Thursday, October 10, 2013

Working It For BP (Hush, Hush, Sweet Charlotte)



Working It For BP
Isaiah's 


From June 10, 2010, that's "Working It For BP."  I really love that comic.  I don't love most of the ones I do.  You can probably count on two hands -- with fingers left over -- the number of my comics I love.  And besides a near weekly comic for The Common Ills for the last eight years, I also do comics for the community newsletters.

I don't hate the rest.  I'm okay with a lot of them, lukewarm to some and probably have sixty or so that I absolutely hate.

Of that comic when it went up, C.I. wrote:

As the Gulf Coast Disaster continues, BP CEO Tony Hayward gets a lap dance from Adm Thad Allen and declares, "Throw a little money at it. It's the BP way." Thad says, "I hope this never ends." Meanwhile, holding some cash, Barack gets a grind job from White House spokesmodel Robert Gibbs. Barack states, "Can't talk right now, Tony. Gibbs is creating an oil spill!" Isaiah archives his comics at The World Today Just Nuts.


Now, did you catch these:


"Old Acquaintance" (Ann)
"Whatever Happened To Baby Jane?" (Betty)
"The Letter" (Trina)
"beyond the forest" (Rebecca)
"Dark Victory" (Ruth)
"All About Eve" (Kat)
"Jezebel" (Marcia)
"Dead Ringer" (Stan)
"Now, Voyager" (Elaine)
"The Little Foxes" (Mike)


It was a theme post.  I said I'd grab it tonight.  

In 2009, at Third, we selected Bette Davis as  "The Best Actress of the 20th Century" and the theme was favorite Bette Davis film.  I have several favorites that were already selected.

My Aunt Sara babysat me all the time and all we did was watch movies -- and eat!

I had popcorn shrimp with her the first time I ever had it.  

And we would watch Turner Classics and rent old movies (back then a new rental was three bucks but old movies on videotape were 99 and 49 cents).  I know all of Bette Davis' movies, all of Gary Cooper's, most of Bing Crosby's, etc.  

I'm going to go with "Hush, Hush Sweet Charlotte."  We saw that over and over mainly because "Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?" was usually always rented.

Hush Hush Sweet Charlotte Poster.JPG


This was supposed to be the movie that reunited Bette Davis and Joan Crawford.  However, during location shooting, Bette made clear she was out for blood and Joan faked illness hoping to have the film shut down but instead they replaced Joan with Olivia de Havilland. 

I think Joan should have done the movie.  I don't care how Bette might have tried to destroy her, the wardrobe and the story would have given Joan the upperhand.  Olivia's a good actress but she's not Joan.  Even so, this is one of Olivia's best roles.

My favorite part of the movie is when a giant object is dropped.  I won't go into it or give spoilers but it did not matter how many times I saw that, I'd always jump when it happened (and still do).

Joan also missed out on a great cast:  Joseph Cotton, Agnes Moorhead and Mary Astor among others. 

And Bette is great as Charlotte.  Is she crazy?  Is she guilty?  Is she innocent?  The story spins and spins and spins some more.

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


Thursday, October 10, 2013. Chaos and violence continue, for the fifth day in a row there are corpses in the streets of Iraq,  Nouri's government executes more people -- and surpasses last year's total, Ed Snowden is honored in Russia, the VA's new motto appears to be "Addiction gets you out the door!," Barack's war on the press and whistle-blowers gets called out, and more.


We noted something this morning but did so at the end of an entry.  Then Glenn Greenwald's Tweets were forwarded:










  • It's hard to imagine how this scathing indictment from of Obama admin's press attacks isn't big news:




  • So we're going to put  an excerpt from the report at the top.  This is from Leonard Downie Jr. and Sara Rafsky's "The Obama Administration and the Press: Leak investigations and surveillance in post-9/11 America"  which was published today by the Committee to Protect Journalists:


    In the Obama administration’s Washington, government officials are increasingly afraid to talk to the press. Those suspected of discussing with reporters anything that the government has classified as secret are subject to investigation, including lie-detector tests and scrutiny of their telephone and e-mail records. An “Insider Threat Program” being implemented in every government department requires all federal employees to help prevent unauthorized disclosures of information by monitoring the behavior of their colleagues.
    Six government employees, plus two contractors including Edward Snowden, have been subjects of felony criminal prosecutions since 2009 under the 1917 Espionage Act, accused of leaking classified information to the press—compared with a total of three such prosecutions in all previous U.S. administrations. Still more criminal investigations into leaks are under way. Reporters’ phone logs and e-mails were secretly subpoenaed and seized by the Justice Department in two of the investigations, and a Fox News reporter was accused in an affidavit for one of those subpoenas of being “an aider, abettor and/or conspirator” of an indicted leak defendant, exposing him to possible prosecution for doing his job as a journalist. In another leak case, a New York Times reporter has been ordered to testify against a defendant or go to jail.
    Compounding the concerns of journalists and the government officials they contact, news stories based on classified documents obtained from Snowden have revealed extensive surveillance of Americans’ telephone and e-mail traffic by the National Security Agency. Numerous Washington-based journalists told me that officials are reluctant to discuss even unclassified information with them because they fear that leak investigations and government surveillance make it more difficult for reporters to protect them as sources. “I worry now about calling somebody because the contact can be found out through a check of phone records or e-mails,” said veteran national security journalist R. Jeffrey Smith of the Center for Public Integrity, an influential nonprofit government accountability news organization in Washington. “It leaves a digital trail that makes it easier for the government to monitor those contacts,” he said.



    It's an important issue and we'll note a whistle-blower later in the snapshot.  For now, Scott Alan McDonald died because of the VA.  His widow Heather McDonald explained what happened to Congress this morning.


    Heather McDonald:  For 15 years, he served honorably in the uniform of his country and was proud to serve as a UH-60 Blackhawk mechanic and Crew Chief for MEDEVAC Unit.  Bosnia, Panama, Iraq and Afghanistan are only a few of the war-torn countries he dedicated his life to changing.  In his career, he experienced heartache, unimaginable violence, death and the overall devastating effects of war.  He saw many of his fellow soldiers give the ultimate sacrifice -- narrowly escaping many times himself.  He loved his country and what the American flag stands for.  He was a brothers in arms to thousands of fellow soldiers and a truly remarkable man that never met a stranger.  Scott had larger than life expectations for his children.  And because of his commitment and honor, in January of 2011, we married.  On April 30, 2011, Scott's career with the army came full circle and he hung his uniform up for good. He began seeking the treatment from the VA for back pain and mental illness.  The Chalmers P. Wylie VA Ambulatory Care Center in Columbus, Ohio immediately started prescribing medications beginning with ibuprofen, nurofen, meloxicam and graduating to vicodin, klonopin, celexa, Zoloft, valium and Percocet.  This is where the rollercoaster began.  My husband was taking up to 15 pills a day within the first six months of treatment.  Every time Scott came home from an appointment, he had different medications, different dosages, different directions on how to take them.  And progressively over the course of a year and a half of starting his treatment, the medications had changed so many times by adding and changing that Scott became changing.  We researched many of the drugs that he was prescribed online and saw the dangerous interactions that they cause.  Yet my husband was conditioned to follow orders.  And he did so.  On September 12th of 2012, Scott attended another of his scheduled appointments.  This was when they added Percocet.  This was a much different medication than he was used to taking and which they prescribed him not to exceed 3,000 milligrams of ibu -- acetaminophen, I'm sorry.  Again, my husband followed orders.  Approximately zero-one-hundred hours on the 13th of September, I arrived home from my job.  I found Scott disoriented and very lethargic.  I woke him and asked him if he was okay?  He told me he was fine and that he just took what the doctors told him to take. At approximately zero-seven-thirty, I found my husband cold and unresponsive.  At 35-years-old, this father of two was gone.  I ask  myself why everyday.  And when I ask the VA why more tests weren't performed to make sure he was healthy enough, they responded by saying: "It is not routine to evaluate our soldiers' pain medication distribution."  A simple "I am in pain" constitutes a narcotic and a "This isn't working" constitutes a change in medication.  I was sickened and disturbed by their response and I decided at that point no one else should die.  I have no doubt that if the proper tests were being performed on our men and women, I would not be here today -- because my husband would be.  I have no doubt that for thousands of the soldiers that have fallen after coming home from war would be here today.  [Wiping tears] I'm sorry.  As the silent soldiers and spouses of our military members. we almost expect the possibility that they won't come home from war.  But we cannot accept that they fight there for their country and after the battle is over they come home and die.


