Thursday, April 22, 2010. Chaos and violence continue, Nouri offers more  pleasing claims in public, the WikiLeaks tape showed what happened but what  happened after (key detail left out of the narrative), World Can't Wait holds a  conference on the assault video, Congress discusses PTSD and TBI, and  more.
  
 Monday April5th, 
WikiLeaks released US military video of  an assault in Iraq. 12 people were killed in the assault including two Reuters  journalists. In real time, 
Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times)  reported, "The two Reuters staff members, both of them Iraqis, were killed  when troops on an American helicopter shot into the area where the two had just  gotten out of their car, said witnesses who spoke to an Agence France-Press  photographer who arrived at the scene shortly after their bodies were taken  away. The Reuters employees were Namir Noor-Eldeen, 22, a photographer, and  Saeed Chmagh, 40, a driver." Rubin quoted AFP's Ahmad Sahib stating, "They had  arrived, got out of the car and started taking pictures, and people gathered. It  looked like the American helicopters were firing against any gathering in the  area, because when I got out of my car and started taking pictures, people  gathered an American helicopter fired a few rounds, but they hit the houses  nearby and we ran for cover."  That detail really didn't make it into the story  recently, did it?  We could have Diane Rehm smear the two journalists on her  show (as she did when she read a piece of crap e-mail asserting the two  were embedded with terrorists and got whatever they deserved and then declared  that would be "the last word" on the issue).  We could have a host of gas  baggery.
   
 But who bothered to tell you that after the event, it happened again.  The  footage captures what took place in real time. The footage ends before the  second wave starts.  The footage captures the realization that there were  children present.  And none of that prevented a second round being fired from US  helicopters?
  
 Last night, 
World Can't Wait held a conference on the WikiLeaks video with  Debra Sweet moderating and 
Dahr Jamail, Elaine Brower and 
Matthis Chiroux  participating. All but Dahr were in New York City.  The conference was streamed  live online last night.  Dahr is an independent journalist.  He reported in Iraq  as a non-embed.  He could have just as easily been killed/targeted as the two  
Reuters reporters. Elaine Brower is a peace activist and the mother of  a service member who has served in Iraq and Afghanistan. She has long been  active in the peace movement and has not allowed the changing of the White House  to silence her speaking out against the continued wars.  Matthis Chiroux served  in Afghanistan.  He is an Iraq War resister.  Like Elaine, he is a very strong  member of the peace movement and the two of them were arrested, along with 
Peace Mom Cindy Sheehan and at least five others, for using  their Constitutional rights of free speech to protest the continued wars while  they were in DC last month.  Early on, Dahr spoke about how Iraqis are still  caught in the conflict and how that hasn't ended.  The Iraq War continues.   That's based on hearing about every third or fourth word.  For me, his feed was  garbled.  Debra did review some of his points. And all excerpts should be  considered "really rush transcript" and not just "rush transcript" because I  wasn't aware that my notes (which weren't that in depth, most of what follows is  from memory -- keep that in mind) is what I would rely on today. I thought the  video was going up at World Can't Wait but that hasn't happened yet. 
 
 Debra Sweet: I don't know if everybody caught Dahr's reference to  General David Petreaus. He is the general that is now in charge of the Central  Command which is all of Europe and Asia basically. Like three years ago, when  the incident we're talking about happened, he was in charge of Iraq and where is  he right now? [Debra then noted their action to protest Petreaus.] I just wonder  if people heard what Dhar said? That in Iraq so far, 1.5 have been killed.  And  I think he said 4.8 million Iraqis are displaced from their homes. And this is a  war that is supposed to be ending. So Dahr, could you give us just sixty seconds  of what to say to people who say "But wait a minute, Obama has ended the war in  Iraq, it's over, the troops are coming home?" 
  
 Still garbeled, he twice mentioned the National Security Strategy.  The  feed cleared up shortly after and he was asked about the WikiLeaks video of the  assault.  
  
