THIS JUST IN! KILLER IS WORSE THAN TRICKY DICK!

BULLY BOY PRESS &  CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE

BIT BY BIT, SLOWLY IT TURNS AND AMERICA WAKES UP TO THE FACT THAT, YES, KILLER BARRY O IS WORSE THAN RICHARD NIXON.

THIS AS KILLER BARRY PUSHES THROUGH 'LAW' AS EXECUTIVE ORDER BECAUSE HE KNOWS IT WOULD NEVER PASS CONGRESS.

KILLER BARRY WANTS TO BE PRINCESS OF THE UNITED STATES -- AND HE'S ALREADY PICKED OUT HIS PINK, SILK PANTIES.

FROM THE TCI WIRE:



Protests took place throughout Iraq today with Al Mada reporting the numbers participating significantly rose from last week.  Hurriyet also observes, "The turnout appeared to be among the largest since the protests began in December."   Sofia News Agency reports, "In Adhamiyah, a mostly Sunni neighbourhood of north Baghdad, several hundred demonstrators resumed their weekly protest under heavy security measures at the Abu Hanifa mosque, calling for the release of prisoners they say are being wrongfully held."  Alsumaria reports Falluja saw tens of thousands turn out today and they took to the international highway (that connects Baghdad to Jordan) as The Voice of Russia notes. Today Reuters notes the protesters in Falluja chanted "NO" to Nouri al-Maliki.  Sameer N. Yacoub (AP) explains,  "The main rallies Friday took place in Fallujah and Ramadi, cities that straddle the highway running through Anbar province."  For a photo of thousands and thousands of occupying the highway in Falluja -- and the areas around the highway -- click on this Alsumaria page.  Click here for a photo of the Falluja protest taken byThaier al-Sudani (Reuters).   And AFP's Prashant Rao provides links to more photos.

8h Prashant Rao ‏@prashantrao

Pictures of Iraq's anti-government protests in Baghdad, Fallujah and Kirkuk by @AFP photographers: http://bit.ly/WYeDRk 

Expand

6h Prashant Rao ‏@prashantrao

Pictures of anti-government demos today in Baghdad, Kirkuk and Fallujah by @AFP photographers: http://bit.ly/WDcrAB 

Expand


A spokesperson for the Falluja protesters, Khaled Hamoud, tells Al-Shorfa, "Today's demonstrations are no different from previous demonstrations in terms of the demands and rights we are seeking.  We hope that the government will meet them and we are determined to continue our peaceful demonstrations."  Morning Star quotes from Cleric Abdul-Hameed Jadoua who addressed the Falluja protesters telling them "the blood of martyrs was shed so that the dignity of our Iraq and our tribes will be restored. [. . .]  From this place, we tell the government that we do not want to see a soldier from now on, not only in Fallujah, but in all its suburbs and villages."   The Christian Science Monitor and Al Jazeera correspondent Jane Arraf Tweeted the following on the Falluja protest today.

15h jane arraf ‏@janearraf

Pick-up trucks full of young guys with flags heading for #Fallujah in what's expected to be huge #Iraqi protest after Friday prayers.

Expand

13h jane arraf ‏@janearraf

Prayers in #Fallujah - thousands still coming in #Iraq ant-government protest - leaders appeal for non-violence. pic.twitter.com/6HSHGkBR

View photo

• Reply
• Retweet
• Favorite
• More

11h jane arraf ‏@janearraf

#Iraq -huge gathering for prayers on #Falluah highway, calls to remember the martyrs, anti-Maliki chants and then all went home for lunch

Expand





Kitabat notes today's protests are a tribute to the Falluja martyrs who were killed last week.

