Sunday, July 17, 2016

Oprah shares with the BBC

bbc oprah


From November 23, 2013, that's   The World Today Just Nuts "Oprah shares with the BBC."  C.I. noted:

Oprah Winfrey declares, of opposition to Barack, "And that occurs in some cases, and maybe even many cases, because he's African-American."  She's asked, "And if someone criticizes President Obama for the lack of jobs?"  She responds, "Racism.  When has a White president ever been called out for that?"  She's asked, "And if they oppose his Drone War."  She responds, "Damn racists."  She's asked, "And if they suggest you and Gayle are lovers?"  Oprah responds, "Little man, I could roll over you, flatten you out, spread you on a cracker and eat you!" Isaiah archives his comics at The World Today Just Nuts.

Poor Oprah.

She's got a dwindling fan base.

Wendy Williams is now vying with Ellen for the Queen of Daytime.

Poor Oprah.

Closeted and sad.

Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Saturday, July 16, 2016.  Chaos and violence continue, Haider al-Abadi's government threatens peaceful protesters and takes down the internet, the IMF prepares their takeover of Iraq, and much more.

The chances of a liberated Iraq most likely vanished this week with the International Money Fund announcing:

The IMF has approved a three-year, $5.34 Billion loan for Iraq focused on implementing economic and financial policies to help the country cope with lower oil prices and ensure debt sustainability. 

The loan will be provided under the Stand-By Arrangement facility and also includes measures to protect vulnerable populations—critical in a time of ongoing conflict, which has resulted in over 4 million internally displaced people. 

There has been silence on this topic -- even among notable 'lefties' like Phylis Bennis -- as we noted January 15th, "Even though the IMF will be yet another form of occupation."

Iraq's Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani has long warned against taking money from the IMF but Prime Minister Hayder al-Abadi elected to ignore al-Sistani.

There was time for American left 'leaders' to voice their objection to this take over.

The May 19th snapshot noted:

Mohammad Tayseer and Dana Khraiche (BLOOMBERG NEWS) report, "Iraq has reached a $5.4 billion, three-year loan agreement with the International Monetary Fund to help OPEC’s second-biggest producer repair public finances damaged by the plunge in oil prices and war with Islamic State militants."
The revenge fantasies, where the daughter of Saddam Hussein must be captured and flogged in the streets of Baghdad?
They are raw meat tossed to the masses to distract them from the ongoing corruption in Iraq.
Billions of dollars have disappeared from the country's coffers as a result of corrupt politicians and officials.
Rather than fretting over the daughter of Saddam Hussein, they might ask how Nouri al-Maliki's son ended up with all those sports cars and residences outside of Iraq.
Where did that money come from?
How did Nouri's two terms as prime minister of Iraq leave him such a wealthy man?
Those are questions that need to be asked.
The Iraqi people live in squalor.
They have no dependable public services.
Baghdad floods in the raining season -- water up to the knees in some sections (including Sadr City) and that's due to the crumbling public infrastructure.
The corruption is not a secret.
There have been US Congressional hearings on the topic going back to the years when Bully Boy Bush occupied the White House.
Billions have been stolen.
And now the IMF is getting their hooks into Iraq.

The IMF $5.4 billion loan to Iraq will have an annual interest rate of 1.5 per cent, Iraq's Central Bank Governor Ali Al Alak said at a press conference, following a week of talks with IMF officials in Jordan, Reuters reported.
The IMF deal will allow Iraq to secure additional financial aid of around $15 billion over the next three years, including securing international bonds, according to [Iraq's Finance Minister Hoshiyar] Zebari.

At this late stage, who's still pretending that the IMF helps out countries in trouble?

Thursday, Stephen Kalin (REUTERS) reported:

Pressured by lower-than-expected oil prices, Iraq will cut non-oil spending in its 2016 budget by 15 percent and take on several billion dollars in international debt, it said in a memo released by the International Monetary Fund on Thursday.

OPEC's second-largest producer, which relies on oil exports for nearly all its revenue, has sought donor support amid a collapse in global crude prices and a costly war against Islamic State militants that has displaced more than 3.4 million people.

Non-oil spending cut by 15%?

It's already been cut.

The Iraqi people will suffer yet again.

The corruption is never-ending.

