Thursday, July 19, 2007

THIS JUST IN! THAT'S A CROCK!

 
APPARENTLY UNAWARE THAT THE EMMY NOMINATIONS WERE ANNOUNCED EARLIER THIS MORNING, U.S. AMBASSADOR TO IRAQ, RYAN CROCKER, GAVE ONE OF THE MOST HAM FISTED PERFORMANCES OF ALL TIME THIS AFTERNOON AS HE HEAPED ON THE MELODRAMATICS WHILE SPEAKING TO THE SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE. 
 
CROCK TOLD THE COMMITTEE THAT BENCHMARKS WERE NOT A RELIABLE MEASURE OF PROGRESS SEEMING TO FORGET WHO SET THEM (THE WHITE HOUSE).
 
CROCK PUSHED "THE FEAR" AND "THE FEAR" REPEATEDLY.  SO MUCH SO THAT SEVERAL ATTENDING EXPECTED HIM TO PULL OUT A FLASH LIGHT AND TELL THE TALE OF THE YOUNG COUPLE PARKING WHO FIND A HOOK ON THEIR CAR DOOR.
 
 
CROCK LEFT THE COMMITTEE MEETING IN A SNIT FIT AND WAS HEARD TO REMARK,
"HOW DARE THEY TREAT ME LIKE THE CAST OF DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES!"
 
 
 
Starting with war resistance.  Joshua Key began serving in Iraq in April 2003. Approximately six and half months later, he made the decision to self-checkout. In Michelle Mason's brilliant documentary Breaking Ranks, Key (and others) share some of what we they saw in the illegal war.  The section with Key in the film that may stand out most is when explains coming upon "heads and bodies.  And American troops in the middle of them saying 'we lost it.'  . . .  I seen two American soldiers kicking the head around like a soccer ball."  Key has also told his story in this year's The Deserter's Tale which has consistently earned strong reviews.  In the book, Key charts his life growing up in Oklahoma, his time in Iraq, his decision to self-checkout and the decision for his family (Joshua and Brandi Key and their four children) to relocate to Canada.  Among the many incidents he witnessed in Iraq was one on the way out of al-Habbaniyah where they passed many onlookers including an unarmed  man sitting in a chair.

As we approached, I saw the seated man raise his leg to bare the sole of his foot at us, a sign of disrespect.  We all knew that this was the Iraqi equivalent of the middle finger -- a clear "f**k you."  As I watched, Sergeant Gurillo -- perched atop an APC just ten feet ahead of mine -- put the man in the sights of his semiautomatic rifle.  Gurillo's rifle had a lever allowing it to be used as a machine gun or for firing single bursts, and Gurillo -- a short stocky guy who was known to us all for getting love letters from both his wife and his girlfriend -- must have switched the level to single-shot mode.  He tipped the barrel of the rifle down ever so slightly, squeezed the trigger, and shot the man squarely in the foot.

That incident is one of many recounted (p. 140 for that one) throughout the book.  It's actually one of the milder incidents in the book.  But someone offers the equivalent of the middle finger and they get shot.  All of the incidents Key observed and took part in, as well as the illegal nature of the war itself, resulted in Key's conclusion that he had no choice but to say no to illegal war,  From page 99:

My own moral judgment was disintegrating under the pressure of being a soldier, feeling vulnerable and having no clear enemy to kill in Iraq.  We were encouraged to beat up on the enemy, we picked our fights with civilians who were powerless to resist.  We knew that we would not have to account for our actions.  Because we were fearful, sleep-deprived, and jacked up on caffeine, adrenaline, and testoserone, and because our officers constantly reminded us that all Iraqis were our enemies, civilians included, it was tempting to steal, no big deal to punch, and easy to kill.  We were Americans in Iraq and we could do anything we wanted to do.

If he had stayed silent, if he'd refused to take a stand, who knows how many media outlets would hail Key as a hero?  Saying no to an illegal war is heroic.  As Dave Lindorff (CounterPunch) observes, "It is not that these soldiers are evil.  They are victims who have been assigned an evil job.  Some in the military -- people with extreme courage -- have resisted, have spoken out, have risked court martials, have refused orders, have deserted, but it is too much to ask most men and women in such a situation to be similarly courageous."  Which is why those who do take a stand need to be supported and applauded.