 Dahr Jamail: That is a very disgusting vile situation and that is  exactly what psychiatrist Robert J. Lipton has said early on in the occupation  that when you send soldiers into an unwinnable occupation and who have been, for  the most part, very effectively brain washed by the propaganda and by ideology  and they thoroughly dehumanize the Iraqi people, this is what is called an  atrocity producing situation and that is exactly what this video shows us --  that we can see with our own eyes. And I think why it has caused such a stir is  for finally, one of the few times that the American public can see with their  own eyes an atrocity producing situation being carried out right in front of  their eyes.  There's no denying it. There's no denying watching them kill  unarmed civilians and there's no denying the callous disregard with which they  carried it out.
  
 Matthis Chiroux: Well it's, it's really interesting actually.  All  of us sitting at this table right now -- me, Elaine and Debra, and even folks in  this room who've been doing demonstrations or have done demonstrations at the  Army Experience Center in Philadelphia where they actually allow young people  they are trying to recruit into the military to pilot helicopter simulators and  it -- even through these simulations -- it is clear that the US kills civilians  and that when children simulate killing civilians in this video game, the  military recruiters explain it to them as not simulated murder but as a rules of  engagement violation. So simplyl including this in the simulation points that --  I wonder how they would react to having this simulated so that young people  could-could see what it's really like to experience a so-called rules of  engagement. 
  
 Dahr Jamal: That's another really good point, Mathis, because,  again, it's all part of the dehumanizing where you don't even talk about the  Iraqis as human beings.  You know, they're "targets," they're "suspected  insurgents,"  etc. etc.  And you don't talk -- you talk about things like the  rules of engagement. You kind of really steralize the whole situation by using  this type of terminology. And, of course, they're not going to show this video  to the kids. Of course, they're going to let them play things that are  kind of  like video gamesque situations to really basically start getting them thinking  along these lines, which I would have to think that folks who fly drones -- who  sit in Nevada or California and pilot drones -- and the people who fly the  helicopter in the video, that they were probably raised playing similar types of  video games and again getting the brain washing backed up by the media where  these are not human beings, these are prssible insurgents, they're  terrorists, they're al Qaeda, etc etc. And it makes it possible to where these  people can basically become simply trained murderers and go out and do just  that. And, you, Matthis, from the military know all too well that which I  discovered through interviewing dozens and dozens of veterans I've interviewed  for news stories and my latest book and that is that they come into  the military and they're basically trained to be murderers, you don't ask  questions, you just follow orders, you don't think about "the other" as a human  being, you think about them as an enemy. This is drilled into you in basic  training and then reinforced throughout your entire contact with the military.  And so that, again, is what puts soldiers in this position in Iraq and  Afghanistan -- where when you put this kind of trained soldier out into the  field, have them afraid, have them completely brain washed so basically everyone  they're looking at is a potential threat, then this is only going to go one  direction and that's the direction that we see in this video.    
 Elaine Brower: This is Elaine Brower, Dahr.  How are  you?
  
 Dahr Jamail: Hi, Elaine, thanks, good.
  
 Elaine Brower: Thanks for doing this this evening but I have a  question for you regarding how you feel about these soldiers and marines that  perform these types of operations and are so callous about it.  Should we feel  disgust? Should we feel that they should be held accountable personally for  this? Or do we look to the government for training them that way? The military?  Isn't it up to the individual person to, uh, seek their own humanity and reality  especially when they've been on several tours of combat deployment? Don't they  realize after awhile that they are killing innocent people? Or is this just they  become robots? 
  
 Dahr Jamail: Well, Elaine, I-I agree with you and that's why  earlier I said that, for example, that the soldiers do carry out atrocities and  do commit war crimes absolutely have to be held to account, they absolutely have  to be brought to justice. You know, the whole thing, again, in the Nurember  Trials, when Hilter's henchmen were put on the stand and then tried to use the  excuse of "I was just following orders," that doesn't apply for exactly what you  said and that is that you, as a human being, are morally responsible for the  actions you take. And, for example, another thing is that the US was ever a  member of the International Criminal Court and we started to see some justice  and some people actually going to trial, I think one thing a lot of  international lawyers would focus on and a lot of domestic lawyers is that the  oath that soldiers swear, for example, is to support and defend the Constitution  by following lawful orders. There it is right there. You can only follow lawful  orders. So whenever your commander, whoever he is, tells you as a soldier, you  know,  "Go fly this helicopter and just shoot whatever," even if they're just  suspected or whatever, that is not a lawful order by the Geneva Convention. [. .  .] They are both legally and morally bound to use their heads and make correct  decisions even if that means not following an order. Okay?
  