Which is why protests never end in Iraq.

Which is why even threats do not stop the protesters.

And threats were was issued Thursday ahead of Friday's protests.

AFP noted that the security forces issued an announcement that anyone protesting would be dealt with "as a terrorist threat."

Which raised the question of who's in charge of the puppet government in Iraq -- a question everyone in the press will work overtime to avoid.

Despite the threats, thousands turned out Friday.

  1. Images from Today demonstration in Tahrir Square,the demonstration was over quickly with no incident
Tahrir Sqaure now ,all the demonstrators went home , ops announced all roads and bridges reopened
All the roads and bridges reopened in after the demo over in less than 2 hours, No one knows why they went home quickly
Great coverage by NRT for today demonstration ,Sadr in Video addressing the people in Tahrir Square
Images from today demonstration in Tahrir square by the Sadrist


The demonstrators massed in Tahrir Square on Friday, holding placards reading "Yes, yes to reform. No, no to sectarianism. No, no to corruption". 
The protest went ahead despite the security forces warning late on Thursday that the rally called by the influential Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr was "unauthorised" and would be treated as a "terrorist threat".
Sadr has led repeated protests in recent months, some of them breaching the central Green Zone government and diplomatic compound.

Shi'ite cleric and movement leader Moqtada had halted protests during the holy month of Ramadan.

ALSUMARIA has a photo essay of the protest.



Shiite cleric, Muqtada al-Sadr, said in a speech, read to the crowd by an assistant, that their presence in Tahrir square was to demand fulfillment of comprehensive reforms in all institutions of the Iraqi state.
He added that they will continue to protest peacefully until the demands are met.
The cleric also called for the dismissal of corrupt state officials and those with special privileges, as well as calling for an end to the sectarian and political quotas in government jobs.


Sadr has led repeated protests, some of them breaching the central Green Zone government and diplomatic compound, calling for an end to what he says is a corrupt power-sharing system between the country's rival sectarian and political factions.
"Yes, yes to reform.  No, no to sectarianism.  No, no to corruption," read the placards brandished by protesters.

RUDAW adds:

According to Rudaw’s correspondent at Tahrir Square, protesters were chanting “Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites are one, and Iraq is for all.”
Rudaw’s Bahman Hassan added that protesters were threatening to storm Baghdad’s secured Green Zone again, saying “Today we are at Tahrir Square and tomorrow we will be inside the Green Zone.”

Threats did not stop the protesters.

Threats also did not prompt the White House or the US State Dept to issue any statement at all, let alone to condemn the Iraqi government's threat to treat civilian protesters as terrorists.

This is appalling and disgusting.

These are the craven acts of cowards who will not stand up in defense of democracy or humanity.

Instead, in their short term goals, they will back any dictator, any tyrant.


In addition to threats, the Iraqi government also shut down the internet.

CIRCLEID reports:

The Iraqi government shut down internet access in the country for nearly four hours in response to mass protests in Baghdad. According to reports, the Internet access went down at 3.39 UTC, but was restored at 7.15 UTC. The outage was detected by internet performance company Dyn. Doug Madory, director of internet analysis at Dyn: “There’s a history of outages in Iraq, they seem to do this more and more these days for things as trivial as sixth grade exams. ... There was just a UN resolution condemning internet outages, and that was slightly in response to previous Iraqi outages." 

On the UN resolution, Ben Sullivan (TECHWEEK) explains:

That UN resolution came just two weeks ago, when the organisation published a paper called The promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights on the Internet.
The resolution criticises the practice of shutting down internet access to citizens. While it was passed by consensus, certain countries such as China and Russia attempted to change parts of the resolution by changing the text of the resolution.
Other countries backed China and Russia’s view, such as Saudi Arabia, India, and South Africa.
But the resolution states: “The same rights that people have offline must also be protected online, in particular freedom of expression, which is applicable regardless of frontiers and through any media of one’s choice, in accordance with articles 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”
And the White House?
They rushed to condemn this attack on free speech?
No, of course not.
Barack Obama backed thug Nouri al-Malik until it was far too late.
He overturned the votes of the Iraqi people in order to give Nouri a second term.
He termed a blind eye to Nouri's abuses -- secret torture chambers (revealed by Ned Parker's reporting for THE LOS ANGELES TIMES), the disappearance of Sunnis, the beating and rapes of Sunni girls and women in the Iraqi jails and prisons, the attacks on Sunnis politicians, the attacks on peaceful protesters, etc.
From 2010 on forward, these abuses just piled up.
And Barack tolerated them.
Because he needed Nouri.
Finally in the second half of 2014, he replaced Nouri with Haider al-Abadi.
And he tolerates anything that Haider does today.
There is no higher ground for Barack to struggle to.
He is in the swamp, up to his knees in despots.
While there is no US effort made towards diplomacy or solving the political crisis in Iraq, the US government is more than happy to continue to drop bombs on Iraq.  Today, the US Defense Dept announced:

Strikes in Iraq
Attack helicopter and bomber, ground-attack, fighter, and remotely piloted aircraft conducted 10 strikes in Iraq, coordinated with and in support of the Iraqi government:

-- Near Baghdadi, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL assembly area.
-- Near Habbaniyah, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL fighting position, an ISIL bunker and an ISIL vehicle-borne bomb.
-- Near Mosul, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL vehicle.
-- Near Qayyarah, two strikes destroyed 21 ISIL boats and suppressed two ISIL mortar positions.
-- Near Ramadi, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL staging area.
-- Near Sinjar, a strike suppressed an ISIL mortar position.
-- Near Sultan Abdallah, a strike suppressed an ISIL mortar position.
-- Near Tal Afar, two strikes struck an ISIL vehicle-borne-bomb factory and damaged an ISIL excavator.

Task force officials define a strike as one or more kinetic events that occur in roughly the same geographic location to produce a single, sometimes cumulative, effect. Therefore, officials explained, a single aircraft delivering a single weapon against a lone ISIL vehicle is one strike, but so is multiple aircraft delivering dozens of weapons against buildings, vehicles and weapon systems in a compound, for example, having the cumulative effect of making those targets harder or impossible for ISIL to use. Accordingly, officials said, they do not report the number or type of aircraft employed in a strike, the number of munitions dropped in each strike, or the number of individual munition impact points against a target. Ground-based artillery fired in counterfire or in fire support to maneuver roles is not classified as a strike.

Ruth's "Lock her up, lock her up, throw away the key" went up earlier as did the following community sites:

Read on ...

Friday, July 1, 2016

Babs Visits DC

babs visis dc

From November 12, 2013, that's "Babs Visits DC." C.I. wrote:

In DC, Barbra Streisand tells Barack, "Politics means never having to say you're sorry."  Ryan O'Neal pops up to note, "That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard."

That's Ryan's line from the end of What's Up Doc? directed by Peter Bogdanovich.  What's Up Doc? is Ryan O'Neal's second biggest film of his career and it's the biggest non-musical lead role for Barbra.  The film sold nearly 30 million tickets -- that's how we're judging biggest -- ticket sales, not box office.  Yes, Prince of Tides raked in 74.7 million but it only sold 15.8 million tickets.  Inflation accounts for its 'bigger' box office.  Almost twice as many people paid to see Barbra in What's Up Doc? -- which remains a film classic.

Isaiah archives his comics at The World Today Just Nuts.

Barbra Streisand should be -- at her elderly age -- being celebrated and embraced.

Instead, she cheapens her own art by making one partisan remark after another -- usually stupid as well as partisan.

The Iraq War only mattered to her when Bully Boy Bush was in office.

She doesn't care today.

She really didn't care then.

Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Friday, July 1, 2016.  Chaos and violence continue,  Falluja's 'liberated' again, the UK is sending more troops to Iraq, Iraq's Shi'ite militias are up in arms that someone would dictate to them other than the government of Iran, and much more.

News from the United Kingdom this morning:

Good day for British govt to 'bury news' as UK domestic politics take priority: UK to send 250 more soldiers to Iraq

Emma Clark (SCOTSMAN) reports:

Scores of extra British troops are being sent to Iraq to help the country in its battle against the so-called Islamic State, Defence Secretary Michael Fallon has announced.

Mr Fallon said almost 200 additional personnel and an engineering squadron will travel to the country, bringing the total number of British personnel in Iraq to 1,100.

A good question from Twitter:
ON Somme anniversary: UK sends 250 more soldiers to Iraq, Total there now 1,100 Did MPs ever sanction this number..where will it lead?