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Jared Hood and James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Augstin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Joshua Key, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Jeremy Hinzman, Stephen Funk, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Care, Kyle Huwer, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty-one US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.


Information on war resistance within the military can be found at  The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters.

The war is illegal.  War crimes are being committed.  Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) noted today that US marine Trent Thomas was found guilty in the April 26, 2006 death of Hashim Ibrahim Awad: "Awad was dragged from his home, shot and then planted with a weapon to make it appear he was a militant planning an attack.  Five other service-members have pleaded guilty in the case."  Reuters noted that Thomas was "convicted of kidnapping and conspiracy to murder".  Elaine (Like Maria Said Paz) addressed this yesterday and noted that, throughout the case, the defense maintained that Awad was a "legitimate target"  which shows no remorse or accountability.  CNN reminds that Thomas had originally pleaded guilty in a plea agreement before changing his mind and withdrawing his plea and that he will be sentenced today.  In February, Dave Hasemyer and Rick Rogers (San Diego Union-Tribune) reported on Thomas' announcement ("stunned the judge"0 that in the midst of what would have been his sentencing hearing, Thomas declared he was withdrawing his guilty plea after having agreed to it three weeks prior.  When he entered the guilty plea in January, Thomas told the judge that his own actions had disgraced the military, admitted they planted a weapon on Awad after killing him, and more.  But, Hasemyer and Rogers reported, Thomas withdrew the plea at the start of February with the claim that the orders were lawful. Lawful?  In January, AP reported on the hearing where Thomas entered the original guilty plea and had Thomas testifying that Melson J. "Bacos started to spaz out, to freak out.  He started saying we were going to get caught" and that "Squad leader Sgt. Lawrence G. Hutchins III then called in over the radio that they had spotted a man digging a hole, Thomas said.  Someone fired a shot, then he and others in the squad opened fire."  At this point Awad was already dragged from his home, already bound, already had a shovel and a gun planted near him -- lawful orders?  Lawful orders don't require any of that and they certainly don't require cover stories -- spazzing out or not.  Allison Hoffman (AP) reports that one of the defense arguments this week was that Thomas may have "a traumatic brain injury [which] impeded the Marine's ability to say no when his squad leader ordered him to snatch the man from his home in Anbar province".  To be clear, that man was not Awad -- when they could not find that man, they went after the grandfather Awad. Tony Perry (Los Angeles Times) explains that Thomas was convicted by a jury composed "of three officers and six enlisted personnel" who "deliberated six hours before reaching its verdict."


Goodman also noted, "Two US soldiers have been charged with murdering an Iraqi civlian in Kirkuk last month.  A lieutenant colonel has been relieved of command in connection with the case."  CBS and AP identify Michael Browder (Lt. Col.) as the commander who has been "relieved of his command . . . although he is not a suspect and has not been charged, the military said" and identified the two charged as Sgt. 1st Class Trey A. Corrales and Spc. Christopher P. Shore.  Browder is not a suspect but the US military press release is not blowing kisses and bearing hugs, noting Browder "was relieved by Maj. Gen Benjamin R. Mixon, commander, Multi-National Division -- North and Task for Lighning, based on the totality of the circumstances surrounding this incident and due to a lack of confidence in his ability to command effectively.  The alleged murder was committed by Soldiers under Browder's command."  The statement notes that the death in question took place ("on or about") June 23rd "in the vicinity of Kirkuk".  Megan Greenwell (Washington Post) reports, "The two men, who are based at Schofield Barracks in Oahu, Hawaii, were stationed near Kirkuk, an oil-rich city that has seen increasing violence and heightened tensions between ethnic groups.  Military officials said the murder probe was launched based on information provided by other U.S. soldiers."  Al Jazeera notes that charges against two US soldiers for murdering Iraqis were announced last month (and like Trent Thomas' crime, the two are accused of planting weapons to excuse the murders): "Sergeant Michael Hnsley and Specialist Jorge Sandoval were charged with the murder of three Iraqi nationals in three separate incidents . . . between April and June near the town of Iskandiriya".

