Hillary has another explanation

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

CRANKY CLINTON'S STEPPED IN IT YET AGAIN.

AFTER WEAVING A COLORFUL TALE REGARDING HER E-MAILS AND INSISTING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE JUST HAD TO TRUST HER, TURNS OUT SHE WAS BEING DISHONEST AND LYING YET AGAIN.

REACHED FOR COMMENT, HILLARY SNAPPED AT THESE REPORTERS, "LOOK, NO ONE EXPECTS ME TO BE HONEST AT FIRST! EVERY ONE KNOWS I AM GOING TO LIE.  THAT'S WHAT I DO.  THAT'S WHO I AM.  AND THAT'S WHY AMERICA SHOULD VOTE FOR ME."

AT THAT POINT, HILLARY EMITTED A SCREAM AND BIT THE HEAD OFF A SMALL CHILD BEFORE SCURRYING OFF UNDER A ROCK.


FROM THE TCI WIRE:



On the Thursday broadcast of ABC World News with David Muir, Iraq was covered:

David Muir: Now to new fall out after our ABC investigation last night. It involves the fight against ISIS known for those awful videos, lining up their victims on the beach.  And now a new concern.  Are some of the Iraqi forces -- trained and paid for by US taxpayers -- using techniques that are just as brutal?  Well the State Dept tonight responding to our report and ABC's chief investigative reporter Brian Ross back on the job tonight.

Brian Ross:  The State Dept called these scenes today serious and distuuing.  Brutal images of what appear to be Iraqi forces and militias carrying out, celebrating, torture and beheadings.  In this torture scene, two US weapons against the wall. This video shows two civilians, pleading for their lives, about to be shot dead.  A man with an American supplied weapon walks by, a gunman with what appears to be the insignia of Iraqi Special Forces caught on tape.

US State Dept spokesperson Jen Psaki: Their behavior must be above reproach or they risk being painted with the same brush as ISIL fighters.


Brian Ross:  The Pentagon says it has already cut off money to some Iraqi units because of gross human rights violations.  But Senator Patrick Leahy says the ABC News report shows the government should cut off money to more Iraqi units.

Senator Patrick Leahy: When you look at at the videos and look at the uniforms being worn, do we really want to say the US condones that?

Brian Ross: US officials tonight tell ABC News that America's top military leader Gen Martin Dempsey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, has repeatedly warned Iraqi leaders about the conduct of the Iraqi military and the militias that fight with them -- especially because the US is sending $1.5 billion to the Iraqi army and almost 3,000 American troops to help train them.


At the link, you'll find not only the video report, but also a text article and a photo essay.  James Gordon Meek, Brian Ross, Rym Momtaz and Alex Hosenball did the previous ABC News report on this topic.

The Jen Psaki moment in the transcript above is from today's State Dept press briefing.

Jen is shown looking down at her notebook and reading a pre-written statement.

She's ridiculous and shameful.  Let's move to that moment at today's briefing:



QUESTION: There’s some really disturbing images coming out of Iraq, which appear to show uniformed Iraqi soldiers committing atrocities – beheadings, torture. Are you – I mean, Iraq has said they’re investigating. Do you have confidence in their investigation, their ability to investigate this alone? Will you, the State Department, do any investigating? That’s the first question.


MS. PSAKI: Sure. Well, these are clearly disturbing and serious allegations, ones that we’ve, unfortunately, spoken about many times before, including from this podium, because we’ve been – there have been a range of reports out there for some time about these types of abuses. So we’re, of course, deeply concerned by the reports. The Iraqi Government, as you mentioned, has indicated that it will investigate to determine the facts behind these claims. We urge it to conduct a transparent, thorough, and timely investigation.
I would also note that Prime Minister Abadi, I think including in his inaugural remarks, spoke about this, has stated that he – not about this specifically, but about efforts to kind of address unregulated militias, which is part of the problem – has stated that he has a zero-tolerance policy of human rights abuses by any security element. U.S. officials from Washington and Baghdad continue to raise our concerns with senior Government of Iraq officials, and we have been doing that for some time.
This behavior is clearly – their behavior must be above reproach or they risk being painted with the same brush as ISIL fighters. And certainly that’s a message that we are making clear. But they’ve indicated they’re investigating. There’s no plans for the United States Government to investigate, no.