RT calls it "mission creep" for the UK.  It is mission creep for all.  Offering perspective, Dita Deboni (ONE VOICE) explains New Zealand's troops, UK troops and others:

So despite telling us there would be no troops sent to Iraq in 2014, and then telling us there would be a deployment – but no longer than two years - in 2015, we are now told, this week, that the Iraq deployment of our ostensibly non-combat troops will go on for another 18 months.
This announcement is not really much of a surprise, coming as it does after Barack Obama’s April announcement that the US would be sending an extra 217 troops to Iraq – as well as Apache helicopters and other more serious equipment of warfare. Days later it was announced the UK would do the same. Italy, Germany and France have all sent more troops to Iraq this year. 

There’s a total of over 7000 US and coalition troops, including New Zealand, on the supposed “advise and assist” role in the fight against ISIS across Iraq, Syria and Libya.  And those are the ones we know about. It’s understood there are many more American troops in Iraq than publicly declared, for example, including some of the country’s air forces.

Governments lie.

Then they take a minute to catch their breath.

And then they lie again.

Now remember what Dita's talking about regarding the number of troops while we note the US Defense Dept announcement yesterday:

Strikes in Iraq
Bomber, fighter and remotely piloted aircraft and rocket artillery conducted 19 strikes in Iraq, coordinated with and in support of Iraq’s government:

-- Near Baghdadi, two strikes struck an ISIL staging facility and destroyed an ISIL bunker and suppressed an ISIL tactical unit.

-- Near Qaim, a strike struck an ISIL vehicle bomb facility.

-- Near Beiji, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed two ISIL vehicles and an ISIL vehicle bomb.

-- Near Fallujah, two strikes struck two separate ISIL tactical units and destroyed 42 ISIL vehicles and denied ISIL access to terrain.

-- Near Habbaniyah, a strike struck a large ISIL tactical unit and destroyed 120 ISIL vehicles, an ISIL tactical vehicle and three ISIL vehicle bombs.

-- Near Haditha, a strike struck an ISIL staging facility.

-- Near Hit, a strike struck a large ISIL tactical unit and destroyed 13 ISIL vehicles and damaged another.

-- Near Mosul, four strikes struck four separate ISIL tactical units and destroyed two ISIL vehicles and an ISIL supply cache.

-- Near Qayyarah, a strike destroyed eight ISIL rocket rails and five ISIL rocket systems.

-- Near Ramadi, a strike struck a large ISIL tactical unit and destroyed two ISIL fighting positions, two ISIL heavy machine guns, an ISIL mortar system and an ISIL staging area and damaged two ISIL fighting positions.

-- Near Sinjar, a strike destroyed an ISIL heavy machine gun.

-- Near Sultan Abdallah, a strike destroyed an ISIL tactical vehicle.

-- Near Tal Afar, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit.

-- Near Waleed, a strike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL vehicle and two ISIL weapons caches.

Task force officials define a strike as one or more kinetic events that occur in roughly the same geographic location to produce a single, sometimes cumulative, effect. Therefore, officials explained, a single aircraft delivering a single weapon against a lone ISIL vehicle is one strike, but so is multiple aircraft delivering dozens of weapons against buildings, vehicles and weapon systems in a compound, for example, having the cumulative effect of making those targets harder or impossible for ISIL to use. Accordingly, officials said, they do not report the number or type of aircraft employed in a strike, the number of munitions dropped in each strike, or the number of individual munition impact points against a target. Ground-based artillery fired in counterfire or in fire support to maneuver roles is not classified as a strike.

These are the daily air strikes that US President Barack  Obama started in August of 2014.


And, as the US government wants us to know (even though it's not true), those air strikes do not kill civilians.

Handling the gossip column, Phil Stewart (REUTERS) passes on, "U.S.-led coalition aircraft waged a series of deadly strikes against Islamic State around the city of Falluja on Wednesday, U.S. officials told Reuters, with one citing a preliminary estimate of at least 250 suspected fighters killed and at least 40 vehicles destroyed."

Wow, so Wednesday's strikes killed 250 fighters.

And these strikes have taken place daily since August 2014.

How many members does the Islamic State have in Iraq?

Must be millions, right?