    A study published last year in The American Journal of Psychiatry found that, "Among patients receiving care from the Veterans Health Administration, death from accidental overdose was found to be associated with psychiatric and substance use disorders. The study findings suggest the importance of risk assessment and overdose prevention for vulnerable clinical subpopulations."  That study was published in January of 2012.  Does no one in the Veteran Affairs Department know how to read?  Clearly, they don't know how to take action but are they at least literate? 

    Nine months before Heather lost her husband, a peer-reviewed, medical study was published warning of what was taking place.  Where was VA Secretary Eric Shineski?  Mismanaging again?

    It has been one scandal after another under Shineski.  It really is time he resigned. Heather McDonald was testifying before the House Veterans Affairs Subcommittee on Health -- US House Rep Dan Benishek is the Chair of the Subcomittee and US House Rep Julia Brownley is the Ranking Member -- as part of the first panel retired Air Force member Kimberly Stowe Green, retired Sgt Joshua Renschler and retired 1st Sgt Justin Minyard.  Panel two was Dr. Pamela Gray, Claudia J. Bahorik, and the VA's Dr. Steven G. Scott.  The third panel was the VA's Dr. Robert Jesse accompanied by Robert Kearns.

    Kimberly Stowe Green's husband, like Heather's husband, should be alive.  He went in for back surgery.  That's not usually life threatening.  But what the VA did before that ensured that it was.

    Kimberly Stowe Green: My husband Ricky Green died as a result of the VA's skyrocketing use of prescription pain killers.   On behalf of my husband, my self and our two grieving sons, I want to ask this Committee to do all that it can to prevent other veterans from dying in the same manner that my husband died. My husband died on October 29, 2011 -- at the age of forty-three -- four days after lower back surgery.  The Arkansas State Crime Lab and it's medical examiner performed an autopsy and determined that the cause of death was mixed drug intoxification complicating recent lumbar spine surgery.  My husband died because of the prescription pain and sleeping medications that the VA and its doctors prescribed for him and dispensed to him out of the VA pharmacy.  In treating Ricky's service-connected back pain, the VA doctors wrote prescriptions for the following drugs.



    She noted the 2010 VA clinical practice guidelines have not been fully implemented and they're not being followed.  What does Eric Shineski say to that?  More to the point, what does US President Barack Obama say to that?  How many screw ups is Shinseki going to rack up before his inability to do his job results in his resignation?

    Kimberly Stowe Green stated, "Ricky survived serving in combat zones in his over 20 years of military  service but he could not survive the VA and its negligent treatment of him."


    Iraq War veteran Josh Green survived a mortar attack in Iraq and the pain from the wounds led the VA to prescribe one pill after another -- he was taking 13 pain killers at one point.  The result?  The VA medical treatment left him with liver damage and no feeling in his left leg.  (Heather McDonald noted her husband had Stage II liver failure but it was "only discovered by the coroner.") That is awful and the VA owes Green much more than an apology.  But something else should be registering.  If it's not, let's note this statement from Green about Percocet, "And what happened was, the more I took it, the less it worked because my body became tolerant to it. 


    Do you get it yet?

    Do you get the problems that are being created under Shinseki?  The problems that will cost millions to clean up and will be harrowing for the veterans going through it?

    You can't just dispense pain killers like they're Flintstone chewables or candy out of Pez dispenser.  This attitude was overcome long ago everywhere except the VA.  It's why former First Lady Betty Ford went public and set up The Betty Ford Center.

    When it comes to addiction, there may not be a more vulnerable population than veterans.  The reasons for that are they are taught to mask the pain while serving and, as both widows pointed out, to follow orders -- the following of orders often carries over the medical treatment from the VA.  The VA doctors are prescribing like it's 1947 and, as a society, we've never heard of pain killer addiction. 

    People in pain need help and need treatment.  They do not, however, need to develop an addiction because a bunch of lazy or quack doctors don't want to do their job.

    Under Shinseki, the prescriptions are killing veterans, yes.  But also under Shinseki, the prescriptions are resulting in addictions that will have be treated years from now.

    That's unacceptable -- from a health standpoint and from a taxpayer standpoint. 


    Shinseki is supposed to be on top of things.  He shouldn't need a Congressional hearing to take action.

    It was really distressing to hear Josh Green detail his objections to the pills and how, when he would raise these objections, he would be prescribed more pills.

    Iraq and Afghanistan War veteran Justin Minyard suffered from chronic back pain (tied to a 72 hour continues shift at the Pentagon, searching for any survivors after the Pentagon was hit on 9-11).  The existing back pain was amplified by his later service in Iraq and Afghanistan.  The treatment?  Pills, pills and more pills.  That's all the VA offered him.  He explained, "My life revolved around when is my next pill, when is my next dosage increase and when can I get my next refill?  At my worst point I was taking enough pills daily to treat four terminally ill cancer patients."

    Repeating, this isn't just medical malpractice with effects people see and feel now, this is medical malpractice that is turning veterans into addicts.  That is unacceptable.  Civilian doctors prescribing in this manner risk loss of license and criminal charges but the VA just looks the other way. The VA motto appears to be: "Addiction gets you out the door!"



    Ranking Member Julia Brownley:  I think we all owe you deep apologies for not responding to your needs the way you have defended our country and, Ms. McDonald, I include you and thanking you for your service to our country and being married to your spouse and supporting him through this process -- that you, too, need to be thanked for your service.  So thank you all.  I think this is obviously a very important topic and hearing your individual stories is, I think, important for the American people to hear.  I wanted to ask a question -- my first question anyway -- and this question is more directed to Mr. Green and Mr. Minyard.  I was wondering about your experiences and maybe experiences from other wounded warriors that you may know -- regarding the continuity of treatment from the army to the VA and perhaps from one VA facility to another VA facility?