  
 Laurie Arbiter: Dahr, this is Laurie Arbiter.  I have two  questions. One is if you could speak about the corporate interests in Iraq -- US  corporate interests -- that are in Iraq right now and have been and the gains  that they may have made over these years during the occupation. Because I have a  theory that it was an investment of both blood and US money but there was also a  return to a certain sector of this country. So I just wondered if you could  speak about that. And the second thing is speak to us about the-the civilian  population here in the US who are witnessing crimes against humanity, who have  enough evidence to not be able to say that we didn't know and have not mounted a  resistance commiserate with those crimes. And if you could speak to what you  think -- do you think that that's going to happen or how should that be  organized?
  
 Elaine had to repeat the question for Dahr who had trouble hearing that.   Dahr declared those the primary questions and noted that it was "the right thing  to do" (protesting) and that people just have to keep working "to basically wake  people up and go, 'Look, this is where your tax money is going, this is what  your government is doing'."  He was also asked about Iran and he talked about  how there was no proof that Iran had nuclear weapons but there was proof that  Israel did and Israel is not the object of war talk from the White House. 
  
   
 Matthis and Elaine were supposed to speak after but my feed dropped out  last night.  And I was hoping World Can't Wait would have the video up today but  they don't.  That may be due to being very busy -- the conference last night was  followed by a demonstration -- or possibly due to the feed dropping out with  Dahr at the start. And repeating, a large portion of the above transcript is  from memory, I wasn't taking in depth notes.  So consider it "rush, rush" and  more of a guidepost than an actual transcript. 
  
     The assassination of Sheikh Ghazi Jabouri, a  prominent Sunni Imam in the Al- Adhamiya district of Baghdad, has raised fears  of renewed sectarian violence in the wake of the Mar. 7  elections.                
 Tensions have been reported in the area following the assassination  Wednesday last week. At least two gunmen killed Sheikh Jabouri, 42, as he walked  home after completing morning prayers at the Rahman Mosque.                     
 His brother Sarmad Faisal Jabouri, like many Iraqis in Adhamiya  district, blames the government. "We hold the government fully responsibility  for the killing of my brother, because they are supposed to be in control of  security at the entrances and exits to the area," Jabouri said.                  
 The attack came on a morning when a high-ranking officer in Iraq's  anti- terrorism police was killed by a bomb planted in his car. The attack also  killed two nearby policemen. 
 The violence comes amidst a wave of increasing attacks across the  capital, and amidst political instability in the wake of last month's elections,  that have yet to yield a clear winner.              
   
 And if you doubt the reality of the above, look to the editorial boards of  the papers that sold the Iraq War to begin with and note how they're either  downplaying the violence or keeping their mouths completely shut.  (And, point  of fact, always worry more about a journalist when s/he's not talking then when  they are.)
  
   
  An Iraqi security force under Prime  Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki's direct command held hundreds of detainees from  northern Iraq in an undisclosed prison in Baghdad, torturing dozens of them,  until the country's human rights minister and the United States intervened late  last month, Iraqi and American officials said. Mr. Maliki ordered the prison closed and said he had  been unaware it existed, according to the officials. His move brought the  release of 71 detainees and the transfer of others to established prisons, but  more than 200 remain in the place, on the grounds of the Old Muthanna military  airfield, in northern Baghdad. All of the detainees were apparently Sunni  Muslims.           
American  diplomats visited the prison on Wednesday, the officials said, and pressed Mr.  Maliki's government to investigate the circumstances of its creation and the  treatment of detainees there, originally 431 in all.               
  
 This follows up on Ned Parker's "
Secret prison for Sunnis revealed in Baghdad"  (Monday's 
Los Angeles Times print,  posted at the paper's website late Sunday). Steven Lee Myers quotes the  ridiculous Wijdan Mikhail Salim in his article who not only offers Nouri praise  for closing the prison he oversaw but huffs, "He's doing the best he can."  Really?  That's his best?
 