QUESTION: Okay. But do they not also risk, then, the U.S. sort of cutting off funding and pulling out of the coalition and sort of stopping their involvement?


MS. PSAKI: Well, we have withheld assistance from certain Iraqi units on the basis of credible information in the past. There’s an entire process of review that happens. And certainly if new information surfaced that warranted that – the Leahy law being put into effect, we would do the same thing.


QUESTION: Right. So unlikely that you would – as a result of these types of crimes, if proven true – I mean, there’s images supporting them at this point. But if proven true, it’s unlikely that you would do some sort of broad pullout of Iraq as a result, just stopping financing to certain brigades?



MS. PSAKI: Well, there are laws in place, that have been in place for time, that we have applied to some Iraqi units. And certainly we would continue to apply those if applicable. Obviously we look at any information that was available, including reports and media reports as well. But I’m not going to prejudge what that would mean in the future.


That's not the law and the State Dept looks like a pack of idiot War Criminals right now.

The US government is not allowed to pick and choose -- per the law -- which parts of a military they give assistance to.  The law is that when incidents like the above take place, the US government has to cut off all military assistance.

That's the law.

I thought Jen was leaving.  I thought she was taking her lying to the White House?

After today, she can't leave soon enough.

There is spin and there is whoring.


We've been rather kind to Jen here.  Marie Harf, not so much.  But Jen's largely gotten a pass because she's usually been professional not whorish.

When she stands in front of the press and lies through her teeth about the law -- to cover for War Crimes -- she's nothing but a cheap whore.

She has no shame and she clearly has no ethics.

The Leahy Amendment does not say: If the government the US is sending military aid to has human rights abuses (War Crimes), the US government must ensure that the 'good' elements of the military receive money and weapons.

The law says when these human rights abuses take place, the aid is to be immediately cut.

The State Dept is a disgrace today.

John Kerry's confused himself with Secretary of Defense throughout his tenure as Secretary of State.

It is shameful.

And it should be criminal for a spokesperson to lie about what the law says.




Recommended: "Iraq snapshot"
"So much of the administration's testimony yesterda..."
"If I were a lawyer for the Iranian government . . ."
"Why Brian Williams shouldn't return to NBC Nightly News"
"Iran in Iraq"
"Brief"
"Greenwald"
"Is Jim Lobe the biggest bitch in the world?"
"margaux's bugger and a dumb plot point (revenge)"
"About the hearing coverage"
"Hillary's e-mails"
"Hillary thinks we're stupid"
"Well it's her idea of fun"
"THIS JUST IN! WHO CAN RELATE TO CRANKY CLINTON!"

Well it's her idea of fun

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

BIG DOG BILL CLINTON GOT TAKEN DOWN FOR SAYING HE DIDN'T HAVE SEX WITH MONICA LEWINSKY WHEN HE DID BUT HIS BORING HALF MAY GET TAKEN DOWN FOR THE CLAIM THAT SHE DIDN'T SEND CLASSIFIED E-MAILS TO ANYONE ON THE PRIVATE SERVER SHE USED FOR HER PRIVATE ACCOUNT.

CRANKY CLINTON JUST ISN'T BELIEVABLE AS SOMEONE CONSUMED BY PASSION BUT AMERICA WILL BUY HER AS THE CRANKY FOOL SENDING OUT NATIONAL SECRETS IN HER E-MAILS.

REACHED FOR COMMENT, CRANKY DECLARED SHE WAS "POURING OVER SPREAD SHEETS.  HA! I WAS UP TILL 4 THIS MORNING RUNNING ACTUARY NUMBERS!  THAT'S THE SORT OF THING THAT GETS MY JUICES FLOWING, I TELL YOU!  I THINK, FOR FUN TONIGHT, I'LL PULL OUT SOME PIE CHARTS."



FROM THE TCI WIRE:


What happens when an angry Frankenstein faces Congress?


That was this morning at the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing where Secretary of State Kerry,  Secretary of Defense Ash Carter and Gen Martin Dempsey (Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) provided testimony.

Or in Kerry's case, theatrics and laughter.

When not impatiently clicking his pen throughout the hearing, Kerry basically glowered -- as if the Committee were villagers carrying torches.

"I see a real danger of a ground troop creep here  converting this into not the region poliicing its own terrorism but like the air strike campaign that's 80% US, it's a US mission," declared Senator Tim Kaine in the hearing.