Staying with war crimes, Tuesday, Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) noted the deaths of Namir Noor-Eldeen and Saeed Chmagh of Reuters last week had resulted in the "news agency . . . calling for a thorough and objective investigation into the U.S. military action last week that left two of its Iraqi staff members dead. . . . Reuters announced on Monday that it had recovered two cameras that were being used by Noor-Eldeen.  Photos on the cameras show no evidence of the firefight described by the U.S. military.  Reuters editor-in-chief David Schlesinger said: 'Our preliminary investigation raises real questions about whether there was fighting at the time the two men were killed."  Eye witnesses last week stated there was no exchange of gun fire going on when the Reuters team arrived.  A US air strike killed the two journalists.  Today, Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez (Democracy Now!) explored the attacks on journalists in Iraq -- the deaths and being held captive by the US military -- with  Scott Horton who spoke specifically of AP's Bilal Hussein who has been imprisoned by the US military since April 12, 2006.  "He was grabbed in Ramadi by a [US] patrol.  The initial announcement by the Baghdad command was that he was caught red-handed in some sort of action.  Of course, I interviewed some of the people involved in detaining him.  They told me that ws a complete lie, that they had been sent out on a mission to get him and that the instructions had come way, way up the chain of command.  In fact, the implication being that it hadn't been decided in Baghdad.  It had been decided in the Pentagon, in Washington." From the broadcast:

AMY GOODMAN: You referred to the US cameraman. This is the case that you seriously investigated. In fact, didn't you represent him, the CBS cameraman?
SCOTT HORTON: The CBS cameraman, that's right.
AMY GOODMAN: Explain his case, to give us some insight. He has since been released.
SCOTT HORTON: He was released one week before Bilal Hussein was arrested. In fact, we think there's some connection between these two events. But he had been taking pictures of an attack on an American convoy that occurred in Mosul in the north of Iraq, and he was shot as he did this. CBS was told in the first couple of hours after the event that he was going to be released, and then he continued to be held. And he kept being moved around.
And we learned that the center of decision-making had passed out of Iraq and was being taken in the Pentagon, in Washington. And in the Pentagon and Washington, unnamed senior press spokesmen, we believe an assistant secretary of defense, were telling reporters, off the record and not for attribution, that he had been found with photographs of four separate incidents of attacks on Americans at the time of the attack. And when we got to the end of the case and the trial, we discovered that was a conscious lie. Absolutely not the case. But it was reported, by the way, on CBS on continuous feed for thirty-six -- excuse me, on CNN on continuous feed for thirty-six hours, as well as on FOX News. Neither of them ever corrected the false statements that were put out.
JUAN GONZALEZ: What is the impact on the journalists who are in Iraq when you have situations like this of the military just grabbing people and holding them indefinitely without charges?
SCOTT HORTON: Well, we have -- I mean, we need to start with the fact that we have more than 110 journalists at this point who have been killed in Iraq. That's twice the number who were killed in World War II. The number of journalists who have been arrested is now into the thousands. Most of those arrests are simply for establishing identity, and they are resolved in a period of four to six hours, but many of them have gone on for weeks and indeed months, and it is -- you know, it creates continuous pressure on the journalists.
But the most disturbing thing here is a tendency on the part of the US military to view these journalists as, quote, "the enemy." And back three months ago, we actually got to see some classified operational security briefing materials that were prepared by the Department of Defense, in which they labeled journalists in a category together with al-Qaeda and drug dealers as potential enemy, to be treated and viewed as such. That leads to people being killed, by the way.
 
[. . .]
 
This summer, Tina Richards' Grassroots America and Iraq Veterans Against the War are launching the campaign Funding the War is Killing the Troops.  As Pham Binh (Dissident Voice) notes IVAW's membership is growing.  And the new  CBS News-New York Times poll demonstrates (yet again) that the public and the illegal war have parted.  Support is not coming back for it.  61% of respondents stating Congress should only fund the illegal war if it has a timetable for withdrawal and only 28% believe that Congress should continue funding regardless. 74% of respondents say the illegal war is going badly, 25% live in the land of delusion and say it's going "well."  Currently 8% of respondents are saying, "Block all funding."  By refuting the lies of US Senator Carl Levin and others, the Funding the War is Killing the Troops campaign can make that 8% number soar much higher.
 
 


Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links.