    Josh Green: I'll answer that.  To the best of my knowledge  -- again, I've walked alongside countless veterans over the last several years on a volunteer capacity and walked them through attempting to navigate the VA health care system to get the best care possible.  In my experience, it takes quite often a door kicker mentality to get veterans the care that they need.  I've hand walked them to a physician's door, to a social worker's door, to a mental health practitioner's door and said, "This person needs help today."  And that's the way we've been able to make some things happen in people's lives.  To answer as quick as possible: No.  There's not good continuity of care from one facility to another.  There's not good continuity of care from DoD to VA.  You know, as I spoke on my specific experience leaving DoD and entering VA care, my medications weren't on the VA formulary so they completely changed my medication regime and put me on more harmful medications which ended up causing me to backslide in my recovery which took the army three years to establish.  As far as -- There's a veteran that I work with currently that has left Portland, a VA facility in Oregon and moved into Washington state.  And upon entering Washington state American Lake VA Hospital, he was told that his medications are not able to be purchased through the American Lake VA Hospital because they don't have the budget for the non-formulary medication that the other facility had.  And this was again a medication that took six years to figure out the best thing for him and they're not going to purchase it anymore  which is causing him to backslide in his pain management.  So short answer is no, there's not good continuity of care.


    Ranking Member Julia Brownley:  Thank you.  And I think I said Mr. Green and I apologize.  I meant Mr. Minyard if you had any additional comments in terms of continuity of treatment?

    Justin Minyard:  Ma'am, with all due respect, I would not, in my opinion, and through my experience, I would not place the word "continuity" anywhere in a sentence that contains other nouns "DoD" and  "VA."  To give you a quick answer --

    Ranking Member Julia Brownley:  Yeah?

    Justin Minyard:  -- the systems, to me --

    Ranking Member Julia Brownley:  I hear you.

    Justin Minyard:  -- don't work.


    Help me out here.  Since 2009, what presidential cabinet level person is supposed to have been addressing "seamless transition" from DoD to VA?

    That would be Shinseki.

    And yesterday, he was just so concerned in the House Veterans Affairs Committee about the shutdown, he bled for any who suffered, you understand.  He'd just hate to think of anyone not receiving their benefits or survivors benefits from the VA because of the shut down.

    Spare us your crocodile tears, Shinseki. 

    Heather McDonald:  After my husband's death, I did contact the VA.  Almost immediately -- the VA itself told me that I needed to immediately start the process to claim my husband's death pension to help my family.  What doing that immediately does I don't know.  It took 11 months to start receiving any retroactive pay from my husband's pension.  I lost my home.  I lost my car.  When I asked them during the-the filing of the claim, the VA asked me whether I felt my husband's death was service-connected or not?  First, that's not my decision.  Every pill he put in his mouth was due to an ailment or an injury he received either in theater due to his service for his country.  So, yes, that makes it service connected.  Why it took 9 months for them to make a decision and a rating on that?  No, I was simply told, "I'm sorry, Mrs. McDonald, this is the process.  It takes time.  There's a huge backlog."  I feel like the VA right now is proud of themselves because they're saying, "The backlog is going down.  The amount of claims are lessening."  Well of course they are.   Because they're dying.  They're not receiving treatment anymore because they're not here to receive it.



    Turning to the topic of Iraq, today the European Parliament passed a resolution condemning the violence:



    MEPs strongly condemned the recent acts of terrorism and sectarian violence in Iraq, calling on the authorities "to facilitate a full and swift independent international investigation (...) and to cooperate fully with that investigation". All leaders and players in society should "start to work together to end the bloodshed and ensure that all Iraqi citizens feel equally protected", adds the resolution. MEPs also voiced concern about the spill-over of violence from the Syria conflict to Iraq.


    And violence today?   National Iraqi News Agency reports the corpse -- well the head -- of a 25-year-old woman was discovered dumped in Kirkuk.  Alsumaria adds the head was found in piles of waste next to a building.  Corpses dumped and discarded were one of the most common traits of the 2006 to 2007 period popular known as the "civil war" (ethnic cleansing).  They began popping up regularly in the last months.  A new development this week?  Starting Sunday, every day has resulted in reports of at least one discovered corpse.  It was every few weeks, then every two to two and half weeks, then every two to three days.  Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and today -- five days in a row.

    In other violence, NINA reporters 1 activist was shot dead in Ramadi ("a supporter of the Ramadi sit-in protest"), an Anbar car bombing injured one police officer, a Falluja bombing left two Iraqi soldiers injured, an armed Falljua attack left 1 police captain dead and another police member injured, a Falluja sticky bombing left two people injured,  1 man was shot dead in Kirkuk, the Salah al-Din military post announced they killed 2 suspects, and an attack on Mosul's al-Mowselya TV channel left 3 Iraqi soldiers dead.  All Iraq News reports 2 suspects werte shot dead in Tikrit by police forces and  3 police officers were shot dead in Mosul.  Alsumaria reports a Mosul roadside bombing injured a taxi driver, 2 Baghdad bombings claimed 3 lives and left twelve people injured, 1 person was shot dead in Baghdad (gun had silencer), and 1 shop owner in central Baghdad was shot dead.


    In other violence, Reuters notes 42 people have been executed by the 'government' in Iraq this week.  This is not good news or anything to be proud of.  Iraq has no real judicial system.  Some executed this year would have likely been released is Nouri al-Maliki's State of Law slate did not keep objecting to the amnesty bill which should have passed a long time ago.  As Human Rights Watch noted at the start of this month,  "In order to successfully identify and arrest those responsible for the attacks, Iraqi authorities should reform their judicial system and revise their draconian anti-terror law."   UNAMI issued the following statement:



    Baghdad, 10 October 2013 – UNAMI notes with concern that between 8 and 9 October, 42 people sentenced to death were executed, among them one woman, as confirmed by the Ministry of Justice of Iraq on 10 October.
        
    UNAMI reiterates its call on the Government of Iraq to adopt a moratorium on the implementation of all death sentences, pursuant to UN General Assembly resolutions 62/149 (2007), 63/168 (2009) and 65/205 (2010), and to consider ratifying the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, with a view to the eventual abolition of the death penalty.


    Al Jazeera notes the 42 executions bring the total for the year to at least  132.  The year is not even over and already Iraq has topped itself in executions, 129 is the number of executions in 2012 (see this Amnesty International report).

    Yesterday's State Dept press briefing found spokesperson Marie Harf insisting that she'd have an answer today with regards to flights through Iraqi air space to Syria.  She apparently forgot.  She did, however, make time to obsess over Ed Snowden.  She's like a cock hound on him.  From today's press briefing:






    QUESTION: Snowden?

    MS. HARF: Mm-hmm. Back in the news.

    QUESTION: Yeah, amazing. He – because we haven’t heard much from him for quite a while. But his father’s there and it just raises this issue – number one, if you had anything to say about that, period. But it raises that issue of he is the father, so it’s an immediate family member, but is there anything legally that he is precluded from doing when he’s there? I mean, can he – because after all, Snowden, Jr., is on the lam. So can he --

    MS. HARF: Is there anything his father is precluded from doing, or else --

    QUESTION: Yeah. Like can he meet – would it be a violation of some type of law to meet with his son?


    MS. HARF: Not to my knowledge. And the father really isn’t our concern, and even the father meeting with the son really isn’t our concern. Our concern really is Edward Snowden returning to the United States. He’s accused of very serious charges here, and he’ll be accorded full due process and protections applicable under U.S. law. It’s not really our – I think our concern about the meeting or our place to comment on it, and I don’t think we’re focused on his father at all in any way. I think we would just encourage Mr. Snowden to return.


