Maybe they should have worried in July?
10 hours ago
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Bedding down with terrorists
But first the project faces more prosaic nemeses. Before it has even been made public, it has set off three investigations into charges of corruption, a widespread problem that has severely hindered improvement in Iraq after the war.
"Everything in the project is suspicious," said Abbas al-Dihlegi, who runs the provincial council's integrity committee. With billions of dollars expected from private investors, both foreign and Iraqi, officials and shopkeepers on Rasheed Street suspect that much of the money will end up in the pockets of politicians or connected contractors. The watchdog group Transparency International recently named Iraq the fifth most corrupt country in the world, out of 180 nations studied.
Mr. Dihlegi said the initial $7 million contract to draw up the plan and provide a short list of contractors was awarded to Al Miemari without competitive bidding from other firms. "That is against the rules," he said. He noted that one of the firm's partners, Thaeir al-Faili, was a former deputy minister of reconstruction and a current member of the board of Baghdad's investment commission, which will grant all contracts for work on the project.
"This is a conflict of interest," Mr. Dihlegi said.
The above is from Riyadh Mohammed and John Leland's "In Heart of Iraq, a Plan to Revive the Pulse of a Central Artery" in yesterday's New York Times and reading it the first response is: "It takes more than pretty." So millions are going to be wasted on a beautification project while potable water and reliable electricity continue to wait? So there'll be a major shopping center for the rich among all the poverty? Sounds like the Chile Augusto Pinochet built. Well, no surprise, that was a US project at 'liberation' as well. Nouri as the new Pinochet? It plays.
Some things don't play. This from Warren P. Strobel and Mohammed al Dulaimy's "Can a city awash in guns, grenades and explosives ever be safe?" (McClatchy Newspapers) for example:
"Rather than trying to ignite a Sunni-Shiite sectarian war, U.S. and Iraqi analysts said, they're aiming to discredit Maliki's government with mass-casualty bombings that also limit the government's ability to function."
Why doesn't it play? It's not helped by unnamed 'analysts'. But the real problem? Don't scream 'Fire!' over and over, stand to the side and calmly wonder why people are running. Strobel and McClatchy repeatedly pushed the notion that it was 'good Shia' not responding to attempts to start a 'sectarian war.' 'Sectarian war' is what they like to call the ethnic cleansing which took place in Iraq as the Shia thugs the US installed into power went about purging the country. A minority population was targeted by the occupiers and their puppets. They were murdered in large numbers and they make up the bulk of Iraq's refugee population. But 'sectarian war' sounds so much prettier and implies some equality between the two sides. There was no equality. One side was backed by the US, the UK, Australia and various other super powers and then there were the Sunnis. One side not only had the backing, it also had control of US forces. All it had to do was insist that a group of 'insurgents' did this or were planning that and the US forces coudl storm whatever street, neighborhood or enclave.
The same press that ignored what was happening decided, this year, to portray attacks as an attempt by Sunnis to re-start a 'sectarian war.' It's amazing how, with no proof, it's a minority population responsible and how, with no proof, they 'know' the motives.
Well they spent months telling us that various attacks were attempts to restart a sectarian war -- ignoring that the losing side in an ethnic cleansing had little to gain in restarting the ethnic cleansing -- and now Strobel and McClatchy (who pushed that spin for months) want to show up and insist that it's an attempt to discredit Nouri?
It's really amazing if you just stop for a moment and be rational. That's not taught in J-school so we'll excuse the dullards of the press for a bathroom break. But for the rest of us, violence took place in Iraq. That much is known.
And the press did what? They offered two narratives this year. In the first narrative, Sunnis were the 'bad guys' trying to force the (empowered and in power) Shias into a war. In the second narrative, Sunnis are the 'bad guys' trying to discredit the poster for the Shia thugs: Nouri al-Maliki.
Does no one ever notice that? Does no one ever notice that the press is identifying with the installed and not telling the story of Iraq?
Once upon a time, there was alarm and dismay over the fact that the US press identified with the US and told the story from the US point of view. That continues today with the press refusing to report what happens and instead forever siding with the puppets the US installed.
The thugs installed who protect other thugs. Last night, Alice Fordham's "Peter Moore freed after US hands over Iraqi insurgent" (Times of London) reported:
The British hostage Peter Moore was dramatically set free yesterday after the United States handed over an Iraqi insurgent suspected of planning the deaths of five American servicemen.
Mr Moore, an IT consultant, was freed by League of the Righteous, or Asaib al-Haq (AAH) -- an extremist Shia group allied to Iran -- after 31 months and spent his first night of freedom at the British Embassy in Baghdad. He is expected to fly home today.
David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, said that officials had worked tirelessly to secure his release but strongly denied that the British Government had given ground to his captors. He said: "There were no concessions in this case. There was no -- quote, unquote -- deal."
Foreign and Commonwealth Office sources confirmed, however, that the transfer from US custody a few days ago of Qais al-Khazali, a cleric and commander of AAH, helped to pave the way for Mr Moore’s release. They also admitted that British diplomats had been pressing the US to hand over al-Khazali to the Iraqi administration.
Today Suadad al-Salhy, Mohammed Abbas, Khalid al-Ansary, Missy Ryan, Mohammed Abbas and David Stamp (Reuters) report, "Iraq said on Thursday its judges could soon free the leader of a Shi'ite group believed to be behind the 2007 kidnapping of Briton Peter Moore if they found no criminal evidence, only a day after the hostage was released."
Thug-love, Nouri's thug-love. They're going to free al-Khazali. The US already did. From the June 9th snapshot:
This morning the New York Times' Alissa J. Rubin and Michael Gordon offered "U.S. Frees Suspect in Killing of 5 G.I.'s." Martin Chulov (Guardian) covered the same story, Kim Gamel (AP) reported on it, BBC offered "Kidnap hope after Shia's handover" and Deborah Haynes contributed "Hope for British hostages in Iraq after release of Shia militant" (Times of London). The basics of the story are this. 5 British citizens have been hostages since May 29, 2007. The US military had in their custody Laith al-Khazali. He is a member of Asa'ib al-Haq. He is also accused of murdering five US troops. The US military released him and allegedly did so because his organization was not going to release any of the five British hostages until he was released. This is a big story and the US military is attempting to state this is just diplomacy, has nothing to do with the British hostages and, besides, they just released him to Iraq. Sami al-askari told the New York Times, "This is a very sensitive topic because you know the position that the Iraqi government, the U.S. and British governments, and all the governments do not accept the idea of exchanging hostages for prisoners. So we put it in another format, and we told them that if they want to participate in the political process they cannot do so while they are holding hostages. And we mentioned to the American side that they cannot join the political process and release their hostages while their leaders are behind bars or imprisoned." In other words, a prisoner was traded for hostages and they attempted to not only make the trade but to lie to people about it. At the US State Dept, the tired and bored reporters were unable to even broach the subject. Poor declawed tabbies. Pentagon reporters did press the issue and got the standard line from the department's spokesperson, Bryan Whitman, that the US handed the prisoner to Iraq, the US didn't hand him over to any organization -- terrorist or otherwise. What Iraq did, Whitman wanted the press to know, was what Iraq did. A complete lie that really insults the intelligence of the American people. CNN reminds the five US soldiers killed "were: Capt. Brian S. Freeman, 31, of Temecula, California; 1st Lt. Jacob N. Fritz, 25, of Verdon, Nebraska; Spc. Johnathan B. Chism, 22, of Gonzales, Louisiana; Pfc. Shawn P. Falter, 25, of Cortland, New York; and Pfc. Johnathon M. Millican, 20, of Trafford, Alabama." Those are the five from January 2007 that al-Khazali and his brother Qais al-Khazali are supposed to be responsible for the deaths of. Qassim Abdul-Zahra and Robert H. Reid (AP) states that Jonathan B. Chism's father Danny Chism is outraged over the release and has declared, "They freed them? The American military did? Somebody needs to answer for it."
The US government decided the lives of 5 US service members didn't matter, the US government decided that justice didn't matter. The US government decided they'd get in bed with terrorists and even sleep in the wet spot without a single complaint. It's not a pretty picture. Right now some on the right are accusing Barack Obama of not 'getting' terrorism or of being soft on it. It's surprising that they haven't run with the story of the League of Righteous which really does more to establish that charge than Barack golfing (although Barack golfing does provide a visual). Mona Mahmood, Maggie O'Kane and Guy Grandjean (Guardian) report:
The men – including Peter Moore, who was released yesterday after more than two years in captivity – were taken to Iran within a day of their kidnapping from a government ministry building in Baghdad in 2007, several senior sources in Iraq and Iran have told the Guardian. They were held in prisons run by al-Quds Force, a Revolutionary Guard unit that specialises in foreign operations on behalf of the Iranian government.
The former US commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, told the BBC he was "90% certain" Moore was held in Iran for some of his two and a half years in captivity.
One of the kidnappers told the Guardian that three of the Britons – Jason Creswell, Jason Swindlehurst and Alec Maclachlan – were killed after the British government refused to take ransom demands seriously.
Part of the deal leading to the release of Moore involved the handing over of the young Shia cleric Qais al-Khazali, a leading figure in the Righteous League.
Today is New Year's Eve. The plan is to do a snapshot this afternoon/evening. Unless there's some serious news out of Iraq on Friday, no snapshot. It is the end of the year and the end of the decade. I've done two morning entries here. In addition to the snapshot, today will also see Martha & Shirley's year-in-books and Kat's look back at the decade in music -- the decade. Friday, I'll do at least one morning entry on Iraq, Kat will offer a look back at the year in music and I'll do a year-in-review. (I haven't written it, I haven't had time to think about it, I don't know what it's going to be.) Either tonight or tomorrow Ruth will look at the 2009 for radio and Isaiah will post two new comics on Friday (although one may go up late tonight). Beth's "Reflecting on 2009 (Beth)" went up Sunday.
In the New Year, March 20th, there's a DC action being called by A.N.S.W.E.R. and others.
Closing with this from John Pilger's "Welcome to Orwell’s World 2010" (Information Clearing House):
Barack Obama is the leader of a contemporary Oceania. In two speeches at the close of the decade, the Nobel Peace Prize winner affirmed that peace was no longer peace, but rather a permanent war that “extends well beyond Afghanistan and Pakistan” to “disorderly regions and diffuse enemies”. He called this “global security” and invited our gratitude. To the people of Afghanistan, which America has invaded and occupied, he said wittily: “We have no interest in occupying your country.”