But earlier this week, at SALON, Patrick Cockburn noted, "The Iraqi army and security forces, for example, had 350,000 soldiers and 660,000 police on the books in June 2014 when a few thousand Islamic State fighters captured Mosul, the country’s second largest city, which they still hold. Today the Iraqi army, security services, and about 20,000 Shia paramilitaries backed by the massive firepower of the United States and allied air forces have fought their way into the city of Fallujah, 40 miles west of Baghdad, against the resistance of IS fighters who may have numbered as few as 900."

So with only a handful, approximately 30,000, in the country why are foreign forces needed?

Didn't the Iraqi forces do a wonderful job of liberating Falluja?

Well . . . not the first time it was announced.

But certainly, last weekend, it had done awesome completely it's mission (if you don't count War Crimes and intimidating the civilian population), right?

Except WORLD BULLETIN reports that a suburb of Falluja (3 miles from the heart of the city) just got 'liberated' yesterday.

Well someday, maybe, right?

At least Iraq is getting along with its neighbors, right?

Well . . .

RUDAW reports:

The Iraqi government has asked Saudi Arabia to stop interfering in its internal affairs in a strong statement a day after the Saudi foreign minister said that the Shiite militia group known as Hashd al-Shaabi must be disbanded.

The Iraqi ministry of foreign affairs said that “it condemns the repeated interference of the Saudi foreign ministry in Iraq’s internal affairs,” said Ahmed Jamal, the ministry spokesperson.

The statement from Baghdad comes a day after Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister Adel Al-Jubeir said that the Shiite militia was a sectarian group backed by Iran and that it must be disbanded.

Why would anyone be bothered by Hashd al-Shaabi?

Ongoing War Crimes.

  1. Shia Militias crimes مليشات الشيعه قتلت 15 سني عراقي اثناء سجودهم بصلاة التراويح ببغداد ابو غريب ولم تذكرهم اي قناة

15 Iraqi Sunni civilian killed During Thier prayers by Shia Militias in Nour mosque Abu Ghraib

AL-MANAR reports, "The Popular Mobilization Forces in Iraq issued on Thursday a statement to blast the stances of Saudi Foreign Minister's stances which asked for decomposing the PMF units."

Let's note Tuesday's Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing:

Ranking Member Ben Cardin: How do you deal with the Shi'ite militia?  How do they deal with it?

Special Envoy Brett McGurk: Well, it's a good question. First of all, Shia militias have to act under the control of the Iraqi government, the Iraqi state, that's a fundamental principle of the government of Iraq.  We think most of the Popular Mobilization Forces operate under the control of the Iraqi state but about 15 to 20% of them actually do not.  And those groups are a fundamental problem.  The number one thing we do is try to make sure they stay out of Sunni populated areas where they did cause real problems.  So in Tikrit, for example, Shi'ite militias are not inside the streets of Tikrit that's one thing that gave the population the confidence to return.  Uh, we have a principle when we support Iraqi forces in the military campaign: We will only support military forces operating strictly under Iraqi command and control.  That means that going up from the ground up an Iraqi chain of command  into a joint operations center where we're working with Iraqi commanders.  If there's a unit that's not operating under that structure, it doesn't get any support.

If it often sounds, by the way, that Brett McGurk's statements conflict with John Kerry's, they do.

That's why we told you awhile back, John's being shut out by the White House and Brett's the go-to-guy.  In related news, Hillary Clinton's sent out feelers to Brett about being Secretary of State should she be elected president.

Back to the issue at hand, will the Shi'ite militias now be issuing a statement condemning Barack's Special Envoy?

Doubt it.

Nouri al-Maliki, when he was prime minister, banned the militias.  He made various organizations disband them or stated they could not participate in the political process.

He did that because he feared being overthrown.

The always oblivious Haider al-Abadi (the current US-appointed prime minister of Iraq) has no such thoughts.

He not only allowed them back into the process, he made them a part of the government.

They're now a part of the government that he can't control.

And they don't take orders from anybody . . .

Except some take orders from Iran, of course.

And Iraq's long take orders from Iran when it came to the Ashraf refugees.

Did John Kerry really call Iran "helpful" this week?

Yes, he did.