    QUESTION: Yeah. Well, I mean, obviously it would be kind of a legal question. Is there really something – like, if you were to meet with, I don’t know, a terrorist to be in collusion with a --


    MS. HARF: I will take the legal question. I don’t think there is, but let me ask my experts.


    QUESTION: Just for the future, it might be interesting.


    MS. HARF: Yeah. No, it’s a good question.


    QUESTION: And then also, is there anything – any update on consular access?


    MS. HARF: No.


    QUESTION: Has he talked with U.S. officials?


    MS. HARF: No, he has not.


    QUESTION: Nothing?


    MS. HARF: Nothing.

    QUESTION: Okay.


    MS. HARF: To my knowledge, nothing. No.


    QUESTION: So you have --


    MS. HARF: Scott --


    QUESTION: You have no reaction or – to the visit by – or no comment on the visit of Mr. Snowden to --


    MS. HARF: Well, I mean, the reaction is the same it’s always been. Mr. Snowden needs to return to the United States to face these charges. Yeah, I really don’t have anything to say about the specific meeting with his father. It’s just not really what we’re focused on.


    QUESTION: He didn’t contact anybody, as far as you know, within the Administration to say he was going?

    MS. HARF: His father?

    QUESTION: Yeah, the father.


    MS. HARF: I do not know the answer to that question. I don’t know --


    QUESTION: I’m just wondering if he – if it was perhaps timed by – that he might have had some discussions --


    MS. HARF: Did he have to get a visa with --


    QUESTION: Yeah.


    MS. HARF: I just – I have no idea. I can try to find out. I don’t think so, though.


    QUESTION: Okay. I just wondered. He might have had discussions with somebody. He might be carrying a message to his son.


    MS. HARF: Not to my knowledge, no. Nothing at all like that. No, nothing.



    For the record, any American citizen with a valid passport can travel to Russia.  There's no permission needed from the US government.  There is no war between Russia and the US -- though there appears to be a war against information and knowledge.



     Ed Snowden  is an American citizen and whistle-blower who had been employed by the CIA and by the NSA before leaving government employment for the more lucrative world of contracting.  At the time he blew the whistle, he was working for Booz Allen Hamilton doing NSA work.  Glenn Greenwald (Guardian) had the first scoop (and many that followed) on Snowden's revelations that the US government was spying on American citizens, keeping the data on every phone call made in the United States (and in Europe as well) while also spying on internet use via PRISM and Tempora.  US Senator Bernie Sanders decried the fact that a "secret court order" had been used to collect information on American citizens "whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing."  Sanders went on to say, "That is not what democracy is about.  That is not what freedom is about. [. . .] While we must aggressively pursue international terrorists and all of those who would do us harm, we must do it in a way that protects the Constitution and civil liberties which make us proud to be Americans."  The immediate response of the White House, as Dan Roberts and Spencer Ackerman (Guardian) reported,  was to insist that there was nothing unusual and to get creaky and compromised Senator Dianne Feinstein to insist, in her best Third Reich voice, "People want to keep the homeland safe."  The spin included statements from Barack himself.   Anita Kumar (McClatchy Newspapers) reports, "Obama described the uproar this week over the programs as “hype” and sought to ensure Americans that Big Brother is not watching their every move."  Josh Richman (San Jose Mercury News) quoted Barack insisting that "we have established a process and a procedure that the American people should feel comfortable about."  Apparently not feeling the gratitude, the New York Times editorial board weighed in on the White House efforts at spin, noting that "the Obama administration issued the same platitude it has offered every time President Obama has been caught overreaching in the use of his powers: Terrorists are a real menace and you should just trust us to deal with them because we have internal mechanisms (that we are not going to tell you about) to make sure we do not violate your rights."  Former US President Jimmy Carter told CNN, "I think that the secrecy that has been surrounding this invasion of privacy has been excessive, so I think that the bringing of it to the public notice has probably been, in the long term, beneficial."



    The more Barack attempted to defend the spying, the more ridiculous he came off.  Mike Masnick (TechDirt) reviewed Barack's appearance on The Charlie Rose Show and observed of the 'explanations' offered, "None of that actually explains why this program is necessary. If there's a phone number that the NSA or the FBI gets that is of interest, then they should be able to get a warrant or a court order and request information on that number from the telcos. None of that means they should be able to hoover up everything."  As US House Rep John Conyers noted, "But I maintain that the Fourth Amendment to be free from unreasonable search and seizure to mean that this mega data collected in such a super aggregated fashion can amount to a Fourth Amendment violation before you do anything else.  You've already violated the law, as far as I am concerned."  Barack couldn't deal with that reality but did insist, in the middle of June, that this was an opportunity for "a national conversation."  He's always calling for that because, when it doesn't happen, he can blame the nation.  It's so much easier to call for "a national conversation" than for he himself to get honest with the American people. And if Barack really believes this has kicked off "a national conversation" then demonizing Ed Snowden is a really strange way to say "thank you."  August 1st, he was granted temporary asylum in Russia.


    The Voice of Russia reports, "Four whistleblowing advocates from the United States met with Edward Snowden in Moscow Wednesday and gave him an award for truth-telling. As seen on the photo published by Getty Images Snowden received the Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence Award (SAAII) alongside UK WikiLeaks journalist Sarah Harrison, who took Snowden from Hong Kong to Moscow and obtained his asylum, and the United States government whistleblowers including Coleen Rowley (FBI), Thomas Drake (NSA), Jesselyn Raddack (DoJ) and Ray McGovern (CIA)."  The Oxford Union explains, "The Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence confers an award each year to a person exemplifying the courage, persistence and devotion to the truth of CIA analyst Sam Adams.  Many distinguished past award winners include prominent whistleblowers and former intelligence agents.Caro Kriel (AP) quotes Jesselyn Raddack stating, "He spoke very openly about a whole range of things, a number of which I won't get into here, but it certainly didn't involve any kind of manipulation by the Russian government or anyone else for that matter.  He definitely is his own person and makes his own decisions and says and does what he wants to."  Raddack is with the Government Accountability ProjectFred Weir (Christian Science Monitor) reports:


    Interviewed on the Kremlin-funded English-language television network RT Thursday, the four whistleblowers agreed that Snowden looked "remarkably well" and was in fine spirits "considering the pressures" of his situation.
    "This is an extraordinary person. He's made his peace with what he did, he's convinced that what he did was right, he has no regrets and is willing to face whatever the future holds for him," Mr. McGovern told RT.
    Snowden's lawyer, Kucherena, has told Russian media that his client "has a girlfriend," is making great progress in learning the Russian language, and may soon find a job to keep him occupied in Russia.
    Reached by telephone on Thursday by the Monitor, Kucherena offered nothing but a good-natured scolding.
    "You must admit that when American politicians demand that human rights should be observed and talk about democratic freedoms, it's a sheer contradiction when we see the fact that everybody is bugged and their emails are read," he said.




    Along with receiving the award (announced in July) yesterday, Ed has another visitor in Russia.  Phil Black ands Ben Brumfield (CNN) report:

    The father of NSA leaker Edward Snowden told reporters in Moscow that he thinks his son deserves a Nobel Peace Prize.
    He arrived there Thursday for his first visit with his son since the former government IT contractor fled the United States after leaking National Security Agency spy program details to the media.
    Members of the European Parliament nominated Snowden in September for the Andrei Sakharov Prize, which honors figures who stand up to oppressive powers. The prize was awarded to Pakistani education activist Malala Yousafzai on Thursday.