In Oceania, truth and lies are indivisible. According to Obama, the American attack on Afghanistan in 2001 was authorised by the United Nations Security Council. There was no UN authority. He said the “the world” supported the invasion in the wake of 9/11 when, in truth, all but three of 37 countries surveyed by Gallup expressed overwhelming opposition. He said that America invaded Afghanistan “only after the Taliban refused to turn over [Osama] bin Laden”. In 2001, the Taliban tried three times to hand over bin Laden for trial, reported Pakistan’s military regime, and were ignored. Even Obama’s mystification of 9/11 as justification for his war is false. More than two months before the Twin Towers were attacked, the Pakistani foreign minister, Niaz Naik, was told by the Bush administration that an American military assault would take place by mid-October. The Taliban regime in Kabul, which the Clinton administration had secretly supported, was no longer regarded as “stable” enough to ensure America’s control over oil and gas pipelines to the Caspian Sea. It had to go.
Obama’s most audacious lie is that Afghanistan today is a “safe haven” for al-Qaeda’s attacks on the West. His own national security adviser, General James Jones, said in October that there were “fewer than 100” al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. According to US intelligence, 90 per cent of the Taliban are hardly Taliban at all, but “a tribal localised insurgency [who] see themselves as opposing the US because it is an occupying power”. The war is a fraud. Only the terminally gormless remain true to the Obama brand of “world peace”.
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
iraq
the new york times
riyadh mohammed
john leland
mcclatchy newspapers
warren p. strobel
mohammed al dulaimy
reuters
suadad al-salhy
mohammed abbas
khalid al-ansary
missy ryan
mohammed abbas
david stamp
the guardian
mona mahmood
maggie o'kane
guy grandjean
john pilger
"Everything in the project is suspicious," said Abbas al-Dihlegi, who runs the provincial council's integrity committee. With billions of dollars expected from private investors, both foreign and Iraqi, officials and shopkeepers on Rasheed Street suspect that much of the money will end up in the pockets of politicians or connected contractors. The watchdog group Transparency International recently named Iraq the fifth most corrupt country in the world, out of 180 nations studied.
Mr. Dihlegi said the initial $7 million contract to draw up the plan and provide a short list of contractors was awarded to Al Miemari without competitive bidding from other firms. "That is against the rules," he said. He noted that one of the firm's partners, Thaeir al-Faili, was a former deputy minister of reconstruction and a current member of the board of Baghdad's investment commission, which will grant all contracts for work on the project.
"This is a conflict of interest," Mr. Dihlegi said.
The above is from Riyadh Mohammed and John Leland's "In Heart of Iraq, a Plan to Revive the Pulse of a Central Artery" in yesterday's New York Times and reading it the first response is: "It takes more than pretty." So millions are going to be wasted on a beautification project while potable water and reliable electricity continue to wait? So there'll be a major shopping center for the rich among all the poverty? Sounds like the Chile Augusto Pinochet built. Well, no surprise, that was a US project at 'liberation' as well. Nouri as the new Pinochet? It plays.
Some things don't play. This from Warren P. Strobel and Mohammed al Dulaimy's "Can a city awash in guns, grenades and explosives ever be safe?" (McClatchy Newspapers) for example:
"Rather than trying to ignite a Sunni-Shiite sectarian war, U.S. and Iraqi analysts said, they're aiming to discredit Maliki's government with mass-casualty bombings that also limit the government's ability to function."
Why doesn't it play? It's not helped by unnamed 'analysts'. But the real problem? Don't scream 'Fire!' over and over, stand to the side and calmly wonder why people are running. Strobel and McClatchy repeatedly pushed the notion that it was 'good Shia' not responding to attempts to start a 'sectarian war.' 'Sectarian war' is what they like to call the ethnic cleansing which took place in Iraq as the Shia thugs the US installed into power went about purging the country. A minority population was targeted by the occupiers and their puppets. They were murdered in large numbers and they make up the bulk of Iraq's refugee population. But 'sectarian war' sounds so much prettier and implies some equality between the two sides. There was no equality. One side was backed by the US, the UK, Australia and various other super powers and then there were the Sunnis. One side not only had the backing, it also had control of US forces. All it had to do was insist that a group of 'insurgents' did this or were planning that and the US forces coudl storm whatever street, neighborhood or enclave.
The same press that ignored what was happening decided, this year, to portray attacks as an attempt by Sunnis to re-start a 'sectarian war.' It's amazing how, with no proof, it's a minority population responsible and how, with no proof, they 'know' the motives.
Well they spent months telling us that various attacks were attempts to restart a sectarian war -- ignoring that the losing side in an ethnic cleansing had little to gain in restarting the ethnic cleansing -- and now Strobel and McClatchy (who pushed that spin for months) want to show up and insist that it's an attempt to discredit Nouri?
It's really amazing if you just stop for a moment and be rational. That's not taught in J-school so we'll excuse the dullards of the press for a bathroom break. But for the rest of us, violence took place in Iraq. That much is known.
And the press did what? They offered two narratives this year. In the first narrative, Sunnis were the 'bad guys' trying to force the (empowered and in power) Shias into a war. In the second narrative, Sunnis are the 'bad guys' trying to discredit the poster for the Shia thugs: Nouri al-Maliki.
Does no one ever notice that? Does no one ever notice that the press is identifying with the installed and not telling the story of Iraq?
Once upon a time, there was alarm and dismay over the fact that the US press identified with the US and told the story from the US point of view. That continues today with the press refusing to report what happens and instead forever siding with the puppets the US installed.
The thugs installed who protect other thugs. Last night, Alice Fordham's "Peter Moore freed after US hands over Iraqi insurgent" (Times of London) reported:
The British hostage Peter Moore was dramatically set free yesterday after the United States handed over an Iraqi insurgent suspected of planning the deaths of five American servicemen.
Mr Moore, an IT consultant, was freed by League of the Righteous, or Asaib al-Haq (AAH) -- an extremist Shia group allied to Iran -- after 31 months and spent his first night of freedom at the British Embassy in Baghdad. He is expected to fly home today.
David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, said that officials had worked tirelessly to secure his release but strongly denied that the British Government had given ground to his captors. He said: "There were no concessions in this case. There was no -- quote, unquote -- deal."
Foreign and Commonwealth Office sources confirmed, however, that the transfer from US custody a few days ago of Qais al-Khazali, a cleric and commander of AAH, helped to pave the way for Mr Moore’s release. They also admitted that British diplomats had been pressing the US to hand over al-Khazali to the Iraqi administration.
Today Suadad al-Salhy, Mohammed Abbas, Khalid al-Ansary, Missy Ryan, Mohammed Abbas and David Stamp (Reuters) report, "Iraq said on Thursday its judges could soon free the leader of a Shi'ite group believed to be behind the 2007 kidnapping of Briton Peter Moore if they found no criminal evidence, only a day after the hostage was released."
Thug-love, Nouri's thug-love. They're going to free al-Khazali. The US already did. From the June 9th snapshot:
This morning the New York Times' Alissa J. Rubin and Michael Gordon offered "U.S. Frees Suspect in Killing of 5 G.I.'s." Martin Chulov (Guardian) covered the same story, Kim Gamel (AP) reported on it, BBC offered "Kidnap hope after Shia's handover" and Deborah Haynes contributed "Hope for British hostages in Iraq after release of Shia militant" (Times of London). The basics of the story are this. 5 British citizens have been hostages since May 29, 2007. The US military had in their custody Laith al-Khazali. He is a member of Asa'ib al-Haq. He is also accused of murdering five US troops. The US military released him and allegedly did so because his organization was not going to release any of the five British hostages until he was released. This is a big story and the US military is attempting to state this is just diplomacy, has nothing to do with the British hostages and, besides, they just released him to Iraq. Sami al-askari told the New York Times, "This is a very sensitive topic because you know the position that the Iraqi government, the U.S. and British governments, and all the governments do not accept the idea of exchanging hostages for prisoners. So we put it in another format, and we told them that if they want to participate in the political process they cannot do so while they are holding hostages. And we mentioned to the American side that they cannot join the political process and release their hostages while their leaders are behind bars or imprisoned." In other words, a prisoner was traded for hostages and they attempted to not only make the trade but to lie to people about it. At the US State Dept, the tired and bored reporters were unable to even broach the subject. Poor declawed tabbies. Pentagon reporters did press the issue and got the standard line from the department's spokesperson, Bryan Whitman, that the US handed the prisoner to Iraq, the US didn't hand him over to any organization -- terrorist or otherwise. What Iraq did, Whitman wanted the press to know, was what Iraq did. A complete lie that really insults the intelligence of the American people. CNN reminds the five US soldiers killed "were: Capt. Brian S. Freeman, 31, of Temecula, California; 1st Lt. Jacob N. Fritz, 25, of Verdon, Nebraska; Spc. Johnathan B. Chism, 22, of Gonzales, Louisiana; Pfc. Shawn P. Falter, 25, of Cortland, New York; and Pfc. Johnathon M. Millican, 20, of Trafford, Alabama." Those are the five from January 2007 that al-Khazali and his brother Qais al-Khazali are supposed to be responsible for the deaths of. Qassim Abdul-Zahra and Robert H. Reid (AP) states that Jonathan B. Chism's father Danny Chism is outraged over the release and has declared, "They freed them? The American military did? Somebody needs to answer for it."
The US government decided the lives of 5 US service members didn't matter, the US government decided that justice didn't matter. The US government decided they'd get in bed with terrorists and even sleep in the wet spot without a single complaint. It's not a pretty picture. Right now some on the right are accusing Barack Obama of not 'getting' terrorism or of being soft on it. It's surprising that they haven't run with the story of the League of Righteous which really does more to establish that charge than Barack golfing (although Barack golfing does provide a visual). Mona Mahmood, Maggie O'Kane and Guy Grandjean (Guardian) report:
The men – including Peter Moore, who was released yesterday after more than two years in captivity – were taken to Iran within a day of their kidnapping from a government ministry building in Baghdad in 2007, several senior sources in Iraq and Iran have told the Guardian. They were held in prisons run by al-Quds Force, a Revolutionary Guard unit that specialises in foreign operations on behalf of the Iranian government.