 In the wake of  Nouri al-Maliki's claims that two big al Qaeda leaders were  killed on Sunday, he continued to be chatty.  
Tuesday, we noted, "
BBC News notes that today Nouri claimed they'd killed Ahmed  al-Obedi. That's generally the thing that trips up Nouri when he's making false  claims -- they're bought and he just keeps upping the claims.  Time will tell if  that was the case again this time."  So that was Tuesday, Nouri was claiming a  third scalp on his belt.  Today 
Ernesto Londono (Washington Post)  reports that Nouri and company are claiming they are holding Manaf Abdul  Raheem al-Rawi and have been dong so since March 11th who is the al Qaeda leader  in Baghdad.  So many leaders in Iraq?  Were it true, you'd picture them in an  intra-mural squabble every other week. They also claim he was responsible for  some bombings last year. Londono observes, "The operations against al-Qaeda in  Iraq have come at an opportune time for Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who is  fighting to keep his job after March 7's disputed parliamentary elections."   See, this is the sort of thing that trips Nouri up. He lies a little and gets  away with it, then he lies a little bigger, then he continues and continues and  continues.  So from "We have killed two terrorist on my safety watch!" on  Sunday, we've gotten another alleged high profile terrorist killed on Tuesday  and today the news that they arrested another high profile terrorist. It's  wonderful spin.  And some people really believed Tom Cruise was saving all those  lives too, right?  That was laughable and Tom was then steered by Pat Kingsley.   Nouri's on his own and just gets more and more creative.   
Marcia addressed Nouri's alleged streak of good luck last night  in "
He's got good karma? Him?"
 
 Hassan Hafidh (Dow  Jones) reports that Iraq managed to bring in $4.351 billion last  month as it exported approximately "1.841 million barrels of oil a day" which  may not see the same this month. 
Kadhim Ajrash and Nayla Razzouk (Bloomberg News) report a bombing on the  pipeline carrying oil to Turkey: "Plumes of black smoke could be seen. The last  time an explosion struck the pipeline in the north was two months ago, when it  took four days to repair and resume pumping." 
Jamal al-Badrani (Reuters)  reports that the police and North Oil Company both state it was a bombing  attack. In addition, 
Reuters notes a  Baghdad sticky bombing which injured "the head of security for the power grid in  western Iraq" and a passenger and a Baghdad roadside bombing which injured three  people.
   
  
 Now we're going to do what we should have done in yesterday's snapshot (but  no room), drop back to Tuesday to note an evening hearing of the Military  Personnel Subcommittee (of the US House Armed Services Committee) which  addressed PTSD and TBI.  Chair Susan Davis explained at the top of the hearing  that some members of the military were being separated from the military  (discharged) due to behavious related to PTSD or TBI and and, noting US House  Rep Walter Jones' work on this issue, she declared, "I agree with the gentleman  that it is unacceptable that the military departments were separating service  members because of misconduct that was caused by a PTSD or TBI injury that  occured during his or her combat tour. Now that we know so much more about the  extent of those injuries in the force, we owe every returning service member the  assurance that we will not punish them for an injury that resulted from combat  service. The unfortunate truth is that we have very likely already separated a  number of service members where the commanders did not consider that the member  was experiencing the consequences of PTSD or TBI."   Appearing before the  Subcommittee were Dr. Charles Rice of the Defense Dept and Bill Carr also of  DoD.  We'll excerpt the following exchanges.
  
 Chair Susan Davis: We're going to want to talk about the needs, the  capacity of the health community within the services and the general population  as well and being able to meet these requirements as well as having the numbers,  really, to review a number of these cases. But I wanted to focus initially on  the commanders in the field.  And talk about how we're educating them and the  role that they're actually playing in trying to assess the severity or the  possibility that someone could be suffering with PTSD or TBI. One of the things  we know is how difficult it is to diagnose and certainly in a subjective fashion  to be able to get that information and yet the commander plays a pretty  significant role. What are we doing and what's the status of that? How do you  think we are doing in trying to move that area forward?
  
 Bill Carr: The first is for the commanders to say "We use the term  PTSD. What does it mean? How do you spot it, what does it mean in concrete  terms?" If you can express it in a way that they comprehend than the likelihood  of their uniting that circumstance with medical help is that much greater. The  Army, the Marine Corps have active programs and training where they instruct the  field in the terms. For example, up PTSD --
  
 Chair Susan Davis: Excuse me, could you pull your mike just a  little bit closer.
  