    Becky Evans (Daily Mail) reports on Lon Snowden's visit hereRIA Novosti adds:

    Edward Snowden’s future and exact current whereabouts remain shrouded in mystery, but his lawyer Anatoly Kucherena says the former US intelligence contractor was not in talks to seek asylum in any other countries and has received several offers of work.
    Kucherena, speaking to Rossiya-24 news channel alongside Lon Snowden, said Edward Snowden would be open to extending his one-year asylum status in Russia.


    Lastly, tomorrow is The International Day of the Girl Child.  UNICEF notes:


    The International Day of the Girl Child is celebrated on 11 October, a day designated by the United Nations for promoting the rights of girls, and addressing the unique challenges they face. The inaugural day in 2012 focused on the issue of ending child marriage. As the lead agency for the Day, UNICEF, in consultation with other United Nations agencies and civil society partners, selected Innovating for Girls’ Education as this year’s theme, in recognition of the importance of fresh and creative perspectives to propel girls’ education forward and building on the momentum created by last year’s event.

    As the nature and scale of barriers facing girls becomes more complex, innovative strategies are needed to give girls an education that prepares them for the challenges of the 21st century. As the world evaluates the gaps that still remain in achieving global goals for gender equality in education and defines an agenda that moves beyond the Millennium Development Goals, it is critical that innovation brings about solutions for improving girls’ education that are not only more creative, but also more effective, efficient, sustainable and just.










    sara rafsky















    Read on ...

    Friday, October 4, 2013

    Heck Of A Job (Snow Cones)



    Heck Of A Job



    From May 30, 2010, that's "Heck Of A Job."  Yes, even by then, it was obvious Barack was taking too many vacations.  C.I. noted: 

     Barack explains, "So the spill goes on through August? We'll handle it. I'm on the job. Mmm. Can I get another Malibu Rum?" Isaiah archives his comics at The World Today Just Nuts.

    Okay, it's a theme post time.  We're noting favorite snacks.

    Mine is snow cone.  When I was a kid -- up until 14 -- my favorite snow cone was cherry but I'd eat any kind really.  But at 14, in the summer, there was this girl named Faith.  She was gorgeous.  And for some reason was attracted to me.

    I didn't believe it at first.  We had been in school together for years.

    But then it became obvious to me.  We'd get pina colada snow cones and then eat them as we took turns kissing.  I'm not making this up.  I'm sure it sounds pathetic.  But it was pretty wild for a 14-year-old.

    I still prefer pina colada to any other flavor.


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


    Thursday, October 3, 2013.  Chaos and violence continue, kidnappings are part of the violence and there's news there today, still no election law passed by Parliament, oil exports are down, Nouri's also still using those 'magic' wands at checkpoints despite the fact that the man who made and sold them is in a British prison for those defective wands, Senators Robert Menendez and John McCain inform the State Dept aid and weapon sales to Iraq can be stopped by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and more.


    James Morrison (Washington Times) reports,  "Sen. Robert Menendez, New Jersey Democrat and chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, and Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican, told a top State Department official to inform the Iraqi government that Congress is growing impatient with its failure to keep the dissidents of the Mujahedin-e-Khalq safe from assaults."

    What's Morrison talking about?

    As of last month, 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 this year, 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 1st.   Adam Schreck (AP) reported that the United Nations was able to confirm the deaths of 52 Ashraf residents.



    Dropping back to September 16's snapshot:

    US Senator Robert Menendez issued a statement on the attack which included, "I hold the Iraqi government directly responsible to protect the community, to investigate this matter thoroughly, and to prosecute the perpetrators of this heinous act. I am deeply concerned for the seven hostages who were taken during this attack. The Iraqi government should act swiftly to determine their whereabouts and ensure their safety. There is added urgency for the global community, as well as for the United States, to help resettle this community outside of Iraq, and end this cycle of ongoing terror attacks."  Seven Ashraf hostages? Nouri's government denied they existed but they did and do. Last week, UNHCR issued the following statement:

    These seven are all known by UNHCR to be asylum-seekers, and the agency hopes to have an opportunity to interview them. In light of the numerous and persistent reports over the past week that these individuals may be at risk of forced return to Iran, UNHCR calls upon the Government of Iraq to locate them, to ensure their physical security, and to safeguard them against return to Iran against their will.


    US House Rep Dana Rohrabacher issued a statement noting them and the continued attacks on the Ashraf community.  He observed, "The refugees disarmed themselves with faith in U.S. Government guarantees of their safety. If we fail them, nobody will believe us again."


    This morning, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a hearing on Iran and its nuclear ambitions (or perceived ones).  Senator Robert Menendez is the Chair of the Committee.  Senator Bob Corker is the Ranking Member.   Appearing before the Committee today were two panels.  The first panel was the State Dept's Under Secretary for Political Affairs Wendy Sherman, the second panel was Washington Institute for Near East Policy's James Jeffrey (Jeffrey was also a US Ambassador to Iraq -- one of four in Barack's first term and don't forget failed nominee Brett McGurk), the Institute for Science and International Security's David Albright and the Council on Foreign Relation's Ray Takeyh.  

    From the first panel:


    Senator John McCain:  In the situation as it relates to the Camp Ashraf people, we know that they were Iranian dissidents.  At one point,  they were designated as a terrorist organization.  But the United States government, it's true, gave them an assurance that if they moved [to Camp Liberty] they would be protected.  We know that the Iranian influence has increased in, uh, in Iraq.  In fact, we know now that Iraq is alive and well and doing extremely well moving back and forth across the two countries.  Now there was a murder of, I believe, 51 people who were members of this  camp and many of them had in their possession guarantees from the United States of America that they would not be harmed.   What-what lessons -- First, are these facts true?  And, second, if they are true, what message does that send to people who we say will be under our protection?


    Wendy Sherman:  Senator, uh, I share your, deep concern about what happened, uh, at Camp Ashraf.  This was a vicious attack in September 1st and many lives were lost.  And the US continues to press the government of Iraq at every opportunity, at very senior -- at the most senior levels to ensure the safety and security of residents at Camp Hurriya where many of the MEK were moved for better safety.  We strongly and swiftly condemned the attack.  We of course extend  our condolences to the victims' families and we are working with the government of Iraq and the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq, UNAMI, to peacefully and voluntarily transfer the surviving residents to safety at Camp Hurriya on September 12th.  And we are working for the protection of the people in Camp Hurriya because we do not want a repeat of this.   So, to date, the government of Iran -- of Iraq has moved in over 700 large T-walls, over 500 bunkers, over 600 small T-walls and nearly 50,000 sandbags.  UN monitors visit the camp daily in accordance with the MOU to asses human rights and humanitarian conditions.  But I must say, Senator, the real answer to this, to the safety and security of all the people in the camps -- who wants to live in a camp? -- is resettlement to third countries to get out of Iraq and to get out of harms way.  And I would call on all the people who are here today representing the rights and the interests of the MEK and the leaders of the MEK in the camps and in Paris, uh, to allow this resettlement to go forward because until the resettlement happens safety and security is going to be a risk.  We will do everything in our power to keep people safe in these camps.  But, as you point out, the al Qaeda threat is increasing in Iraq and it is difficult.