The former US commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, told the BBC he was "90% certain" Moore was held in Iran for some of his two and a half years in captivity.
One of the kidnappers told the Guardian that three of the Britons – Jason Creswell, Jason Swindlehurst and Alec Maclachlan – were killed after the British government refused to take ransom demands seriously.
Part of the deal leading to the release of Moore involved the handing over of the young Shia cleric Qais al-Khazali, a leading figure in the Righteous League.
Today is New Year's Eve. The plan is to do a snapshot this afternoon/evening. Unless there's some serious news out of Iraq on Friday, no snapshot. It is the end of the year and the end of the decade. I've done two morning entries here. In addition to the snapshot, today will also see Martha & Shirley's year-in-books and Kat's look back at the decade in music -- the decade. Friday, I'll do at least one morning entry on Iraq, Kat will offer a look back at the year in music and I'll do a year-in-review. (I haven't written it, I haven't had time to think about it, I don't know what it's going to be.) Either tonight or tomorrow Ruth will look at the 2009 for radio and Isaiah will post two new comics on Friday (although one may go up late tonight). Beth's "Reflecting on 2009 (Beth)" went up Sunday.
In the New Year, March 20th, there's a DC action being called by A.N.S.W.E.R. and others.
Closing with this from John Pilger's "Welcome to Orwell’s World 2010" (Information Clearing House):
Barack Obama is the leader of a contemporary Oceania. In two speeches at the close of the decade, the Nobel Peace Prize winner affirmed that peace was no longer peace, but rather a permanent war that “extends well beyond Afghanistan and Pakistan” to “disorderly regions and diffuse enemies”. He called this “global security” and invited our gratitude. To the people of Afghanistan, which America has invaded and occupied, he said wittily: “We have no interest in occupying your country.”
In Oceania, truth and lies are indivisible. According to Obama, the American attack on Afghanistan in 2001 was authorised by the United Nations Security Council. There was no UN authority. He said the “the world” supported the invasion in the wake of 9/11 when, in truth, all but three of 37 countries surveyed by Gallup expressed overwhelming opposition. He said that America invaded Afghanistan “only after the Taliban refused to turn over [Osama] bin Laden”. In 2001, the Taliban tried three times to hand over bin Laden for trial, reported Pakistan’s military regime, and were ignored. Even Obama’s mystification of 9/11 as justification for his war is false. More than two months before the Twin Towers were attacked, the Pakistani foreign minister, Niaz Naik, was told by the Bush administration that an American military assault would take place by mid-October. The Taliban regime in Kabul, which the Clinton administration had secretly supported, was no longer regarded as “stable” enough to ensure America’s control over oil and gas pipelines to the Caspian Sea. It had to go.
Obama’s most audacious lie is that Afghanistan today is a “safe haven” for al-Qaeda’s attacks on the West. His own national security adviser, General James Jones, said in October that there were “fewer than 100” al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. According to US intelligence, 90 per cent of the Taliban are hardly Taliban at all, but “a tribal localised insurgency [who] see themselves as opposing the US because it is an occupying power”. The war is a fraud. Only the terminally gormless remain true to the Obama brand of “world peace”.
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
iraq
the new york times
riyadh mohammed
john leland
mcclatchy newspapers
warren p. strobel
mohammed al dulaimy
reuters
suadad al-salhy
mohammed abbas
khalid al-ansary
missy ryan
mohammed abbas
david stamp
the guardian
mona mahmood
maggie o'kane
guy grandjean
john pilger
The ongoing betrayal of veterans
When specialist Larry Roberta of the Oregon Army National Guard went to Iraq in 2003, he expected sandstorms, physical hardship, perhaps even combat. What he didn't expect was the orange dust he encountered, all over the place, at the Qarmat Ali Water Treatment Plant, near Basra in southern Iraq.
"You could taste stuff in the air," Roberta recalled. "It had a really strange metallic taste."
Roberta's unit and other Army National Guard units were at the plant during the spring and summer of 2003, in the months after the U.S. invasion that March. Their mission was to provide security for workers repairing the plant. It supplied water to Iraqi oil fields, and was an important part of the U.S. mission to get Iraq's oil flowing again. The workers were repairing the plant for defense contractor Kellogg Brown & Root (KBR). Roberta and other Guardsmen and former KBR employees told NBC News that the orange dust was throughout the plant and the grounds, and sometimes would permeate the air during when the desert winds blew.
"It blew up in my face and on my chicken patty and my mouth and stuff like that," Roberta said. "I didn't really think a whole lot of it other than it tasted really bad and made me throw up and burned."
The above is from Rich Gardella and Lisa Myers report (link has text and video) for NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams. Larry Roberta and others were exposed to sodium dichromate. They were exposed to it due to KBR. The report doesn't note it but when KBR honchos visited, they wore protective gear. US service members and contractors were exposed to the cancer causing substance because KBR wanted to play it on the cheap. And now KBR wants to play dumb. While some are dead (David Moore died last month) and others are sick or sick and dying. There's no excuse for it and there was never an excuse for it.
But it happened. And it happened during three years of Democratic Party grandstanding. From 2003 to 2006, it was bad and evil KBR that the Dems are going to take on. Dick Cheney-connected KBR will be held accountable. In November 2006, American voters were asked to give one house of Congress to the Democratic Party. 'Give us one house,' claimed Dem leadership (including Nancy Pelosi and John Conyers), 'and we'll have subpeona power and be able to launch investigation and demand accountability.' The American voters didn't give the Democratic Party one house in the 2006 mid-term elections, they gave the Democrats control of both houses of Congress.
The report notes the work of the Senator Byron Dorgan and the Democratic Policy Committee he chairs and he and the other senators on the committee deserve to be noted. But this isn't a committee with the powers of a Congressional committee. And it's really sad that none of the standing Congressional commitees -- in a Democratically controlled Congress -- has seen fit to use their subpeona power to ensure accountability and justice for the veterans whose backs the same Democratic Party grandstanded on to get back in power.
They got more than they asked for and that happened again in the 2008 election when they were given even more seats in both houses of Congress and the White House. They just keep getting but what are the veterans getting and what are the American voters getting?
Senator Evan Bayh is a member of the DPC. He's proposed a bill that would create a federal registry for veterans exposed to chemicals while serving overseas. Such a registry would allow veterans to bypass a lot of the nonsense and red tape to receiving treatment that, for examples, veterans exposed to Agent Orange during Vietnam, had to experience for decades. He proposed it, it should be an easy bill to pass. But it's buried in the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee. It's buried there and has been since October.
That's not a bill about gay service members. Supposedly addressing equality has to be done slowly so equality for service members has to wait. I don't buy that argument but if you do, fine. Explain why the federal registry has to wait?
Who's objecting to creating a registry that would allow veterans to get the help they need? David Moore offered testimony to Congress, David Moore spoke out on this issue. Bayh noted his work and his passing. When the news of Moore's death was reported, the Senate should have immediately passed Bayh's bill. But there was no pressure on it from leadership and they're content to let the committee bury it. (Bayh and Dorgan don't serve on the Senate VA Committee.)
We shouldn't be too surprised by the refusal to address KBR's actions. The leadership also promised to end the Iraq War . . . if they were given control of one house in 2006. Couldn't impeach Bush, but they'd end the war. They were given control of two houses, last year they were also given control of the White House. If you haven't noticed: US forces are still in Iraq.
The following community sites updated last night:
Thomas Friedman is a Great Man
John Pilger and other realities
12 hours ago
Mikey Likes It!
Politico's Arena
12 hours ago
Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude
how can you follow hedy epstein?
12 hours ago
SICKOFITRADLZ
The US negotiates with terrorists
12 hours ago
Trina's Kitchen
The moon and the loon
12 hours ago
Ruth's Report
Jeff Cohen: Stand up comic
12 hours ago
Oh Boy It Never Ends
John Pilger, Rebecca and more
12 hours ago
Like Maria Said Paz
Professor . . .
12 hours ago
Ann's Mega Dub
1 British hostage still not accounted for
12 hours ago
Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills)
Iraq
12 hours ago
Cedric's Big Mix
You kill Jason at the end or you get the sequel
13 hours ago
The Daily Jot
THIS JUST IN! TALES FROM THE CRYPT!
13 hours ago
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
iraq
nbc nightly news with brian williams
nbc
rich gardella
lisa myers
iraq
anns mega dub
like maria said paz
kats korner
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
thomas friedman is a great man
trinas kitchen
the daily jot
cedrics big mix
mikey likes it
ruths report
sickofitradlz
oh boy it never ends
"You could taste stuff in the air," Roberta recalled. "It had a really strange metallic taste."
Roberta's unit and other Army National Guard units were at the plant during the spring and summer of 2003, in the months after the U.S. invasion that March. Their mission was to provide security for workers repairing the plant. It supplied water to Iraqi oil fields, and was an important part of the U.S. mission to get Iraq's oil flowing again. The workers were repairing the plant for defense contractor Kellogg Brown & Root (KBR). Roberta and other Guardsmen and former KBR employees told NBC News that the orange dust was throughout the plant and the grounds, and sometimes would permeate the air during when the desert winds blew.
"It blew up in my face and on my chicken patty and my mouth and stuff like that," Roberta said. "I didn't really think a whole lot of it other than it tasted really bad and made me throw up and burned."
The above is from Rich Gardella and Lisa Myers report (link has text and video) for NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams. Larry Roberta and others were exposed to sodium dichromate. They were exposed to it due to KBR. The report doesn't note it but when KBR honchos visited, they wore protective gear. US service members and contractors were exposed to the cancer causing substance because KBR wanted to play it on the cheap. And now KBR wants to play dumb. While some are dead (David Moore died last month) and others are sick or sick and dying. There's no excuse for it and there was never an excuse for it.
But it happened. And it happened during three years of Democratic Party grandstanding. From 2003 to 2006, it was bad and evil KBR that the Dems are going to take on. Dick Cheney-connected KBR will be held accountable. In November 2006, American voters were asked to give one house of Congress to the Democratic Party. 'Give us one house,' claimed Dem leadership (including Nancy Pelosi and John Conyers), 'and we'll have subpeona power and be able to launch investigation and demand accountability.' The American voters didn't give the Democratic Party one house in the 2006 mid-term elections, they gave the Democrats control of both houses of Congress.