This resulted in a forced chuckle by Kerry.

It didn't result in any real answer.

Of course not.

Kerry can't even get honest that everyone in the administration is waiting on Gen Lloyd Austin's recommendation which the military chiefs expect will be for US troops in an on the ground combat role -- this was addressed -- again -- in yesterday's Senate Armed Services Committee hearing covered in Tuesday's snapshot.  From yesterday:


Senator Lindsey Graham:  Do you agree with me that the best way that you guarantee that you destroy and degrade ISIL is that you have some American ground forces to help the regional forces?


Gen Joseph Dunford Jr.: Senator, uh, right now, uh, I think it's critical that we provide US support.  And I think, as you know, we're waiting for Gen [Lloyd]  Austin to make a recommendation as to exactly what that support would be.



John Kerry found Kaine's question hilarious.

This despite the fact that Kaine's remarks are similar to what many leaders in the region have said and have told Congress.  King Abdullah II of Jordan, for example, has noted this has to be a regional response and not a US dominated one.  For it to work, it has to be a regional response otherwise it is the West again attacking Iraq which only helps recruit opposition forces.

King rightly points out that while Kerry and other US officials insist the current war on Iraq is a coalition effort -- a coalition working with the government of Iraq -- the reality is that 80% of the air strikes are carried about by the US.

So if they can't get honest about that, why should the same US government officials be trusted when they claim that any efforts on the ground would be a coalition working with Iraq?

Most likely, as King points out, ground forces would be US troops with a few Iraqis and a handful of soldiers from other countries tossed in.

Though he can't get honest, John Kerry can lecture and did so repeatedly.

"So as long as we continue to work on the integration," he said waiving his clutched and unclutched right hand  throughout the air, "the  internal inclusivity of Iraq and its government -- to help the Iraqis to be able to do this themselves, help the region feel empowered by it, that is a long term recipe for the United States not to have as much risk and not to have to put ourselves on the line the way we have historically."

But that hasn't been done.

Iraq's Haider al-Abadi became prime minister in August and there's been nothing but empty talk.

He did finally get a budget passed.

Iraq's Parliament passed the 2015 budget on January 29, 2015.

And in August, this was going to happen before the end of September.

Didn't turn out that way.

In fairness to him, there is no 2014 budget.

Former prime minister and forever thug Nouri al-Maliki was never able to pass a 2014 budget.

But that's really all Haider has to point to.

The State Dept attempted to sell an 'oil deal' between the central government out of Baghdad and the Kurdish Regional Government as proof that Haider was being more "inclusive" than Nouri and as movement towards resolving Iraq's many crises that led to the current state of affairs.

However, that 'deal' is still not implemented.

It's nothing more than empty words from Haider al-Abadi.



RECOMMENDED:  "Iraq snapshot"
"ACLU Sues NSA to Stop Mass Internet Spying"
"Again reselling the Iraq War"
"A passing"
"Is there a bigger bitch than John Kerry (Wally)"
"How afraid of us is the US government?"
"John Kerry's become a bully and a bore (Ava)"
"Fat men always get TV shows"
"All Lives Matter"
"Hillary can sink like a stone"
"Look what it's led to"
"I honestly feel sorry for Barack Obama"
"NSA's illegal spying"
"John Kerry has a hissy"
"THIS JUST IN! AND THE HUFFY BIKE HE RODE IN ON!"

John Kerry has a hissy

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

TODAY ELDERLY SECRETARY JOHN KERRY APPEARED BEFORE THE CONGRESS LOOKING ALL GLUM LIKE SOMEONE FORGOT TO GIVE HIM A COFFEE MUG ON

NATIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE PROFESSIONALS’ DAY.

HE SLAMMED REPUBLICANS WHO WROTE A LETTER TO IRAN – A PUBLIC LETTER.

REACHED FOR COMMENT AFTER THE HEARING BY THESE REPORTERS, KERRY BRISTLED WHEN REMINDED THAT WHILE RUNNING FOR THE PRESIDENCY IN 2004, HE INSISTED THAT THE FOREIGN LEADERS HE SPOKE TO PRIVATELY WANTED BULLY BOY BUSH TO LEAVE THE WHITE HOUSE.