    Senator John McCain:  And I hope that this issue will be raised with the Iraqi government.  And we in Congress may have to look at the kind of aid and how we are extending that to Iraq if this kind of thing is going to be countenanced by the Iraqi government.  I don't -- I've used up all my time.  And I thank you for your response.

    Chair Robert Menendez: Before I turn to Senator [Edward] Markey let me echo what Senator McCain has said in this regard.  And I put out a statement in this regard, I also talked to our Department.  You know, America went to the MEK and we said, 'Disarm and we will protect you.'  And then we ultimately left and that protection has not been there.  You can put up I don't care how many tons of sand bags but when elements of the Iraqi forces actually may very well be complicit in what took place, sand bags aren't going to take care of the problem.  And I agree with you that resettlement is a critical part.  Maybe the United States could be part of leading the way in saying to a universe of these individuals that in fact you can be resettled to the United States.  And that would get the rest of the world to offer further resettlement. But it is unacceptable to lose one more life when American commanders gave these individuals a written guarantee towards their safety.  And it sends a message to others in the world that when we say we are going to do that and we do not, they should not trust us.  And for one thing that this Committee can do since it has jurisdiction over all weapon sales is that I doubt very much that we are going to see any approval of any weapon sales to Iraq until we get this situation in  a place where people's lives are safe.  




    First off, I counted at least 15 Ashraf supporters attending the hearing.  (They wore yellow.)  Second, I don't mean to be rude here, but why don't you know your facts?

    We were at the hearing today because we knew there was a good chance that Ashraf would be raised.  McCain and Menendez are among those who regularly raise the issue.  So the State Dept should have known that as well.

    Instead, it's like an AA meeting facilitated by someone who never did the steps.  To answer McCain's two questions, she had to pull out 'The Big Book.'  The State Dept cheat sheet.  She was reading aloud and had no idea what she was quickly skimming.  That's how she made this mistake:


    We of course extend  our condolences to the victims' families and we are working with the government of Iraq and the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq, UNAMI, to peacefully and voluntarily transfer the surviving residents to safety at Camp Hurriya on September 12th. 

    And "we are working" on something that took place September 12th?  She had no idea until she finished her skimming while testifying that the US was not "working" because everyone had been moved out of Ashraf by the 12th.


    She still didn't grasp what she'd read:

    But I must say, Senator, the real answer to this, to the safety and security of all the people in the camps -- who wants to live in a camp? -- is resettlement to third countries to get out of Iraq and to get out of harms way. 

    "In the camps"?  There's only one camp now, Camp Hurriya.  Second, learn.  Do your damn job and learn.  It shouldn't be that damn difficult when you consider all the money US taxpayers are giving the State Dept to work in Iraq (only Afghanistan exceeds Iraq in terms of the State Dept's budget).  Wendy Sherman showed up knowing nothing about the topic.  "Who wants to live in a camp?"

    Camp Ashraf was established decades ago.  The residents didn't want to leave it.  Not for Camp Hurriya, not to move anywhere else.  It had become their home.

    That's why the international press showed them with tears, the first group forced out.  They were crying because they were leaving their homes.

    If you don't grasp that, you shouldn't be speaking on the topic on behalf of the US government.

    Wendy Sherman doesn't want to live in a camp?

    Got it.

    But Wendy Sherman isn't a Camp Ashraf resident nor is she every person on the face of the planet.  Meaning?  What she likes and doesn't like does not get reflected 100% across humanity.  She needs to stop try to be the Voice of All People and instead learn some facts.


    We're not done yet because she wasn't done yet showing her ignorance.  She said, "We will do everything in our power to keep people safe in these camps.  But, as you point out, the al Qaeda threat is increasing in Iraq and it is difficult."  First off, no, the US government is not doing everything in its power.  It could take some of the US forces (including the unit Barack sent in fall 2012) and have them protect Camp Hurriya.  Or it could demand that United Nations security forces go in and protect the people of Hurriya.

    Second of all, al Qaeda?

    How stupid is Wendy Sherman?

    She didn't have the brains to realize Ashraf would probably be an issue.  Then she wants to blame al Qaeda?

    It was most likely Nouri's forces.  Barring that, it was fighters from Iran who were waived in.

    If the State Dept is so stupid they think al Qaeda is in Iran, then the whole world's at risk.

    al Qaeda in Iraq is a Sunni phenomenon (created by the Iraq War).  The MEK are Shi'ites from Iran.  The people who want them out of Iraq?  Shi'ites.  Not Sunnis.  al Qaeda in Iraq has no interest in the 3,000 or so MEK.  They're not upset that the MEK has been at war with the government of Iran.  They don't care. It's not their battle.

    Wendy Sherman needs to learn her facts before she next offers Congressional testimony.  And here's a little clue for her bosses, tossing her the State Dept big book as a cheat sheet doesn't cover it.  Here's another clue: Pay attention to members of Congress.

    We quoted Senator Menendez's statement in full when it was released -- that wasn't even a month ago.  How did the State Dept miss that statement on Iraq?  And what fool didn't realize that Senator Robert Menendez is Committee Chair Robert Menendez of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee? That used to be chaired by John Kerry, who is now over the State Dept, so I would think there would be a level of awareness.  This is the Committee that provides oversight of the State Dept.

    Wendy Sherman was an embarrassment.  Part of that's not her fault.  State Dept witnesses have gotten so lax and -- like Wendy today -- are more concerned with snapping a variation of 'let me finish speaking' then of knowing the basic facts.  That's something to be addressed department wide by the Secretary of State (Kerry).  But going into that hearing she should have some awareness that Iraq -- Iran's neighbor -- would likely come up as a topic in the hearing.


    Equally true, 7 Ashraf residents remain missing.  The US government -- including the State Dept -- believes Nouri al-Maliki, prime minister and chief thug in Iraq, has them in one of his secret prisons.  The UN has called on him to release them.  But, as Alsumaria has repored,  Nouri has issued a statement declaring his security forces were not holding any hostages.  He denies they exist.  That's 7 people the US government swore it would protect.  And Wendy Sherman didn't think this topic would come up?

    Let's go back to Chair Menendez for just a moment.



    Chair Robert Menendez: And for one thing that this Committee can do since it has jurisdiction over all weapon sales is that I doubt very much that we are going to see any approval of any weapon sales to Iraq until we get this situation in  a place where people's lives are safe.  


    On the US and Iraq and weapons, John Hudson (Foreign Policy) reports today that Iraq will not get the US drones that the Iraqi government has been calling for:


    Though neither Iraqi nor U.S. officials will say who called off the drones, it's no secret who began discussing them in the first place. In an August 17 trip to Washington, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari told reporters that Baghdad is seeking U.S. advisers, air surveillance or drone strikes to combat al-Qaeda's grip on the country. "We cannot fight these increasing terrorist" threats alone, he said. Speaking of drone strikes specifically, he said as long as they were used to "target al-Qaeda and their bases," without "collateral damage," Iraqis would welcome them.
    That same month, Iraqi ambassador to the U.S. Iraq Lukman Faily reiterated Iraq's interest in drones. "The reason we're now considering drone support is because we need to get better control of the sky so we can track and destroy al-Qaeda camps in the country," Faily told The Cable.
    It's not hard to understand why they'd be interested in the unmanned aircraft. On Monday, the detonation of 15 car bombs in Baghdad left dozens dead in an event that would've shocked any other country not embroiled in a civil war. However, in Iraq, it was only the 38th such atrocity in the last 12 months. In 2013 alone, Iraq is averaging 68 car bombings a month. The United Nations reports that 5,740 civilians were killed since January, which is almost two times more deaths than recorded in all of 2010.
    Despite the staggering numbers, the U.S. isn't about to open up a new drone war in Iraq. "The use of lethal drones has not been discussed nor is it even under consideration for Iraq," an administration official tells The Cable.