The report notes the work of the Senator Byron Dorgan and the Democratic Policy Committee he chairs and he and the other senators on the committee deserve to be noted. But this isn't a committee with the powers of a Congressional committee. And it's really sad that none of the standing Congressional commitees -- in a Democratically controlled Congress -- has seen fit to use their subpeona power to ensure accountability and justice for the veterans whose backs the same Democratic Party grandstanded on to get back in power.
They got more than they asked for and that happened again in the 2008 election when they were given even more seats in both houses of Congress and the White House. They just keep getting but what are the veterans getting and what are the American voters getting?
Senator Evan Bayh is a member of the DPC. He's proposed a bill that would create a federal registry for veterans exposed to chemicals while serving overseas. Such a registry would allow veterans to bypass a lot of the nonsense and red tape to receiving treatment that, for examples, veterans exposed to Agent Orange during Vietnam, had to experience for decades. He proposed it, it should be an easy bill to pass. But it's buried in the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee. It's buried there and has been since October.
That's not a bill about gay service members. Supposedly addressing equality has to be done slowly so equality for service members has to wait. I don't buy that argument but if you do, fine. Explain why the federal registry has to wait?
Who's objecting to creating a registry that would allow veterans to get the help they need? David Moore offered testimony to Congress, David Moore spoke out on this issue. Bayh noted his work and his passing. When the news of Moore's death was reported, the Senate should have immediately passed Bayh's bill. But there was no pressure on it from leadership and they're content to let the committee bury it. (Bayh and Dorgan don't serve on the Senate VA Committee.)
We shouldn't be too surprised by the refusal to address KBR's actions. The leadership also promised to end the Iraq War . . . if they were given control of one house in 2006. Couldn't impeach Bush, but they'd end the war. They were given control of two houses, last year they were also given control of the White House. If you haven't noticed: US forces are still in Iraq.
The following community sites updated last night:
Thomas Friedman is a Great Man
John Pilger and other realities
12 hours ago
Mikey Likes It!
Politico's Arena
12 hours ago
Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude
how can you follow hedy epstein?
12 hours ago
SICKOFITRADLZ
The US negotiates with terrorists
12 hours ago
Trina's Kitchen
The moon and the loon
12 hours ago
Ruth's Report
Jeff Cohen: Stand up comic
12 hours ago
Oh Boy It Never Ends
John Pilger, Rebecca and more
12 hours ago
Like Maria Said Paz
Professor . . .
12 hours ago
Ann's Mega Dub
1 British hostage still not accounted for
12 hours ago
Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills)
Iraq
12 hours ago
Cedric's Big Mix
You kill Jason at the end or you get the sequel
13 hours ago
The Daily Jot
THIS JUST IN! TALES FROM THE CRYPT!
13 hours ago
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
iraq
nbc nightly news with brian williams
nbc
rich gardella
lisa myers
iraq
anns mega dub
like maria said paz
kats korner
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
thomas friedman is a great man
trinas kitchen
the daily jot
cedrics big mix
mikey likes it
ruths report
sickofitradlz
oh boy it never ends
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Iraq snapshot
Wednesday, December 30, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, Peter Moore is alive, Anbar Province's governor is in critical condition, Robert Knight says farewell to KPFA listeners (after being fired by KPFA) and more. Peter Moore is alive. England's Foreign Secretrary David Miliband declared today, "Peter was set free by his captors this morning in Baghdad and delivered to the Iraqi authorities. He is now in the care of the British Embassy in Baghdad." December 19th Andy Bloxham (Telegraph of London) reported on the plea from Moore's family and the family of Alan McMenemy. Moore was kidnapped in Iraq along with four other British citizens with the League of Righteous claiming credit for that May 29, 2007 action in which they utilized official uniforms and official vehicles to kidnap Moore, Alec Maclachlan, Jason Crewswell, Alan McMenemy and Jason Swindelhurst from the Ministry of Finance in Baghdad. Today Deborah Haynes (Times of London) reminds, "The lead kidnapper, dressed as an Iraqi police major, shouted 'Where are the foreigners?' as he led a team of gunmen, also in uniform, into the Finance Ministry building in Baghdad." For a little background on the League of Righteous, from the June 9th snapshot: This morning the New York Times' Alissa J. Rubin and Michael Gordon offered "U.S. Frees Suspect in Killing of 5 G.I.'s." Martin Chulov (Guardian) covered the same story, Kim Gamel (AP) reported on it, BBC offered "Kidnap hope after Shia's handover" and Deborah Haynes contributed "Hope for British hostages in Iraq after release of Shia militant" (Times of London). The basics of the story are this. 5 British citizens have been hostages since May 29, 2007. The US military had in their custody Laith al-Khazali. He is a member of Asa'ib al-Haq. He is also accused of murdering five US troops. The US military released him and allegedly did so because his organization was not going to release any of the five British hostages until he was released. This is a big story and the US military is attempting to state this is just diplomacy, has nothing to do with the British hostages and, besides, they just released him to Iraq. Sami al-askari told the New York Times, "This is a very sensitive topic because you know the position that the Iraqi government, the U.S. and British governments, and all the governments do not accept the idea of exchanging hostages for prisoners. So we put it in another format, and we told them that if they want to participate in the political process they cannot do so while they are holding hostages. And we mentioned to the American side that they cannot join the political process and release their hostages while their leaders are behind bars or imprisoned." In other words, a prisoner was traded for hostages and they attempted to not only make the trade but to lie to people about it. At the US State Dept, the tired and bored reporters were unable to even broach the subject. Poor declawed tabbies. Pentagon reporters did press the issue and got the standard line from the department's spokesperson, Bryan Whitman, that the US handed the prisoner to Iraq, the US didn't hand him over to any organization -- terrorist or otherwise. What Iraq did, Whitman wanted the press to know, was what Iraq did. A complete lie that really insults the intelligence of the American people. CNN reminds the five US soldiers killed "were: Capt. Brian S. Freeman, 31, of Temecula, California; 1st Lt. Jacob N. Fritz, 25, of Verdon, Nebraska; Spc. Johnathan B. Chism, 22, of Gonzales, Louisiana; Pfc. Shawn P. Falter, 25, of Cortland, New York; and Pfc. Johnathon M. Millican, 20, of Trafford, Alabama." Those are the five from January 2007 that al-Khazali and his brother Qais al-Khazali are supposed to be responsible for the deaths of. Qassim Abdul-Zahra and Robert H. Reid (AP) states that Jonathan B. Chism's father Danny Chism is outraged over the release and has declared, "They freed them? The American military did? Somebody needs to answer for it." Since the release, and the League of Righteous face time with Nouri and with Nouri's spokesperson, three of the British hostages were released, or rather, their bodies were. The three were Alec Maclachlan (body handed over in September), Jason Crewswell (body handed over in June) and Jason Swindelhurst (body handed over in June). The British government announced over the summer (with no explanation why) that they considered Alan McMenemy deceased. His family has continued to hope that he is alive. The British government had announced at the same time that they believed Peter Moore was alive. ITN is calling Peter Moore's release "a late Christmas present" for his family. Last month Leicester Mercury reported the current prime minister of England, Gordon Brown, was refusing to meet with the father of Peter Moore. Today, with public support continuing to crater for Gordon Brown, he declared: I am hugely relieved by the wonderful news that Peter has been freed, and will be reunited with his family as quickly as possible. They have faced a terrible ordeal and I know that the whole nation will share their joy that he is coming home. I pay tribute to all those who helped in the protracted effort to secure the release. At this moment of celebration, we also remember the families of British hostages who have been killed in Iraq and elsewhere. And we pledge to continue to do everything we can to bring British hostages back to their loved ones, including the remaining hostage of the group in Iraq, Alan McMenemy. I demanded that the hostage takers return him to us. Diane Moy (New York Daily News) quotes Peter's father Graeme stating, "We are so relieved and we just want to get him home, back now to his family and friends. I'm breaking down, I'm just so overjoyed for the lad. It's been such a long haul." The most confusing part of the press reports is the family. Graeme Moore is Peter's father. His mother re-married and now has the last name of Sweeney. Some credit Pauline Sweeney as his mother and Frank Sweeney as his father. Pauline Sweeney is not his biological mother. Avril Sweeney is Peter Moore's biological mother. The Times of London and the Telegraph of London have long covered this story and their correspondents reporting today, such as Deborah Haynes, have been on the story since it began in 2007. So before anyone e-mails to say, for example, "Emma Alberici of Australia's ABC says 'Mr Moore's father and stepmother, Pauline and Frank Sweeney . . .'" -- Graeme Moore is Peter's biological father and Avril Sweeney is Peter's biological mother. Stephen Adams (Telegraph of London) sketches this out, "Mr Moore, 36, is the son of Graeme Moore, now 60, a delivery driver from Wigston, Leicestershire, and Avril Sweeney, 54, from Blackburn, Lancs. Mr Moore, 36, is the son of Graeme Moore, now 60, a delivery driver from Wigston, Leicestershire, and Avril Sweeney, 54, from Blackburn, Lancs. His parents split when he was six months old and soon divorced. His mother remarried but that relationship also ended and she moved out when he was 12. He chose to stay and live with his stepfather, Patrick Sweeney, and later Mr Sweeney's second wife, Pauline." It is a blended family and it's surprising that so many in the press don't grasp that since Gordon Brown was insisting he didn't have to meet with Graeme Moore for a variety of reasons. Call all family members but unless you're going into the walk through (as Stephen Adams did), Graeme Moore and Avril Sweeney are his legal parents. Frank Sweeny is his step-father. All are overjoyed and all deserve to be but when the prime minister has refused to meet with Graeme Moore mere weeks ago, you better believe this is a sore issue and you better take care to get the facts right. And if you're not getting what a source of pain this is, Graeme Moore told CNN (link has text and video) he learned the "news on the television" and that he called Miliband's claims of Brown's administration keeping the family updated a lie: "They don't talk to Peter's family. They never have." Sam Jones (Guardian) notes other skepticism about Miliband's statement (disclosure I've known David Miliband for years). Miliband declared, "The British government does not make substantive concessions to hostage takers, anywhere and any place, and there was no such substantive concession in this case." And some are zooming in on "substantive concession" and saying it's worded that way to leave leg room or "cover [for] the deal predicted