WHEN FURTHER REMINDED THAT HIS SECRET TALKS WERE CALLED OUT, KERRY INSISTED THAT THEY WERE “SECRET – SEE IT WAS GOSSIP.  AND EVERYONE KNOWS I’M A CATTY GOSSIP.  SO THAT’S THE DIFFERENCE.”

AS HE STORMED OFF HE NOTED HE DIDN’T EVEN GET A CARD TODAY.

THESE REPORTERS ATTEMPTED TO INFORM HIM THE HOLIDAY DID NOT ROLL AROUND UNTIL MARCH 22^ND BUT HE HAD HAD ALREADY STORMED OFF.

•  

FROM THE TCI WIRE:

This morning, US Senator John McCain declared, "Indeed, all four of the military service chiefs have testified that defense spending at sequestration levels would put American lives at risk. Now more than ever, a strong Navy and Marine Corps are essential to our nation's ability to deter adversaries, assure allies and defend our national interests."


He was speaking at a budget hearing the Senate Armed Services Committee was holding.  Mccain is the Chair of the Committee, Senator Jack Reed is the Ranking Member.  The witnesses appearing before them were Gen Joseph Dunford Jr (Commandant of the Marine Corps), Secretary of the Navy Raymond Mabus Jr. and Adm John Greenert (Chief of Naval Operations).

We'll come back to the hearing in a moment.

But let's think about what the Chair was saying.

Not in terms of the US but in terms of Iraq.

Nouri al-Maliki was prime minister of Iraq from 2006 - 2014.  There were no real public works programs to repair Iraq's crumbling infrastructure.  There were times when the yearly budget was such that Nouri could have given every Iraqi citizen in the country a billion dollars.  But didn't.

The money also didn't go to help address Iraq's problems -- such as the severe shortage of nurses and doctors (but especially nurses).  Instead, Nouri was fine with bringing in nurses from other countries.

This despite double-digit unemployment in Iraq and a severe need for employment.

Now there was money for Nouri's son to amass a fleet of sports cars in London as well as a bachelor pad where he -- contrary to the strict Shi'ite beliefs Nouri is supposed to hold (supposed to) -- entertained woman after woman.  There was money for Nouri's son to party.

But there was no money spent on the Iraqi people.

Nouri created his own political slate and dubbed it State and Law.

The point being, Nouri insisted, he was law and order and restoring that to Iraq.

And he ran in 2010 on the (false) claim that he'd restored order to Iraq.

The one thing he did pour money into was the Iraqi forces.

(Not the Peshmerga.  The Kurdish Regional Government paid the Peshmerga out of their portion of the national budget.)

In fact, the Iraqi forces were so 'covered' by Nouri, he was able to say, "I got this."

He was able to say, "I got this" -- and to refuse to US training for them.


This was noted in the November 30, 2011 House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia hearing on Iraq.  We covered it in the next day's snapshot (December 1, 2011).  The Ranking Member, US House Rep Gary Ackerman, noted how the US training program was being publicly rebuked by the Ministry of the Interior.  They did not want or need US trainers.  That was made clear.  (There was no Minister of the Interior.  Nouri refused to nominate anyone for the post so that he could control the Ministry himself.)

They didn't show up for training, these forces.

What's changed since then?

Not much.

CBS News reported Monday:


CBS News correspondent Holly Williams reports there are already more than 2,500 U.S. military advisers and trainers in Iraq, but Dempsey said their work is being hindered by the fact that Iraqi units sometimes fail to show up for training, or arrive without the proper equipment.
"Right now we don't need more advisers on the ground," Dempsey told reporters on board the French aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle, alongside his counterpart French Gen. Pierre de Villiers.
"We've got trainers and advisers that are waiting for some of the Iraqi units to show up, and when they've shown up -- a handful of them -- they've shown up understrength and sometimes without the proper equipment. The Iraqi government can actually fix that themselves," said Dempsey.


Back at the 2011 hearing when Ackerman was noting the Iraqi forces didn't want US training, he also noted that the Iraqi forces were unable to provide security to the country by themselves as he questioned the State Dept's Brooke Darby:

Ranking Member Gary Ackerman: When will they be willing to stand up without us?

Brooke Darby: I wish I could answer that question.

Ranking Member Gary Ackerman: Then why are we spending money if we don't have the answer?