    39 minutes.

    Yesterday, in Iraq, two more helicopters were shot down (4 died in the first crash, none died in the second).  The drones in question would be presumably be predator drones.  Iraqi air space is already invaded by drones.  First off, drones fly in from Turkey.  Those may be Turkish drones or CIA drones.  In Bully Boy Bush's second term, the Turkish government gave land for a CIA sub-station and got drones in return.  The drones flying in Iraqi airspace may also be part of the CIA presence in Iraq or the US army's Special-Ops forces.  In addition, the Iraqi press has quoted various Iraqi officials insisting that neighbor Saudi Arabia flies drones over Iraq.

    Were Nouri's government to get predator drones from the US government, you can be sure they would be used to fire on people -- as opposed to mass arresting them -- and the world saw what he did with helicopters.  A peaceful sit-in is taking place.  The governor of Kirkuk tells Nouri his SWAT cannot enter the province so he avoids the roads and uses the helicopters (the /US supplied) to drop his SWAT in.  And the result?  That would be the April 23rd massacre of a sit-in in Hawija resulted from  Nouri's federal forces storming in.  Alsumaria noted Kirkuk's Department of Health (Hawija is in Kirkuk)  announced 50 activists have died and 110 were injured in the assault.   AFP reported the death toll eventually (as some wounded died) rose to 53 dead.   UNICEF noted that the dead included 8 children (twelve more were injured).


    Though they won't be getting drones from the US (for now anyway), they are planning to send something into flight.  Alsumaria reports Abdul Karim al-Samarrai, Minister of Science and Technology, states they will launch a satellite in April.




    Oren Dorell (USA Today) reports, "While jihadi fighters spilling over from Syria's civil war are a major factor, the violence is also a result of unresolved political stress between Iraq's Shiite majority and a disillusioned Sunni minority, and shows that the USA needs to rebuild its influence in the country, especially with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, said Kenneth Pollack, an analyst at the Brookings Institution."  He quotes Pollack stating, "We've got to rebuild our influence with Iraq and restrain all the different sides. We need to get Maliki to make significant concessions and slowly push both sides to rebuild that deal we hammered out in 2008."



    Turning to the violence, NINA notes a Mosul bombing claimed 2 lives and left six more people injured, police Lt Majid Anwar Ahemd's Falluja home was invaded leaving him injured,  a police officer and a civilian were injured when their car was shot up in Shuhada, an Albu Faraj sticky bombing injured one police officer and three civilians, a Mosul roadside bombing left two Iraqi soldiers and one civilian injured, a bombing near Mosul General Hospital claimed the lives of 5 police officers and left three more injured2 Shabanks (wife and husband) were shot dead in Mosul, a Baquba sticky bombing injured one person2 border guards (Iraqi and Syrian border) were shot dead, a Baghdad football field bombing claimed 4 lives and left thirteen people injured,  and police say they shot dead a suspected bomber in Mosul.  Alsumaria notes the death toll from the football field bombing has risen to 5 (injured is 22) and they note the man in charge of the Mosul Office of Real Estate was shot dead in front of his home.  Of the football field bombing, AFP points out, "The bombing in Madain, south of Baghdad, was just the latest in a string of attacks this year targeting young men playing Iraq's favourite sport."

    There was also kidnapping news.  All Iraq News notes that a group of farmers were kidnapped in Samarra.  Why?  They were said to have been cooperating with the federal police forces.  The outlet also notes that kidnappers released some kidnapping victims today and they were then "transported to Tikrit where one of them has lost his mind due to severe torture and passed away when he arrived at the hospital," according to a police source.



    On violence, Mustafa Habib (Niqash) reports:


    Having lived through years of violence and war, many Iraqis didn’t believe the hype about the recent “summer of terror”. In general, they didn’t think there could be all-out sectarian war again so soon. But over the past few weeks this has changed: real signs of sectarian conflict are starting to emerge again, corpses are being left on streets, and ordinary Baghdadis are starting to worry.
    The Shiite Muslim family headed by local man, Abbas, lives in Sadr City, in Baghdad. Recently the family members have been watching TV news reports all about death, violence, murder, kidnapping and internal displacement in their country. Not that far away in the mainly Sunni Muslim neighbourhood of Saidiya, in southern Baghdad, the Sunni Muslim family headed by Mohammed, has been watching the same reports.
    And despite their sectarian and social differences, the two families share one fear: that a sectarian conflict is about to start in Iraq again.
    Both families have as much reason to fear this as any other Iraqi: A member of Abbas’ family was killed during the last round of sectarian violence when the family was living in the mostly Sunni Muslim area of Amiriya. Meanwhile Mohammed’s brother was kidnapped by unidentified gunmen in 2006 – they still don’t know what happened to him but can only assume he was killed.
    And Baghdadis in particular know about the signs of sectarian conflict. When violence erupted between 2006 and 2008 between Shiite Muslims and Sunni Muslims, Baghdad was at the centre of much of the unrest because of the variety of different sects and ethnicities resident here. 
    For months now, Iraq has been being tormented by a wave of carefully coordinated bombs and terrorist attacks. Security forces appear to have been unable to stop these – recently one even went off in the mostly peaceful, semi-autonomous region of Iraqi Kurdistan. But although these events are clearly frightening and they terrorize the population, most locals have not believed they were leading to the start of a new sectarian conflict.




    Still on violence, dropping back to the June 8, 2010 snapshot:



    In November of last year, Rod Nordland (New York Times) explained the 'bomb detectors' in use in Iraq: "The small hand-held wand, with a telescopic antenna on a swivel, is being used at hundreds of checkpoints in Iraq. But the device works 'on the same principle as a Ouija board' -- the power of suggestion -- said a retired United States Air Force officer, Lt. Col. Hal Bidlack, who described the wantd as nothing more than an explosive divining rod." They are the ADE 651s with a ticket price of between $16,500 and $60,000 and Iraq had bought over 1,500.  More news came with arrests on January 22: "Caroline Hawley (BBC Newsnight -- link has text and video) reports that England has placed an export ban on the ADE-651 'bomb detector' -- a device that's cleaned Iraq's coffers of $85 million so far. Steven Morris (Guardian) follows up noting that, 'The managing director [Jim McCormick] of a British company that has been selling bomb-detecting equipment to security forces in Iraq was arrested on suspicion of fraud today'." From the January 25th snapshot:



    Riyad Mohammed and Rod Norldand (New York Times) reported on Saturday that the reaction in Iraq was outrage from officials and they quote MP Ammar Tuma stating, "This company not only caused grave and massive losses of funds, but it has caused grave and massive losses of the lives of innocent Iraqi civilians, by the hundreds and thousands, from attacks that we thought we were immune to because we have this device."  Despite the turn of events, the machines continue to be used in Iraq but 'now' an investigation into them will take place orded by Nouri. As opposed to months ago when they were first called into question. Muhanad Mohammed (Reuters) adds that members of Parliament were calling for an end to use of the machines on Saturday.  Martin Chulov (Guardian) notes the US military has long -- and publicly -- decried the use of the machines,  "The US military has been scathing, claiming the wands contained only a chip to detect theft from stores. The claim was based on a study released in June by US military scientists, using x-ray and laboratory analysis, which was passed on to Iraqi officials." 