to lead to the imminent release of one of the leaders of Righteous League, a hardline Islamic group." Alberici observes, "T'he kidnappers from Asaib-Al-Haq, which translated means 'the league of righteousness", a Shia splinter group, are believed to have been told by the Iraqi Government that if they handed over Mr Moore and the body of Mr McMenemy, they would be given the right to run in the Iraqi elections next year." CNN adds, "Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said government officials were not involved in the talks that led to Moore's release, but said the decision to free him 'is part of the national reconciliation program' aimed at convincing Iraq's remaining armed factions to lay down their arms." Ned Parker and Janet Stobart (Los Angeles Times) report, "The U.S. military blamed the abduction and killing of five soldiers in Karbala in January 2007 on Asab al Haq and later captured its leaders, Qais and Laith Khazali. Laith was freed in June; Qais was transferred to the Iraqis today, said a spokeswoman from the British Foreign Office." John Leland and Jack Healy (New York Times) remind, "Earlier this year, Iraq's national security adviser, Mowaffak al-Rubaie, said the group might have targeted the five men because of the work Mr. Moore was doing to help combat theft and corruption in the Finance Ministry." Jim Muir (BBC News) also notes the questions being raised and offers, "Although the security situation has improved hugely over the past two years, Iraqis -- including schoolchildren -- continue to be kidnapped for ransom, a practice that was extremely widespread during the worst of the violence and lawlessness that prevailed during 2006-7. " George Pitcher (Telegraph of London) observes, "There has been a protracted media and communications shut-down on the circumstances of these kidnaps. There may be very good intelligence reasons for that approach. But high-profile coverage over the years assisted with the release of hostages such as Alan Johnston and John McCarthy. The latest discreet strategy has yielded just one safe from five. I hope we learn more of the reasons for this approach soon. The families of those who were not as lucky as Mr Moore deserve no less." And he's correct. Silence on kidnappings is good for governments, not for individuals. (Along with governments, the New York Times regularly blacks out the kidnappings of their journalists.) The British government's FAILURES on kidnappings in Iraq go far beyond the four kidnapped with Moore and also include Margret Hassan. December 7th, the Iraq Inquiry explored the issue of kidnappings when questioning the British Ambassador to Iraq in 2004, Edward Chaplin. Committee Member Lawrence Freedman: Part of this, perhaps particularly relevant for British opinion was the start of hostage taking. So we had in this period the Kenneth Bigley and Margaret Hassan cases. How aware were you of the danger to British nationals in Baghdad? Edward Chaplin: Very aware. And, indeed, I think if you looked at the travel advice at the time, it would be "don't come anywhere near this place". They were terrible incidents. I mean, terrible obviously for the families, but terrible for the embassy in the sense that we were very helpless. Kidnapping was widespread at the time. This was often criminals rather than political. Of course, as we have seen elsewhere, often criminal gangs will carry out kidnappings of what they think are valuable people, valuable in the sense that they can be sold on to some political group. And I don't think we know even now exactly who was behind either kidnapping. I would have to refresh my memory. I mean, they were different in the sense that Ken Bigley, we didn't even now. He hadn't even registered with the embassy, we didn't know he was there. He was working with these two Americans for a Gulf company. The first thing we knew of his existence was when the news of the kidnap came through. Margaret Hassan was different. In fact, I had met her before when I was Ambassador in Jordan because she worked for CARE Australia, a very effective NGO, one of the few working inside Iraq before and after the invasion. So I admired the work that she was doing and the embassy kept in touch. So that was, if you like, an even greater blow. But just to explain -- I don't know if you want to go into detail about this, but I probably cannot because what happens when a kidnapping of a British citizen takes place is you have set up a really discrete team because this needs 24-hours-a-day attention. So that team was led my deputy and we had a lot of support particularly coming out from London, experience negotiators and so on. So after the initial phase, my job was really to keep it in the minds of Iraqi ministers who we thought would could help, the army and the police and so on, and do whatever else I could do to help. Commitee Member Lawrence Freedman: What sort of response did you get from -- Edward Chaplin: Very positive and, of course, this was raised all the way to Allawi himself and it was raised by ministers, but they didn't have the capacity to help very much, I don't think. And, of course, they were dealing at any one time with lots of other kidnappings. Committee Member Lawrence Freedman: We had no evidence oursevles of who was holding her? Edward Chaplin: I think the assumption early on was it was a criminal gang of some sort, but we never got very far in pinning down exactly who was behind it and -- let alone having contacts that might lead to some progress. Commitee Member Lawrence Freedman: And in the aftermath of her murder, we still seemed to have been in the dark as to what had happened and, indeed, where her body was. Edward Chaplin: Some time later some of her clothes and possessions were found. We knew her husband as well, who stayed on in Baghdad. So we would see him from time to time. I don't know what the investigation -- continued investigation showed. His comments were and are outrageous and indicative of how useless the British government made itself during kidnappings -- do-nothing, hope someone else does something or finds out something. David Brown (Times of London) reported that both of Margaret Hassan's sisters were present at the inquiry and hoped to hear some details about their sister. He quotes Deidre Fitzsimons explaining, "We have been waiting years for the chance to hear what happened to my sister but she was worth so little that she received just three minutes. We came to find out the truth even though we were skeptical, because we were told this would not be a cover-up. We have been betrayed. The authorities did not do one thing to help her when she was kidnapped and they are now doing nothing to find out why. As for Ken Bigley, it was almost as if he didn't matter at all [by Chaplin's testimony]. He was an innocent man who was murdered for no reason." Reuters offers a timeline for British citizens kidnapped in Iraq. Earlier this month (December 17th) on CNN's Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees, Michael Ware reported on the September 2005 rescue of US citizen Roy Hallums. From the transcript: WARE: Three months after Roy Hallums disappeared in Baghdad in 2004, this proof of life video appeared. ROY HALLUMS, KIDNAPPING SURVIVOR: My name is Roy Hallums, I'm an American national. WARE: Hallums was an American contractor, building mess halls and providing food to the U.S. military, and his kidnappers were demanding $12 million for his release. HALLUMS: You're just basically in shock. And you're moving and you're walking but it's almost like an out of body experience. You can see what's going on, but you don't believe it. WARE: Before it was over, Hallums would be held nearly a full year by Iraqi insurgents -- 311 days, something I know a little about having been taken by Al Qaeda myself. WARE (on camera): When I was grabbed by Al Qaeda and pulled from my car, I mean, they were just going to cut my head off. But it was like it was someone else. At that moment, it felt to me like it was happening to someone else even though I was completely or even hyper- aware of the moment. HALLUMS: You're right. It's like it's almost third person, that I can sit there and tell the story. I can answer any question anybody has. It doesn't bother me, and what's for lunch, you know? WARE (voice-over): This is Hallums at the end of his ordeal. He lost 40 pounds but says he never lost hope. For most of the time, his kidnappers kept him in a secret and cramped underground cell, the entrance sealed shut. HALLUMS: You could hear them trawling this concrete over the door, and then they would shove a freezer over the top of that to hide where the door was. You're buried in there, and if they decide, well, it's just too dangerous to go back to the house and they never come back, then you're in your tomb. WARE (on camera): Dead men tell no tales. WARE (voice-over): Eight months after his proof of life video had appeared, U.S. special forces received a crucial tip on his whereabouts. Worried Hallums would be moved, they instantly launched a daylight rescue, four helicopters sweeping into a village south of Baghdad. The rescue isn't the only news out of Iraq today. Fadhel al-Badrani, Khalid al-Ansary, Missy Ryan and Philippa Fletcher (Reuters) report "twin suicide bombs" in Anbar Province have claimed "at least 24" lives with over one hundred people left injured (that should really be 26 if there were two suicide bombers): "At the Ramadi hospital, doctors crowded around injured policemen lying on stretchers. One of the wounded was a tiny baby, its diaper and white sweater dotted with blood." Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reports that among the injured is the province's governor, Qassim al-Fahdawi and that "[t]he bomber who targeted him was one of his bodyguards, said the Anbar Salvation Council." Anne Barker (Australia's ABC) notes that "conflicting reports" exist on the condition of al-Fahdawi and states that he was wounded in the second of the two bombings. Al Jazeera quotes police Capt Ahmed Mohammed al-Dulaimi stating, "A suicide bomber wearing an army uniform ran towards the governor. Some security people held him back, and he detonated himself." Bassim al-Anbari (AFP) offers, "The US military declined to confirm reports by Ramadi General Hospital that American troops took the provincial governor to a US-run hospital for treatment, when contacted by AFP." This afternoon Anne Barker (ABC) sketched out the attacks, "The first explosions appeared to target the governor's convoy at Ramadi, about 100 kilometres west of Baghdad. A suicide bomber detonated a bomb in a car, which was followed soon after by a second suicide attacker on foot." Mark Langford (Sky News) explains the first bombing attracted attention and "Deputy police chief Qassim al Fahdawi said he and other officials had gone to inspect the damage when a suicide bomber on foot detonated a vest full of explosives nearby." UPI reports the governor is in a Baghdad hospital. The Washington Post's Michael Hastins (at Financial Times of London) notes the death toll rose to 24, the governor "had undergone surgery" and "The attacks in Ramadi follow a string of about 40 assassination attempts in the past month in Anbar province, mostly targeting politicians, police officers, religious figures and tribal sheiks." Jamal Naji and Hannah Allam (McClatchy Newspapers) report: The sophisticated attack in the provincial capital of Ramadi, about 70 miles west of Baghdad, was the deadliest in months for Anbar, and it raised fears that an uneasy peace that's prevailed in the province since Sunni tribes and security forces joined forces with U.S. troops to weaken al Qaida in Iraq, a mostly homegrown offshoot of the international terror network, may be unraveling. Once most of the militants were killed or driven underground, the factions turned to internecine fighting for control of security forces and lucrative reconstruction contracts, and now those struggles appear to be escalating. The rival camps accuse one another of insurgent infiltration, corruption and cronyism, fragmenting the Sunni political bloc ahead of elections in March. "The city is moving toward destruction because of the parties who rule the province, from the head of the Anbar provincial council to the Anbar police commander. The issue is a power struggle that's resulted in the return of terrorists to the city," said Sheikh Raed al Sabah, a prominent Ramadi tribal leader who helped to organize tribesmen into U.S.