[long pause]

Ranking Member Gary Ackerman: You know, this is turning into what happens after a bar mitzvah or a Jewish wedding. It's called "a Jewish goodbye."  Everybody keeps saying goodbye but nobody leaves.

When will they be able to stand up?


Not then.

And apparently still not now.

In fairness to them, it turns out some of Nouri's spending was wasted on corruption and on paying people for service that they were not actually performing.

But the US is yet again working on training.

Iraqi forces, by themselves, are still not able to meet the goals McCain expects from US allies: "to deter adversaries, assure allies and defend our national interests."

Recommended: “Iraq snapshot”

“Do they need GPS to find Tikrit?”

“The world is shocked -- shocked! -- that invaders ...”

“Who's following The Following?”

“As a 2008 Hillary supporter, I found her press briefing hugely disappointing”

“The Originals”

“Hart of Dixie does better in ratings than Jane The Virgin”

“Look what the unions are doing now”

“Not a fan of Jennifer Lawrence”

“Barack attacks again”

“old lady hillary clinton”

“The just verdict”

“Dear Hillary: You're the lowest scum in the world”

“It's all about my needs says Hillary”

“THIS JUST IN! RULES ARE HARD FOR HILLARY!”

It's all about my needs says Hillary

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

CRANKY CLINTON TOOK TO THE UNITED NATIONS TODAY TO INSIST SHE HAD DONE NOTHING WRONG AND BESIDES SHE WAS JUST TRYING TO DO WHAT WAS "CONVENIENT" FOR HER.

NEVER MIND WHAT WAS BEST FOR THE GOVERNMENT OR THE COUNTRY.

IT WAS ALL ABOUT HER PERSONAL CONVENIENCE.


FUNNY, WHEN SHE WAS SWORN IN, THERE WAS NO TALK OF 'DOING THE JOB TO THE BEST OF MY PERSONAL CONVENIENCE.'

THERE WAS A CRYING BABY.

.
THE WOMAN WHO WANTS TO BE PRESIDENT DIDN'T CARE ENOUGH ABOUT HER JOB AS SECRETARY OF STATE TO DO WHAT WAS NEEDED, ONLY WHAT WAS CONVENIENT.  WHAT A SELLING POINT FOR HER CAMPAIGN.

AND FOR NOW?

CRANKY CLINTON ANNOUNCED TODAY SHE WOULD NOT BE TURNING OVER HER SERVERS.

IN OTHER WORDS, SHE'S NOT BEING OPEN, SHE'S NOT BEING HONEST BUT SHE WANTS YOUR VOTE SO SHE CAN TAKE HER CORRUPTION TO THE TOP!



FROM THE TCI WIRE:



Prensa Latina reports, "US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Martin Dempsey said today that the self proclaimed Islamic State for Syria and Iraq, ISIS will be defeated at the same time that the local government increases is offensive against Tikrit and Al-Anbar."

Is that what he said?

If that's what he said, he's an idiot.

As many observers have pointed out -- to stick only with Tikrit -- Iraq grabbing control of it from the Islamic State doesn't matter as much as what happens the day after liberation or 'liberation.'

Is there a reason for Sunnis to buy in?  A reason for them to feel the government out of Baghdad is a representative one.

Dempsey usually makes remarks about the need for a political solution.

Maybe he forgot.

Or maybe Prensa Latina got it wrong.

Robert Burns (AP) reports, "Before arriving in the Iraqi capital, Dempsey said that he wanted to press the Shiite-dominated government to deliver on its promise to reconcile with the Sunni minority and to explain how it intends to balance its relations with Iran."


It's a shame that the Pentagon failed to release a transcript of the press conference.

It might have cleared up some errors.

Might have even mitigated some of the reactions to the press briefing.


At Rudaw's report on Dempsey's remarks at the press conference, the most popular reader comment is this:


They're spinning the story, what's happened is the Iranians have instructed Baghdad to get rid of the Americans, all of it, the air support, bases, training etc. and now the Americans are doing damage control, trying to save face. Fist they claimed Baghdad is not requesting more air support, now they're claiming that they want to "avoid civilian casualties", they have no such concerns in Syria or Yemen or Afghanistan. A month ago the Pentagon and the administration declared that they were planing to send additional advisers, special forces and around 4000 marines to Iraq, this past week they've changed their tone completely, even today Dempsey said Iraq "doesn't need" more US trainers or advisories.                      