    Today the BBC reports police raids took place at "Global Tech, of Kent, Grosvenor Scientific, in Devon, and Scandec, of Nottingham. Cash and hundreds of the devices have been seized, and a number of people are due to be interviewed under caution on suspicion of fraud."  Michael Peel and Sylvia Pfeifer (Financial Times of London) add, "Colin Cowan, head of City police's overseas anti-corruption unit, said investigators were seeking further information from the public about the manufacture, sale and distribution of the devices. Det Supt Cowan said: 'We are concerned that these items present a real physical threat to anyone who may rely on such a device for protection'." 



    The next big news on the 'magic' wands was in the May 2nd (May 2, 2013) snapshot:



    The wands didn't work, they were never going to work.  The liar who sold them, and got rich off them, James McCormick, was convicted last month.   Robert Booth and Meirion Jones (Guardian) report, "A jury at the Old Bailey found Jim McCormick, 57, from near Taunton, Somerset, guilty on three counts of fraud over a scam that included the sale of £55m of devices based on a novelty golfball finder to Iraq. They were installed at checkpoints in Baghdad through which car bombs and suicide bombers passed, killing hundreds of civilians. Last month they remained in use at checkpoints across the Iraqi capital."  Today, Jake Ryan (Sun) reports, McCormick, who is 57, was sentenced to a "maximum ten years today."

    Robert Booth (Guardian) notes Saad al-Muttalibi ("adviser to Nouri al-Maliki) is insisting Nouri's considering suing on behalf of the victims.  Actually, the families of the victims should be suing Nouri for allowing those things to be used for the last years, even after the wands were globally revealed to be a joke.  The Belfast Telegraph notes that McCormick "showed no reaction as he was told his 'callous confidence trick' was the worst fraud imaginable."  Jake Ryan quotes Judge Richard Hone stating, "The device was useless, the profit outrageous and your culpability as a fraudster has to be placed in the highest category.  Your profits were obscene.  You have neither insight, shame or any sense of remorse."


    As we have repeatedly noted, Nouri can't sue.  He doesn't have standing.  Victims may be able to but Nouri would also be named in the suit.  He would be sued along with McCormick.  That's because even after the conviction, the wands continued to be used.  In fact, they're still in use today.


    The Press Association notes today:



    The fake detectors were still being used at checkpoints in Iraq as recently as two days ago, when a wave of car bombs struck Baghdad, killing 55 people, the Independent reported.
    The paper said more than 4,500 people had been killed in Iraq since McCormick's conviction in April.
    The Iraqi government had promised the devices would be phased out and replaced by sniffer dogs, but only two provinces in the south of the country have so far installed canine units, the newspaper reported.
    Iraqi officials are reported to have complained that contradictory statements have been made to them from the government, leading to delays in the fake devices being banned.
    A schoolteacher who witnessed one of Monday's explosions said: "I went through one checkpoint on the way in [to Sadr City] where they had the detectors just before the bombing.
    "They look like wands and they are supposed to bend when they spot a bomb. But they are useless, everyone knows that."


    That's on Nouri al-Maliki.  And it's not minor.

    When a leader of a country puts the people at risk as a result of a fake security device?  He needs to be sued, he needs to be impeached. He is unfit for office.


    For elections to be held in 2014, a law has to be passed.   Iraq is supposed to hold elections in 2014, parliamentary elections.  The last ones were in March 2010.

    That's not how it was supposed to be.  They were actually supposed to take place in 2009.  But they failed to pass the election law on time.  And what they did pass was unfair so Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi used his veto right to stop the law.  What was unfair?  The Iraqi government made the decision that Iraiq exiles and refugees outside of Iraq could vote.  But they were doing a lousy job with polling stations in the areas that Sunni refugees immediately fled (at that time: Syria, Jordan and Lebanon).  al-Hashemi saw this as an attempt to disenfranchise a group of people and stopped the law.  (He did give consent in time for a new law to be passed, however, the Parliament couldn't get it together to do so in time.)  Under Nouri nothing happens on time.  Each election brings more problems than the one before.  And it would be so nice if, for once, the Iraqi High Electoral Committee and the United Nations Assistance Missionfor Iraq were not having to scramble at the last minute.  (The UN and IHEC need at least three months lead time to prepare for a national election.)  Sunday, September 29th, UNAMI released the following:


    Baghdad, 29 September 2013 – The Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General for Iraq (SRSG), Mr. Nickolay Mladenov, today met with the Parliament Speaker, Mr. Usama Al-Nujeifi, as well as with heads of several political blocs at the Council of Representatives. كوردى
       
    “I urge all political leaders to reach a compromise on the adoption of the draft election law as soon as possible, and to make sure that Iraq adheres to the electoral calendar, according to the constitutionally stipulated timeframe,” Mr. Mladenov said. “The United Nations will continue to work with all political blocs and entities to facilitate reaching an agreement on the draft election law, and will continue supporting the electoral process”, he concluded.


    All Iraq News reports that not only did the Parliament not pass an election law today, they're not going to take up the issue again until Monday.  Ayad al-Tamimi (Al Mada) reports that the Legal Committee met and Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi participated in the meeting where it was discussed that the election would take place in all 18 provinces and the Kurdistan Alliance is saying the compensatory seats have to be based on voter turnout.  Amjad Salah and Ammar al-Ani (Alsumaria) repors on this objection as well.


    It's not just that group or just that issue.  Ghassan Hamed and Muhannad Mohammad (Alsumaria) speak with an MP from Moqtada al-Sadr's bloc, Hakem al-Zamili,  who reveals it's more than one group and that, if the delays continue, the Sadr bloc is happy to go public about who is blocking the vote.  It may not seem like a big deal right now.  Three months heads up, not that big.  But I remember August 2009.  And how it wasn't going to be a big deal for the legislation to be passed then either.  But it took months.  Plural.  This is nonsense.  These matters are left until the last minute.  The Iraqi people don't deserve this and shouldn't accept it.


    On the topic of oil,  Ben Lando's latest article at Iraq Oil Report is entitled "September exports down by 500K bpd."  Today Rudaw covers the topic as well:

    Last year, for the first time since 1989, Iraq’s monthly oil production was able to surpass Iran’s production quota inside the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC).
    Iraqi monthly oil production export hit a high of 2.7 million barrels per day (bpd) in 2012, while Iran’s fell from 2.2 million in 2011 to a low of 1.5 million in 2012. This was largely due to tightened US and international sanctions.
    Many thought that Iraq had become a stable oil producing country in the region, but one year after achieving the higher production rates Iraq once again became an unreliable source of oil. Production was again down to 2.3 million bpd by July this year.













     

    ben lando


















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