-backed Sunni militias as part of the "Awakening" movement. The twin bombings were not the only violence reported out of Iraq today. Bombings? Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Khalis roadside bombing which claimed 7 lives ("including Khalis chief of police") and left twenty-five people wounded, a Tuesday Mosul bombing which injured two police officers, and 2 Baghdad roadside bombings last night which wounded two people. Shootings? Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports an attack on the Ministry of the Interior's director general, Mohammed Salih Ahmed, which left him, his son and their driver wounded and, dropping back to yesterday, 1 man shot dead in Mosul. Reuters notes "a judge and his wife" injured in a Kirkuk shooting and 1 person shot dead in Mosul yesterday. The Early Show (CBS) weather anchor Dave Price is in Iraq -- not reporting, entertaining the troops. Except for McClatchy Newspapers (who keeps rotating staff), no major outlet is sending reporters back into Iraq. As was obvious on Talk of the Town (NPR -- link has text and audio option) everyone's pulling reporters out of Iraq and moving them to Afghanistan. So in other words, if Iraq really falls apart (hard to determine at this point since it's never been "together" since the start of the illegal war), it won't just be Barack who 'took the eye of the ball,' it will be the press. Grasp that. Grasp that Barack campaigned saying (just like John Kerry before him) that Bully Boy Bush focused on Iraq when he should have focused on Afghanistan. Grasp that the 2012 candidates may say Barack took his eye off Iraq to increase US presence in Afghanistan. Grasp that the move needed, the ones many voters thought they were voting for, was for both wars to have been ended. Alissa J. Rubin explains to Neal Conan that it's easier to move around Afghanistan than it was to move around Iraq -- Rubin didn't leave Iraq that long ago. So what's that really saying? Panhandle Media's never been interested in Iraq. They bellowed and they hollered (Carly Simon's "Memorial Day") but they didn't do much else except make a buck off the illegal war. They had a million excuses for why this war couldn't be covered. Including it was just too dangerous. Somehow Free Speech Radio News managed and still manages to speak to Iraqis for reports. But dream on if you think you'll hear about Iraq on any of the bulk of Pacifica's radio programs or in any of the 'independent' magazines for the left and 'left'. There was one huge exception. KPFA's Flashpoints Radio regularly covers Iraq. Dahr Jamail and others provide segments. Yes. But Robert Knight, in his "Knight Report" at the top of so many Flashpoints broadcast, never forgot the Iraq War. He wasn't just a 'news reader' ripping off AP, either. He provided context and passion and managed to convey the horror and the need to continue to focus on Iraq. His thanks for that? As Kat noted Monday night "KPFA fires Robert Knight." In last night's "Robert Knight's KPFA farewell," Kat noted the final segment of the final Knight Report. Robert Knight: And finally, we close today's Knight Report with the unwelcome news that your reporter is now the third target among Flashpoints production personnel of a relentless and disproportionate series of cutbacks by the current management of KPFA. Your reporter learned of his dismissal -- effective today -- by way of a FedEx letter that was delivered three days after the deed. It has been a great honor to serve with The Knight Report as the contextualizer of breaking world developments, clandestine operations and international policy on Flashpoints which remains the most important investigative news program produced and nationally distributed by -- and pursuing the very best traditions of -- the Pacifica network. Your reporter hopes to rejoin you at some future date under more favorable administrative times at KPFA. With gratitude and regret from exile and in limbo I'm Robert Knight reporting live in New York for Flashpoints. Henry Norr (at The Daily Censored) writes about what is seen as a targeted attack on Flashpoints and we'll again note the last paragraph of the article: "To express support for Flashpoints, write to general manager Lemlem Rijio at gm@kpfa.org and turn out for the first meeting of the new LSB, now set for 7 p.m. on Monday, Jan. 11, 2010 (disregard dates announced earlier) at the Humanist Hall, 390 27th St. (near Telegraph), Oakland." Lastly, NOW on PBS begins airing on most PBS stations Friday (check local listings) and their upcoming broadcast explores elections, soccer and soap opera: There are places in the world where the success of a soap opera is measured not just in TV ratings, but in human lives. On January 1 at 8:30 pm (check local listings), NOW travels to Kenya, where ambitious producers and actors hope one such TV show, "The Team", can help foster peace amongst the country's 42 official tribes. During presidential elections two years ago, tribalism-influenced protests in Kenya left almost 1,500 dead and nearly 300,000 displaced. Tensions continue today over issues including extreme poverty and widespread corruption. In "The Team", soccer players from different tribes work together to overcome historic rivalries and form a common bond. The hope is that commonalities portrayed in fiction can inspire harmony in the real world. Early reaction to the show's inaugural season is promising. "I was very surprised to see how Kenyans want change, how they want to live in peace and the way the responded to us," Milly Mugadi, one of the show's stars, noted during a local screening. "There were people from different tribes talking about peace and how to reconcile with each other... they opened up their hearts." John Marks, whose organization Common Ground produces versions of "The Team" in 12 different countries, is cautiously hopeful. "You don't watch one of our television shows and drop your submachine gun," explains Marks, who says he was inspired by the influence of "All in the Family" on American culture. "But you can change the environment so it becomes more and more difficult to be in violent conflict." Can this soap opera for social change really make a difference in stopping violence? Next on NOW. |
Bombings rock Iraq
Fadhel al-Badrani, Khalid al-Ansary, Missy Ryan and Philippa Fletcher (Reuters) report "twin suicide bombs" in Anbar Province have claimed "at least 24" lives with over one hundred people left injured (that should really be 26 if there were two suicide bombers): "At the Ramadi hospital, doctors crowded around injured policemen lying on stretchers. One of the wounded was a tiny baby, its diaper and white sweater dotted with blood." Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reports that among the injured is the province's governor, Qassim al-Fahdawi and that "[t]he bomber who targeted him was one of his bodyguards, said the Anbar Salvation Council." Anne Barker (Australia's ABC) notes that "conflicting reports" exist on the condition of al-Fahdawi and states that he was wounded in the second of the two bombings. Al Jazeera quotes police Capt Ahmed Mohammed al-Dulaimi stating, "A suicide bomber wearing an army uniform ran towards the governor. Some security people held him back, and he detonated himself." Bassim al-Anbari (AFP) offers, "The US military declined to confirm reports by Ramadi General Hospital that American troops took the provincial governor to a US-run hospital for treatment, when contacted by AFP."
In addition to those two bombings, Reuters notes a Khalis roadside bombing which claimed the lives of 7 pilgrims and left another twenty-five injured and, dropping back to Tuesday for all that follows, a hand grenade attack in Mosul which injured two police officers, "a judge and his wife" injured in a Kirkuk shooting and 1 person shot dead in Mosul.
David Muir and Judy Isikow (ABC World News with Diane Sawyer) take a look back at the decade's notable events including the Iraq War:
Soon, though, the White House turned up the heat on another man, Saddam Hussein, launching a controversial offensive in Iraq.
Secretary of State Colin Powell said to the U.N. Security Council, "Leaving Saddam Hussein in possession of weapons of mass destruction for a few more months or years is not an option."
Powell was part of President Bush's war room, along with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, National Security advisor Condoleezza Rice, and Vice President Dick Cheney.
Forty-three days after the war began, we saw that famous sign, "Mission Accomplished." But the war was far from over.
On the above, a friend at ABC asked for that. On the phone yesterday and I didn't have time and explained that and asked to be reminded this morning. I was and it's included. That's a friend. If I don't know you, if you're e-mailing the public account, you're wasting your time and mine if you give a web address and tell me to read it because I'll want to highlight it and it's "on Iraq." I don't have time. If you want something highlighted and you're e-mailing me to ask for it, include it. If it is Iraq related (and not pro-war), it'll be considered. But, please note, I'm not interested in any 'poor Barack, the ___ are forcing him to do this.' I'm not interested. Not if '____' is generals or bankers or international spies or the great chefs of Europe. Barack Obama is a grown man and he does what he wants. Quit robbing him of his agenda. Related. If you're not Iraq, especially don't e-mail saying, "Check this out, I know you'll want to highlight it." Why do I want to highlight your site on Africa, for example? I don't know you. I don't know who you are. I do know there's a lot of propaganda which has allowed the war in the Congo to continue with so little attention from the international community. I don't know you, you're wasting my time if you're asking me to research you. And if you're not noted right away, wait a day or two to see if you do get noted. Again, a friend at ABC wanted the above yesterday but I (a) didn't have time and (b) couldn't fit it into what was being covered. And it's Iraq related. And a friend wanted it highlighted. So if I've never met you, quit thinking I owe you something or that I'm working for you and must follow your orders and do so immediately. Doesn't work that way.
Lastly, "It's the Iraq Inquiry!" There are two US articles I'm ignoring this week on the Iraq Inquiry. One's by a real reporter and is good until the half-way mark when suddenly Barack's being forced to do things he doesn't want to by these unseen powers. Ooooh. Can we get some spooky music for that? Ooooh. I'm not interested in that crap. Repeating, Barack Obama is an adult. He's many things but he's not stupid, he doesn't get tricked and he's never been forced into doing anything in his life that I'm aware of (and I'm aware of his childhood, his college days and his political life). Stop this nonsense. It turns a grown man into a little baby. Like what he's doing, don't like it, don't care, but don't take away the fact that he's in control of his life and doing what he wants. Judge his actions, absolutely, but don't rob him of that. Don't reduce him to an infant. That's sad.
So that's one. The other?
The 'article' is cobbled together from remarks the author made on a Pacifica show last week. I heard it (not on KPFA, it doesn't air on KPFA) and I didn't want to highlight it. I'm not interested in advancing the careers of sexist pigs. He started off with 'jokes' about Sarah Palin before moving on to 'jokes' about Hillary Clinton and, when his segment was over, it was clear to all that he found every woman in the world to be stupid. But of course all the men were saints and wonderful and blah blah blah. I'm not promoting pigs.