 Bill Carr: I'm sorry. For example, with PTSD, my point before this  was that commanders have guides that allow them to take a situation that  presents and make some more informed and rational judgment as to whether or not  the symptoms they're seeing represent PTSD and, for example, some of the  instruction presents to them that if-if the person reports a disturbing memories  and disturbing dreams reliving so forth, those are things we would all say,  "Yes, I recognize that now as PTSD."  But unless we actively say it to the chain  of command, then they'll hear it and they won't understand the emotional  significance of what they've just heard. So the education programs of the Army  and Marine Coprs in making sure commanders know that --
  
 Chair Susan Davis: Could you just be more specific in helping us  understand?  I think in the testimony there was some notion of how much time is  spent but what does that look like in terms of that training? 
  
 Bill Carr: It would take the form of about one hour training. And  I'm going to have to -- I'm sorry -- I will have to confer back to you --  exactly how it would play out at a unit at, let's say, Fort Bragg, what  specifically did they experience? And I would be glad to provide that back.   There are a number of resources on the web that are available to those who  go look for them and they're easily found but I think the question from the  Chair is "What do we present so that it's deliberately placed before the chain  of command?"  So that these terms that I've described. And I'm sorry I can't  provide that now but I'll come back to it.
  
 Chair Susan Davis: Dr. Rice?  Did you want --
  
 Dr. Charles Rice: Uh. Yes, ma'am. Madame Chair, I think it's  important to emphasize that the emphasis on this comes from the very top.  General  [Peter] Chiarelli, the Vice Chief of Staff os the US Army, General  [James] Amos, the Assisting Commandant of the Marine Corps have talked about  this over and over with their commanders. [Clears throat.]  Excuse me. Once a  month, for example, General Chiarelli has a conference with all of his  commanders where a suicide has occured and the general officer at that  particular post or station is there to report on what were the specific  cirucmstances that led up to the suicide. Obviously, we don't want to be  tumbling to this problem after a suicide has been completed.  But I think it  does bring to bear the fact that the emphasis from the Vice Chief and from the  Assisting Commandant is continuous. It's important. They are very emphatic about  making sure that it gets desseminated won the chain of command.  I think the  other -- in addition to the point that Mr. Carr made -- the other place that  it's real important is the Senior Non-Commissioned Officer level because those  are the people who are really in day to day contact with the troops and  education in this area has been encorporated into sergeants' major course, for  example.  All of the Senior NCO leaders are taught about how to  recognize various aspects. The details -- contents of those courses is something  that, like Mr. Carr, I woud have to get back to you. 
  
 Chair Susan Davis: Okay, thank you very much. Because I think we  all know how long it takes the medical professionals to be able to describe and  understand and I think there's a great deal for our commanders to be doing and  certainly the officers and it's difficult to even find some of the time for  that. But I think that while we had a great deal of emphasis early in the last  few years and we've had to focus a great deal on suicides in the unit, I think  we want to be sure that we're spending enough time doing that because, in many  ways, they really are the critical actor, I think, in this.  
  
 Dr. Charles Rice: Yes, ma'am, I think that's exactly right. I think  that the most important thing that the commander, the Senior NCO does is to  convey to a member of his unit: It's okay to go ask for help.  It takes a strong  person to do that.  
  
 Chair Susan Davis: Thank you. Mr. Wilson?
  
 Ranking Member Joe Wilson: Thank you again, for both of you being  here. And Mr. Carr how has DoD reached out to former military members who are  administratively discharged, separated to inform them of the opportunity to  request a review of their separation through the discharge review board?  To  date, how many members have requested such a review?
  
 Bill Carr: The outreach was through media -- principally to ensure  that it reached cities and towns -- and, uh, to date, the number's relatively  low 129 Army have applied for -- to the Discharge Review Board.  
  
 Ranking Member Joe Wilson: And --
 
Bill Carr: So it was a media effort.
  
 Ranking Member Joe Wilson: A media effort. And also, I'm sure if a  person is discharged, you'll send periodic -- I've seen them -- periodic  newsletters to the discharged personnel and it would have been in that  publication too, wouldn't it?
  
 Bill Carr: I'm almost sure it was in those -- it was in those  publications as well.
  
 Ranking Member Joe Wilson: And inadvertently, one of my sons [Alan]  -- who served a year in Iraq -- I kept, kept getting his mail and it was really  very enlightening and very encouraging to me, how helpful the information that  was provided and, of course, I would get it to him right away.
  