He'll hop into bed with anyone (that's why NEWSWEEK called him "the randy conspiracy buff" all those years ago -- though only the "conspiracy buff" angle was ever explored in commentaries after the fact).

And he hopped into bed with Iran.

Who's on top, John?

I know this not because it was on the news (though it was).  I know this from visiting members of Congress this week.  And those who advocate for the Ashraf community -- especially from my home state -- are furious with John for that statement.

They point out that the ones kidnapped have still not been returned and that the State Dept still provides no real information.

But, hey, John, you got a new sex partner and at your age, that is an accomplishment.

It doesn't help the persecuted Iranian refugees.

Hey, John, you think they might now ask you about the man you appointed to take care of this problem?

Your personal friend who had no experience in the area, pocketed his tax payer funded salary and then quickly went back into the private industry?

Yeah, I'm thinking so, too, John.

The Ashraf community.

Background:  As of September 2013, Camp Ashraf in Iraq is empty.  All remaining members of the community have been moved to Camp Hurriya (also known as Camp Liberty).  Camp Ashraf housed a group of Iranian dissidents who were  welcomed to Iraq by Saddam Hussein in 1986 and he gave them Camp Ashraf and six other parcels that they could utilize. In 2003, the US invaded Iraq.The US government had the US military lead negotiations with the residents of Camp Ashraf. The US government wanted the residents to disarm and the US promised protections to the point that US actions turned the residents of Camp Ashraf into protected person under the Geneva Conventions. This is key and demands the US defend the Ashraf community in Iraq from attacks.  The Bully Boy Bush administration grasped that -- they were ignorant of every other law on the books but they grasped that one.  As 2008 drew to a close, the Bush administration was given assurances from the Iraqi government that they would protect the residents. Yet Nouri al-Maliki ordered the camp repeatedly attacked after Barack Obama was sworn in as US President. July 28, 2009 Nouri launched an attack (while then-US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was on the ground in Iraq). In a report released this summer entitled "Iraqi government must respect and protect rights of Camp Ashraf residents," Amnesty International described this assault, "Barely a month later, on 28-29 July 2009, Iraqi security forces stormed into the camp; at least nine residents were killed and many more were injured. Thirty-six residents who were detained were allegedly tortured and beaten. They were eventually released on 7 October 2009; by then they were in poor health after going on hunger strike." April 8, 2011, Nouri again ordered an assault on Camp Ashraf (then-US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was again on the ground in Iraq when the assault took place). Amnesty International described the assault this way, "Earlier this year, on 8 April, Iraqi troops took up positions within the camp using excessive, including lethal, force against residents who tried to resist them. Troops used live ammunition and by the end of the operation some 36 residents, including eight women, were dead and more than 300 others had been wounded. Following international and other protests, the Iraqi government announced that it had appointed a committee to investigate the attack and the killings; however, as on other occasions when the government has announced investigations into allegations of serious human rights violations by its forces, the authorities have yet to disclose the outcome, prompting questions whether any investigation was, in fact, carried out."  Those weren't the last attacks.  They were the last attacks while the residents were labeled as terrorists by the US State Dept.  (September 28, 2012, the designation was changed.)   In spite of this labeling, Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) observed that "since 2004, the United States has considered the residents of Camp Ashraf 'noncombatants' and 'protected persons' under the Geneva Conventions."  So the US has an obligation to protect the residents.  3,300 are no longer at Camp Ashraf.  They have moved to Camp Hurriyah for the most part.  A tiny number has received asylum in other countries. Approximately 100 were still at Camp Ashraf when it was attacked Sunday.   That was the second attack this year alone.   February 9th of 2013, the Ashraf residents were again attacked, this time the ones who had been relocated to Camp Hurriyah.  Trend News Agency counted 10 dead and over one hundred injured.  Prensa Latina reported, " A rain of self-propelled Katyusha missiles hit a provisional camp of Iraqi opposition Mujahedin-e Khalk, an organization Tehran calls terrorists, causing seven fatalities plus 50 wounded, according to an Iraqi official release."  They were attacked again September 1, 2013 -- two years ago.   Adam Schreck (AP) reported back then that the United Nations was able to confirm the deaths of 52 Ashraf residents.

The situation has not been addressed.  The Ashraf community continues to be targeted.  The US government legally owes them safe passage out of Iraq.

Read on ...
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.