And, for the record, I tell friends no all the time. I was asked to quote from this Los Angeles Times editorial on refugees. I don't see anything worth quoting -- and we care about the refugee crisis. But I see a lot of sloppy in that editorial and I said that to my friend at the paper and told him I'd look at it again before I did the snapshot later today but, as it stands currently, I can't find one sentence I could quote.
Jesse Leavenworth (Hartford Courant) provides a look back and notes, "The ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan haven't permeated Main Street as deeply, but the separation, camaraderie and loss common to all wars have marked thousands of Connecticut service members, their families and friends."
And Sabina e-mails wondering if Terry Gross knows that any women "other than herself" exist? No, of course not. Terry's all about Terry. I know what you mean Sabina. (Terry's in the midst of repeats -- 'encores' -- and it's Deanna Durbin time on 'Fresh' Air as Terry plays 100 Men and a Girl.) Jennifer Jones was not just a famous actress, she was an Academy Award winning one. She passed away earlier this month and Hiram Lee observes her passing for WSWS:
Veteran American actress Jennifer Jones died December 17 at the age of 90. A talented and sensitive performer, Jones was one of several dynamic young actors to emerge in the American cinema during the postwar period. She earned an Academy Award for her performance in The Song of Bernadette (1943) and was nominated three more times during her career. Jones appeared in her final film, The Towering Inferno, in 1974 and had remained largely out of the public eye ever since.
Jennifer Jones, whose given name was Phylis Isley, was born in Tulsa, Oklahoma, on March 2, 1919. Her family ran the Isley Stock Company, a touring theater group that performed tent shows throughout the southern and midwestern United States. Jones began performing with the company while still a child.
Having developed a passion for acting at an early age, Jones would go on to attend New York's American Academy of Dramatic Arts in the late 1930s. Here she met another young actor, Robert Walker (1918-1951), who is today best remembered for co-starring (along with Farley Granger) in Alfred Hitchcock's Strangers on a Train (1951). Walker and Jones married in 1939. The two briefly moved to Hollywood and Jones landed small parts in a Western and a Dick Tracy serial. The two returned to New York after Jones failed an audition with Paramount Pictures.
In addition, the 11:00 a.m. (EST) hour of The Diane Rehm Show -- streaming online and airing on most NPR stations -- features Carole King for the hour (it's a rebroadcast). There's no RULE that all NPR guests must be men -- Terry Gross just thinks there is.
March 20th there's a DC action being called by A.N.S.W.E.R. and others.
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
iraq
reuters
fadhel al-badrani
khalid al-ansary
missy ryan
philippa fletcher
cnn
mohammed tawfeeq
abc news
anne barker
al jazeera
afp
bassim al-anbari
abc world news with diane sawyer
david muir
judy isikow
the los angeles times
the hartford courant
jesse leavenworth
hiram lee
npr
the diane rehm show
carole king
In addition to those two bombings, Reuters notes a Khalis roadside bombing which claimed the lives of 7 pilgrims and left another twenty-five injured and, dropping back to Tuesday for all that follows, a hand grenade attack in Mosul which injured two police officers, "a judge and his wife" injured in a Kirkuk shooting and 1 person shot dead in Mosul.
David Muir and Judy Isikow (ABC World News with Diane Sawyer) take a look back at the decade's notable events including the Iraq War:
Soon, though, the White House turned up the heat on another man, Saddam Hussein, launching a controversial offensive in Iraq.
Secretary of State Colin Powell said to the U.N. Security Council, "Leaving Saddam Hussein in possession of weapons of mass destruction for a few more months or years is not an option."
Powell was part of President Bush's war room, along with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, National Security advisor Condoleezza Rice, and Vice President Dick Cheney.
Forty-three days after the war began, we saw that famous sign, "Mission Accomplished." But the war was far from over.
On the above, a friend at ABC asked for that. On the phone yesterday and I didn't have time and explained that and asked to be reminded this morning. I was and it's included. That's a friend. If I don't know you, if you're e-mailing the public account, you're wasting your time and mine if you give a web address and tell me to read it because I'll want to highlight it and it's "on Iraq." I don't have time. If you want something highlighted and you're e-mailing me to ask for it, include it. If it is Iraq related (and not pro-war), it'll be considered. But, please note, I'm not interested in any 'poor Barack, the ___ are forcing him to do this.' I'm not interested. Not if '____' is generals or bankers or international spies or the great chefs of Europe. Barack Obama is a grown man and he does what he wants. Quit robbing him of his agenda. Related. If you're not Iraq, especially don't e-mail saying, "Check this out, I know you'll want to highlight it." Why do I want to highlight your site on Africa, for example? I don't know you. I don't know who you are. I do know there's a lot of propaganda which has allowed the war in the Congo to continue with so little attention from the international community. I don't know you, you're wasting my time if you're asking me to research you. And if you're not noted right away, wait a day or two to see if you do get noted. Again, a friend at ABC wanted the above yesterday but I (a) didn't have time and (b) couldn't fit it into what was being covered. And it's Iraq related. And a friend wanted it highlighted. So if I've never met you, quit thinking I owe you something or that I'm working for you and must follow your orders and do so immediately. Doesn't work that way.
Lastly, "It's the Iraq Inquiry!" There are two US articles I'm ignoring this week on the Iraq Inquiry. One's by a real reporter and is good until the half-way mark when suddenly Barack's being forced to do things he doesn't want to by these unseen powers. Ooooh. Can we get some spooky music for that? Ooooh. I'm not interested in that crap. Repeating, Barack Obama is an adult. He's many things but he's not stupid, he doesn't get tricked and he's never been forced into doing anything in his life that I'm aware of (and I'm aware of his childhood, his college days and his political life). Stop this nonsense. It turns a grown man into a little baby. Like what he's doing, don't like it, don't care, but don't take away the fact that he's in control of his life and doing what he wants. Judge his actions, absolutely, but don't rob him of that. Don't reduce him to an infant. That's sad.
So that's one. The other?
The 'article' is cobbled together from remarks the author made on a Pacifica show last week. I heard it (not on KPFA, it doesn't air on KPFA) and I didn't want to highlight it. I'm not interested in advancing the careers of sexist pigs. He started off with 'jokes' about Sarah Palin before moving on to 'jokes' about Hillary Clinton and, when his segment was over, it was clear to all that he found every woman in the world to be stupid. But of course all the men were saints and wonderful and blah blah blah. I'm not promoting pigs.
And, for the record, I tell friends no all the time. I was asked to quote from this Los Angeles Times editorial on refugees. I don't see anything worth quoting -- and we care about the refugee crisis. But I see a lot of sloppy in that editorial and I said that to my friend at the paper and told him I'd look at it again before I did the snapshot later today but, as it stands currently, I can't find one sentence I could quote.
Jesse Leavenworth (Hartford Courant) provides a look back and notes, "The ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan haven't permeated Main Street as deeply, but the separation, camaraderie and loss common to all wars have marked thousands of Connecticut service members, their families and friends."
And Sabina e-mails wondering if Terry Gross knows that any women "other than herself" exist? No, of course not. Terry's all about Terry. I know what you mean Sabina. (Terry's in the midst of repeats -- 'encores' -- and it's Deanna Durbin time on 'Fresh' Air as Terry plays 100 Men and a Girl.) Jennifer Jones was not just a famous actress, she was an Academy Award winning one. She passed away earlier this month and Hiram Lee observes her passing for WSWS:
Veteran American actress Jennifer Jones died December 17 at the age of 90. A talented and sensitive performer, Jones was one of several dynamic young actors to emerge in the American cinema during the postwar period. She earned an Academy Award for her performance in The Song of Bernadette (1943) and was nominated three more times during her career. Jones appeared in her final film, The Towering Inferno, in 1974 and had remained largely out of the public eye ever since.
Jennifer Jones, whose given name was Phylis Isley, was born in Tulsa, Oklahoma, on March 2, 1919. Her family ran the Isley Stock Company, a touring theater group that performed tent shows throughout the southern and midwestern United States. Jones began performing with the company while still a child.
Having developed a passion for acting at an early age, Jones would go on to attend New York's American Academy of Dramatic Arts in the late 1930s. Here she met another young actor, Robert Walker (1918-1951), who is today best remembered for co-starring (along with Farley Granger) in Alfred Hitchcock's Strangers on a Train (1951). Walker and Jones married in 1939. The two briefly moved to Hollywood and Jones landed small parts in a Western and a Dick Tracy serial. The two returned to New York after Jones failed an audition with Paramount Pictures.
In addition, the 11:00 a.m. (EST) hour of The Diane Rehm Show -- streaming online and airing on most NPR stations -- features Carole King for the hour (it's a rebroadcast). There's no RULE that all NPR guests must be men -- Terry Gross just thinks there is.
March 20th there's a DC action being called by A.N.S.W.E.R. and others.
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
iraq
reuters
fadhel al-badrani
khalid al-ansary
missy ryan
philippa fletcher
cnn
mohammed tawfeeq
abc news
anne barker
al jazeera
afp
bassim al-anbari
abc world news with diane sawyer
david muir
judy isikow
the los angeles times
the hartford courant
jesse leavenworth
hiram lee
npr
the diane rehm show
carole king
More troops deploy to Iraq
The Mattoon Journal Gazette and Charleston Times-Courier reports that a December 17th dedication ceremony at the US Balad base honored a number of soldiers and civilians including four Illinois National Guard service members who died serving in Iraq back in 2004: Sgt Jessica Cawvey (died 10-6-04), Spc Charles Lamb (died 09-05-04), Sgt Shawna Morrison (died 09-05-04) and Spc Jeremy Ridlen (died 05-23-04). Meanwhile Erik Holmes (Air Force Times) reports on a drinking game in Iraq that turned deadly: Corey Hernandez, Michael Garcia were playing "Trust" on December 10th and Hernandez "faces charges of manslaughter and use of a weapon to commit a felony" while Garcia is dead. From the article:
There was not supposed to be a round in the chamber. That's the way the game is played -- buddies trust each other that the weapon is cleared and pulling the trigger will be harmless.
Garcia "took the gun down, he put it in front of [Hernandez], and he says, 'Trust me. Now point it at me and shoot.' And Corey did," Davis said
Hernandez and Garcia had played Trust with the gun before, Davis said, and they usually took turns as the shooter.
"They had done this a number of times," he said. "No one knows why there was a round in the chamber."
