.'

John McCain is no friend of the White Houses.  That is a large chunk of his exchange in the Senate hearing.

You can agree or disagree with the points he raises.  But you will notice he does not pretend he is shocked or act like he just learned of Nouri's request from last year for air strikes.

You can refer to the November 1, 2013 snapshot covering Nouri's face-to-face meet up with Barack Obama to grasp that there's no way anyone can pretend to be shocked by today's events.

Yet a number of House members pretended and played -- and lied -- during Wednesday's hearing.  And a number of reporters are eager to join them in pretending and playing.

Another topic that came up repeatedly was Nouri's failures.

For example, former US Ambassador to Iraq James Jeffrey told the Senate Committee on Thursday:

Despite the election of a moderate Sunni Arab speaker of the Iraqi parliament two weeks ago, there is no certainty that Iraqi political leaders and parliament can overcome their deep divisions to create an inclusive new government as rightly demanded by the U.S. Government. For starters, any such government must not be headed by PM Maliki. He has lost the trust of many of his citizens, including a great many Shia Arabs, yet is still trying to hold on to power. In this uncertain situation, while pushing the traditional approach, we must simultaneously prepare to deal with an Iraq semi-permanently split into three separate political entities, and to shape our approach to the Sunni Arab, Shia Arab, and Kurdish populations and to the central government on that basis.

Nouri "is still trying to hold on to power"?  Michael Gregory and Larry King (Reuters) reported Friday morning that Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistanti's Friday message was that politicians must stop "clinging to their posts, in an apparent reference" to Nouri who refuses to step aside.

Jeffrey thinks the answer is "an inclusive new government" and one that "must not be headed by PM Maliki."  In the same Thursday hearing, it was wondered if the State Dept was backing Nouri and at what cost?


Senator Jeff Flake:  Is it possible at all, in the State Dept's view to move ahead with Maliki in charge?  Will there be sufficient trust -- any trust -- in the Sunni population that he'll be inclusive enough?  His government?  Or does our strategy rely on somebody else coming in?

Brett McGurk: Again, it's going to be very difficult for him to form a government.  So they're -- they're facing that question now -- now that the president's been elected to face the question of the prime minister.  Any prime minister, in order to form a government, is going to have to pull the country together.  And so who ever the leader is, it's someone who's going to have to demonstrate that just to get the votes he needs to remain -- or to, uh, uh, be sworn into office.  So that's something that's going to unfold fairly rapidly over the coming days.  Again, there's a 15 day timeline to nominate a prime minister [designate] and then whomever the nominee is then has to form a Cabinet and present it to the Parliament to form a government.

 While Nouri has lost the support of many -- including, reportedly, the support of the Iranian government, the US government continues to support him and not just as evidenced by Brett's slip-up ("he needs to remain") but also by the exchange in Friday's State Dept press briefing moderated by Marie Hark

QUESTION: Right. Yeah, I wanted to ask you if there’s any progress on the forming of the new government. Do you have any updated --

MS. HARF: Well, they selected a president and --

QUESTION: Right.

MS. HARF: -- they have up to 15 day – excuse me, up to 15 days, I think, to name candidates for prime minister. And then after that, I think up to 30 to actually form a government. I can check on the dates. But they have now a speaker, they have a president, and then next up is a prime minister.

QUESTION: Should we read from the testimony that Mr. McGurk did on Capitol Hill that you are losing patience with Mr. Maliki, you’d like to see someone else take his place?

MS. HARF: You ask this question a different way every day. We don’t support --

QUESTION: Yes.

MS. HARF: -- and I’ll give you the same answer, so let’s – for consistency, let’s do that again today. We don’t support any one candidate, any one person to be prime minister. We’ve said it needs to be someone who is interested in governing inclusively. We’ve also said we’ve had issues in the past with how Prime Minister Maliki has governed. But again, it’s not up for us to decide. It’s up for the Iraqis to decide.

QUESTION: Right. But your confidence in Maliki’s abilities to rule inclusively, as you said, is --

MS. HARF: Well, we’ve had issues in the past.

QUESTION: -- not ironclad.


MS. HARF: We’ve had issues in the past.


The State Dept has "had issues"?  With a War Criminal, they've "had issues"?




RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Like a bad odor, Nouri refuses to go away"
"Iraq snapshot"
"47% of Post-9/11 Veterans Know a Fellow Vet Who Ha..."
"Levin statement at Senate Finance Committee hearin..."
"Wolf: Genocide Taking Place In Iraq"
"ObamaCare thoughts by Dr. George Flinn (Republican..."
"War Crimes in Gaza? Genocide?"
"The Palestinian Right and the American Left (David..."
"More US troops sent into Iraq"
"Am I the only one getting sick of Felicia Day? (Cagney and Lacey fans, pay attention)"
"Kristin Bauer van Straten -- Roz Kelley without the sparkle"
"Chris Pratt, put your clothes on"
"actually, billy joel, we did start the fire"
"James Blake"
"Idiot of the week"
"A functioning government"
"Media"
"Mistresses:The unmentioned workplace gets noted"
"Mistresses heads for Melrose Place"
"When I used to sing for you"
"Drive All Night"
"All American Boy"
"Peace is Just a Word"
"Till They All Get Home"
"Carly's "Hold Out Your Heart""
"Spiral Down"
"Kate Nash's "Foundations""
"tori amos' hidden gem"
"Cause you were my protection from the rain inside"
"When Barry gets behind closed doors and he lets his hair hang long . . ."
"THIS JUST IN! HE NEEDS TO LET HIS HAIR DOWN!"