Before anymore US troops are sent to Iraq, it would be good to know how the missing is seen in the region and in Iraq.  Not how it's seen by the US appointed and anointed rulers in Iraq, but by the people.


In America, some are saying the people have spoken.  For example, Andrew Tilghman (Military Times) writes, "According to a Rasmussen poll in early February, 52 percent of Americans believe the U.S. should send 'send combat troops back to Iraq as part of an international coalition to fight ISIS.' That's up from 48 percent in October. Meanwhile, the percentage of those opposed fell 8 points, to 28 percent from 36 percent in October."

A few problems.

"International coalition" isn't defined.

Second, Rasmussen?

Seriously.

I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, their polling had Mitt Romney winning the 2012 election.

For those who've forgotten, Mitt Romney lost that election to Barack Obama.


Whatever the actual figure, I don't doubt that it's increased since October.

The US media's been selling fear non-stop since then.

It's attempted to stir up the public.  It's featured 'talkers' who've predicted mayhem on the streets of America from the Islamic State despite the fact that it's really not possible.

Homegrown terrorists launching an attack on US soil?

Very possible.

It's even possible that they might be terrorists who are sympathetic to the Islamic State.

But the Islamic State having fighters to spare, fighters who can easily cross into the US?

Not as simple as the talkers would insist.


RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Afghan Girls Need Your Support Today (Feminist Maj..."
"Everybody wants to play Empire (remember, it's not..."
"Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Hillary's Camp..."
"Hejira"
"Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Hillary Teache..."
"Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Hillary's E-ma..."
"International Women’s Day 2015 Let’s Save Our Wome..."
"No to the racist backlash over Isis - former Guant..."
"The so-called Good Wife"
"When does it ever end?"
"Oh, those scandals"
"Left to choke on her own words"
"Hillary plots response"
"Liar James Carville"
"Fox really has nothing for me this summer"
"Oh, Hillary, buy a clue"
"Hillary tries to figure out what to say"
"hillary needs to get honest"

Truest statement of the week

Truest statement of the week II

A note to our readers

Editorial: A video tells ten billion words

TV: The only thing worse than bad TV is the Water ...

Oh, Sheila

What a sad five years for Ms. Blog (Ava and C.I.)

Radio worth applauding

This edition's playlist

No to the racist backlash over Isis - former Guant...

International Women's Day 2015 Let's Save Our Wome...

David DeGraw's Transcendental Element

The Center for Reproductive Rights issued the fol...

Highlights

"How Hillary intends to fight back on the scandal"
"THIS JUST IN! HILLARY HAS A PLAN!"

How Hillary intends to fight back on the scandal

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

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

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

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



FROM THE TCI WIRE:




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


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


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


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

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

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

Secretary Robert McDonald:  Exact number --

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

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

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

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

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


And this is what frustrates me regarding the hearings.

McDonald doesn't have basic information?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

Let's go back:

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

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

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

Secretary Robert McDonald:  Exact number --

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

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



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

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


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

Senator Robert McDonald:  Working on it.


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


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

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

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

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



Again, the lack of respect for women veterans.

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

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

She is informed.

And she's done the work to be.

Why hasn't Clancy?

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

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

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





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

Clinton's response

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

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

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


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


FROM THE TCI WIRE:



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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Downloads

• Fact Sheet on Conference offsets.pdf »

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

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

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


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

But that did not happen.

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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


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

The big meet-up

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

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

THE POINT OF THE MEET UP?

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


FROM THE TCI WIRE:



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


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


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

This has resulted in a large amount of criticisms.

Strangely, Barack hasn't been asked about it.

Strangely, he's not offered an opinion.

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

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


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

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

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

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


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


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

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


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



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

 

Crabby Clinton

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

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

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

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

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

"PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO TRUST ME."

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

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





FROM THE TCI WIRE:



The assault on Tikrit has begun.

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


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

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

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



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



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


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



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

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

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

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

Mark Thompson (Time magazine) notes Haider spoke today:

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

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


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


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




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


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



UNAMI issued the following cautionary statement today:

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

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

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


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

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



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




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

Truest statement of the week

Truest statement of the week II

A note to our readers

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

TV: Agent Carter demonstrates a path forward

The bitches go after Patricia

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

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

Celebrity

Bad Cops

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

This edition's playlist

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

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

The IRS scandal

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