Garcia's roommate, also an airman, dialed 911 shortly before 1 a.m. Dec. 11 to report the shooting. When officers arrived a few minutes later, Hernandez, the roommate and another airman were waiting outside.
In the US, Pasquotank Elementary School has lost a teacher for the year. Kristin Pitts (Daily Advance) reports Sarah Lindsay has deployed to Iraq and, "[a]lthough she prepared her students for months, Lindsay’s departure from the classroom was difficult. Her fourth-graders took it particularly hard, but Lindsay says it probably was hardest on her." She also leaves two sons (Liam and Samuel) and a husband (Gerald) in Elizabeth City, NC while deployed in Iraq. Jake Lowary (Leaf-Chronicle) reports on the 22 members of the Tennessee National Guard who are headed to Camp Shelby before deploying to Iraq. Spc William Howard, who leaves his wife (Diana) and their son (Justin) for the twelve-month tour, states, "If I was going to do 12 years (in the military), I wanted to do one of them in an area where they needed me." Clint Confehr (Marshall County Tribune) reports on the Tennessee departure for the 22 members of the Tennessee Army National Guard as family members said their goodbyes:
Pat "Nanny" Estes of Petersburg said before a goodbye hug with Chris Evans, 34, of Lewisburg.
"It could be 12-18 months or longer" before the soldiers' return, Estes said. "It depends on what Obama does with this freakin' war."
Evans married Estes' daughter. Now, she says, "He's like a real son, not just an ex-son-in-law."
Despite the divorce, "Chris ate with us Christmas Eve," she said. "And he spent Christmas Day with us."
Philadelphia's WPVI (link has text and video) reports on the departure of 60 New Jersey Air National Guard members Monday at the McGuire Air Force Base as they headed to Iraq for a six month tour.
Francis A. Boyle is an international law professor (he was also a witness at Ehren Watada's Article 32; however, Judge Toilet -- John Head -- refused to allow Boyle to testify at the attempted court-martial). This is from Boyle's "The United States Promotes Israeli Genocide Against the Palestinians" (Global Research):
As long ago as October 19, 2000, the then United Nations Human Rights Commission (now Council) condemned Israel for inflicting "war crimes" and "crimes against humanity" upon the Palestinian people, most of whom are Muslims. The reader has a general idea of what a war crime is, so I am not going to elaborate upon that term here. But there are different degrees of heinousness for war crimes. In particular are the more serious war crimes denominated "grave breaches" of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Since the outbreak of the first Intifada in 1987, the world has seen those heinous war crimes inflicted every day by Israel against the Palestinian people living in occupied Palestine: e.g., willful killing of Palestinian civilians by the Israeli army and by Israel's illegal paramilitary settlers. These Israeli "grave breaches" of the Fourth Geneva Convention mandate universal prosecution for the perpetrators and their commanders, whether military or civilian, including and especially Israel's political leaders.
But I want to focus for a moment on Israel's "crimes against humanity" against the Palestinian people-as determined by the U.N. Human Rights Commission itself, set up pursuant to the requirements of the United Nations Charter. What are "crimes against humanity"? This concept goes all the way back to the Nuremberg Charter of 1945 for the trial of the major Nazi war criminals in Europe. In the Nuremberg Charter of 1945, drafted by the United States Government, there was created and inserted a new type of international crime specifically intended to deal with the Nazi persecution of the Jewish people:
Crimes against humanity: namely, murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds in execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated.
The paradigmatic example of "crimes against humanity" is what Hitler and the Nazis did to the Jewish people. This is where the concept of "crimes against humanity" came from. And this is what the U.N. Human Rights Commission determined that Israel is currently doing to the Palestinian people: crimes against humanity. Expressed in legal terms, this is just like what Hitler and the Nazis did to the Jews. That is the significance of the formal determination by the U.N. Human Rights Commission that Israel has inflicted "crimes against humanity" upon the Palestinian people. The Commission chose this well-known and long-standing legal term of art quite carefully and deliberately based upon the evidence it had compiled.
Furthermore, the Nuremberg "crimes against humanity" are the historical and legal precursor to the international crime of genocide as defined by the 1948 Genocide Convention. The theory here was that what Hitler and the Nazis did to the Jewish people was so horrific that it required a special international treaty that would codify and universalize the Nuremberg concept of "crimes against humanity." And that treaty ultimately became the 1948 Genocide Convention.
The following community sites updated last night:
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
iraq
the mattoon journal gazette
the charleston times-courier
the air force times
erik holmes
kristin pitts
the daily advance
the leaf-chronicle
jake lowary
wpvi
francis a. boyle
anns mega dub
like maria said paz
kats korner
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
thomas friedman is a great man
trinas kitchen
the daily jot
cedrics big mix
mikey likes it
ruths report
sickofitradlz
oh boy it never ends
There was not supposed to be a round in the chamber. That's the way the game is played -- buddies trust each other that the weapon is cleared and pulling the trigger will be harmless.
Garcia "took the gun down, he put it in front of [Hernandez], and he says, 'Trust me. Now point it at me and shoot.' And Corey did," Davis said
Hernandez and Garcia had played Trust with the gun before, Davis said, and they usually took turns as the shooter.
"They had done this a number of times," he said. "No one knows why there was a round in the chamber."
Garcia's roommate, also an airman, dialed 911 shortly before 1 a.m. Dec. 11 to report the shooting. When officers arrived a few minutes later, Hernandez, the roommate and another airman were waiting outside.
In the US, Pasquotank Elementary School has lost a teacher for the year. Kristin Pitts (Daily Advance) reports Sarah Lindsay has deployed to Iraq and, "[a]lthough she prepared her students for months, Lindsay’s departure from the classroom was difficult. Her fourth-graders took it particularly hard, but Lindsay says it probably was hardest on her." She also leaves two sons (Liam and Samuel) and a husband (Gerald) in Elizabeth City, NC while deployed in Iraq. Jake Lowary (Leaf-Chronicle) reports on the 22 members of the Tennessee National Guard who are headed to Camp Shelby before deploying to Iraq. Spc William Howard, who leaves his wife (Diana) and their son (Justin) for the twelve-month tour, states, "If I was going to do 12 years (in the military), I wanted to do one of them in an area where they needed me." Clint Confehr (Marshall County Tribune) reports on the Tennessee departure for the 22 members of the Tennessee Army National Guard as family members said their goodbyes:
Pat "Nanny" Estes of Petersburg said before a goodbye hug with Chris Evans, 34, of Lewisburg.
"It could be 12-18 months or longer" before the soldiers' return, Estes said. "It depends on what Obama does with this freakin' war."
Evans married Estes' daughter. Now, she says, "He's like a real son, not just an ex-son-in-law."
Despite the divorce, "Chris ate with us Christmas Eve," she said. "And he spent Christmas Day with us."
Philadelphia's WPVI (link has text and video) reports on the departure of 60 New Jersey Air National Guard members Monday at the McGuire Air Force Base as they headed to Iraq for a six month tour.
Francis A. Boyle is an international law professor (he was also a witness at Ehren Watada's Article 32; however, Judge Toilet -- John Head -- refused to allow Boyle to testify at the attempted court-martial). This is from Boyle's "The United States Promotes Israeli Genocide Against the Palestinians" (Global Research):
As long ago as October 19, 2000, the then United Nations Human Rights Commission (now Council) condemned Israel for inflicting "war crimes" and "crimes against humanity" upon the Palestinian people, most of whom are Muslims. The reader has a general idea of what a war crime is, so I am not going to elaborate upon that term here. But there are different degrees of heinousness for war crimes. In particular are the more serious war crimes denominated "grave breaches" of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Since the outbreak of the first Intifada in 1987, the world has seen those heinous war crimes inflicted every day by Israel against the Palestinian people living in occupied Palestine: e.g., willful killing of Palestinian civilians by the Israeli army and by Israel's illegal paramilitary settlers. These Israeli "grave breaches" of the Fourth Geneva Convention mandate universal prosecution for the perpetrators and their commanders, whether military or civilian, including and especially Israel's political leaders.
But I want to focus for a moment on Israel's "crimes against humanity" against the Palestinian people-as determined by the U.N. Human Rights Commission itself, set up pursuant to the requirements of the United Nations Charter. What are "crimes against humanity"? This concept goes all the way back to the Nuremberg Charter of 1945 for the trial of the major Nazi war criminals in Europe. In the Nuremberg Charter of 1945, drafted by the United States Government, there was created and inserted a new type of international crime specifically intended to deal with the Nazi persecution of the Jewish people:
Crimes against humanity: namely, murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds in execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated.
The paradigmatic example of "crimes against humanity" is what Hitler and the Nazis did to the Jewish people. This is where the concept of "crimes against humanity" came from. And this is what the U.N. Human Rights Commission determined that Israel is currently doing to the Palestinian people: crimes against humanity. Expressed in legal terms, this is just like what Hitler and the Nazis did to the Jews. That is the significance of the formal determination by the U.N. Human Rights Commission that Israel has inflicted "crimes against humanity" upon the Palestinian people. The Commission chose this well-known and long-standing legal term of art quite carefully and deliberately based upon the evidence it had compiled.
Furthermore, the Nuremberg "crimes against humanity" are the historical and legal precursor to the international crime of genocide as defined by the 1948 Genocide Convention. The theory here was that what Hitler and the Nazis did to the Jewish people was so horrific that it required a special international treaty that would codify and universalize the Nuremberg concept of "crimes against humanity." And that treaty ultimately became the 1948 Genocide Convention.
The following community sites updated last night:
-
- THIS JUST IN! NOW THEY'RE CONCERNED!10 hours ago
- Who's responsbile?10 hours ago
-
-
- A killer and a rumor10 hours ago
- 60 Minutes on drought10 hours ago
-
- Tracy Morgan needs help10 hours ago
-
- Graffiti10 hours ago
-
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
iraq
the mattoon journal gazette
the charleston times-courier
the air force times
erik holmes
kristin pitts
the daily advance
the leaf-chronicle
jake lowary
wpvi
francis a. boyle
anns mega dub
like maria said paz
kats korner
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
thomas friedman is a great man
trinas kitchen
the daily jot
cedrics big mix
mikey likes it
ruths report
sickofitradlz
oh boy it never ends