 Bill Carr: Yes, sir.
  
 Ranking Member Joe Wilson: And then they've got him at a correct  address. 
  
 Bill Carr: Yes, sir.
  
 Ranking Member Joe Wilson: What is your plan for providing  additional mental health assets required for the pre-separation exams and the  discharge review boards? How many additional personnel do you anticipate  needing? Additionally, I'm very grateful, I work with a volunteer organization  called Hidden Wounds of Columbia, South  Carolina which is serving as a back up for discharged personnel, they are  actively promoting mental health assistance. And so it's DoD, VA and then  volunteer organizations. But how many more personnel do we need?    
 Bill Carr: For the discharge review board function, as long as the  criteria are kept broad for example, we don't stipulate a grade on whether  they're active or reserve and are not overly restricted in the academic  disciplines, my understanding is that the manning requirements will be met for  the DRBs, that that wouldn't impose any constraint on the flow of applications.   
  
 Ranking Member Joe Wilson: And it's encouraging for me, I went to a  pancake breakfast to raise money for Hidden Wounds and the VA  had a table set up there with personnel from the VA hospital and it was a -- I  could see that it was a really positive interaction between the volunteer  organizations and DoD personnel and VA personnel.   
 US House Rep Dave Loebsack noted that he shared Wilson's concern that  members of the Reserves and their families -- "especially those living in rural  areas" -- and he wanted to know about the Tele-health program, how service  members were made aware of it and how those whom the Tele-health determined  needed face-to-face treatment were getting it?  
  
 Dr. Rice stated that the Tele-health was created with rural members in  mind.  The media was used to get the word out.  Self-referral is available if  someone requires more than is available through Tele-health or the website.  But  how clear is that to someone?  Probably not that clear. This was a weak section  and the answers weren't impressive nor were they reassuring.  Loebsack stated  (warned?) he would be staying on this issue and thinks it will be "a huge issue"  especially for the National Guard in Iowa.  He wanted to know about Guard  members diagnosed with PTSD after separation?  Dr. Rice stated they would be  referred to VA.  Carr stated that, if it were him, for the Reserve, that "I'm  probably going to proceed with my physician on my own medical program".  Or,  they could go onto the VA and Carr trusted (so very trusting or so cleverly  spinning?) that he would trust that the VA would "in short order . . .  administratively determine it to be a consequence of combat" -- apparently Carr  has paid little attention to either the news or the subcommittee hearings of the  House Veterans Committee that US House Rep John Hall has chaired?
  
 Related, we'll note this from Sherwood Ross' "
PENTAGON CONTINUES TO USE 'PERSONALITY DISORDER'  DISCHARGES TO CHEAT VETERANS OUT OF BENEFITS" (
Veterans Today):
An army sergeant who had received 22 honors including  a Combat Action Badge prior to being wounded in Iraq by a mortar shell was told  he was faking his medical symptoms and subjected to abusive treatment until he  agreed to a "personality disorder"(PD) discharge.                       
After a doctor with the First Cavalry  division wrote he was out for "secondary gain," Chuck Luther was imprisoned in a  six- by eight-foot isolation chamber, ridiculed by the guards, denied regular  meals and showers and kept awake by perpetual lights and blasting heavy metal  music---abuses similar to the punishments inflicted on terrorist suspects by the  CIA.                
"They told me  I wasn't a real soldier, that I was a piece of crap. All I wanted was to be  treated for my injuries," 12-year veteran Luther told reporter Joshua Kors of  "The Nation" magazine (April 26th). "Now suddenly I'm not a soldier. I'm a  prisoner, by my own people. I felt like a caged animal in that room. That's when  I started to lose it." The article is called "Disposable Soldiers: How the  Pentagon is Cheating Wounded Vets."              
Luther had been seven months into his deployment at  Camp Taji, 20 miles north of Baghdad, when a mortal shell exploded at the base  of his guard tower that knocked him down, slamming his head into the concrete.  "I remember laying there in a daze, looking around, trying to figure out where I  was at," he said. Luther suffered permanent hearing loss in his right ear,  tinnitus, agonizing headaches behind his right eye, severe nosebleeds, and  shoulder pain.