Friday, January 25th, Nouri al-Maliki's armed thugs in Falluja fired on protesters killing at least seven (Alsumaria reported Saturday that another of the victims has died from wounds raising the death toll from six to seven)  and sixty more were left injured. Today Kitabat reports four more victims of last Friday's violence have died bringing the death toll to 11.  Protesters in Falluja were marching and taking part in a sit-in when the military opened fire on them.  Anbar Province has sworn out arrest warrants for the soldiers.  Rami G. Khouri (Daily Star) sees similarities between Egypt and Iraq:

The same applies to the tens of thousands of demonstrators in Iraq, who, like their Egyptian counterparts, are protesting the killing of demonstrators by the security services as well as a wider sense that the central government is not addressing the socio-economic and political rights of all citizens with diligence or fairness. In both cases, many ordinary citizens feel that one group is trying to monopolize power and seize control of the state. The Iraqi and Egyptian leaders have both acted with an authoritarianism that remind us of their predecessors’ policies in many ways., which Arabs now wish to leave behind them for good.
 Dar Addustour notes that Nouri met for six hours mid-week with armed forces commanders to discuss/anticipate today's protests.  Kitabat explains that hundreds of thousands of Iraqis took part in protests today throughout Anbar Province, Kirkuk Province, Nineveh Province, Diyala Province and Salahuddin following morning prayers. Dar Addustour quotes from Sheikh Abdul Hamid Jadou's sermon where he said that the prime minister needed to hear the protesters.  The Sheikh declared that positions don't last, the world does not last but God watches and Nouri needs to do the right thing.  Alsumaria notes that protesters in Kirkuk marched calling for government to implement their demands and calling for loyalty to the Falluja martyrs and that the heads of the tribal clans in Anbar, Salahuddin and Nineveh Province are declaring Nouri needs to listen to the protesters.    Al Jazeera reports:

Al Jazeera's Jane Arraf, reporting from Fallujah, said many had walked for hours to attend Friday's protest and had turned the highway into a mosque for the weekly prayers.
"Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is under increasing pressure to listen to their demands," she said, adding that a lot of the protesters, mostly young men, were unemployed and that a lot of them have been in jail.
"They feel they've been neglected by the Shia government," she said.


World Bulletin observes, "The protests are evolving in the most serious test yet for Maliki and his fragile government that splits posts among Shi'ite, Sunni and ethnic Kurds, who were already deadlocked over how to share power for more than a year."  In a report for the Christian Science Monitor, Jane Arraf explains:

The Anbar demonstrations began in December, with protesters demanding an end to perceived targeting of Sunni Muslims after the arrest of the Sunni finance minister’s bodyguards on terrorism charges. But it is the arrests of dozens of Iraqi women that have infuriated many in this fiercely tribal area. That anger has spread to Sunni areas in Baghdad and to provinces farther north, and both Al Qaeda in Iraq and mainstream political figures have been quick to join the fray.


Human Rights Watch's "Iraq: A Broken Justice System" was released yesterday and noted:

Most recently, in November, federal police invaded 11 homes in the town of al-Tajji, north of Baghdad, and detained 41 people, including 29 children, overnight in their homes. Sources close to the detainees, who requested anonymity, said police took 12 women and girls ages 11 to 60 to 6^th Brigade headquarters and held them there for four days without charge. The sources said the police beat the women and tortured them with electric shocks and plastic bags placed over their heads until they began to suffocate.
Despite widespread outcry over abuse and rape of women in pre-trial detention, the government has not investigated or held the abusers accountable. In response to mass protests over the treatment of female detainees, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki issued a pardon for 11 detainees. However, hundreds more women remain in detention, many of whom allege they have been tortured and have not had access to a proper defense.

On the topic of the call to release prisoners, this call has been a constant of the recent wave of protests and was also a part of the 2011 protests.  Iraqis disappear into the 'legal system' and their families can't find them.   Article IV allows the security forces to arrest relatives of suspects.  Relatives who are not charged with anything languish in detention centers and prisons.  The Sunni population feels they are especially targeted by Nouri -- both with regards to arrests and with regards to being put to death.





RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Protests across Iraq"
"Archbishop Sako"
"Quiche in the Kitchen"
"Congress was as bad as the press today"
"Zero Dark Thirty"
"Whitney"
"News of plants"
"Whitney"
"scandal 'truth or consequences'"
"Hagel's all mushy (Wally)"
"Oh, Winslow"
"Applause for Senator Blumenthal"
"JoAnn Wypijewski is Smelly Cat"
"Lindsay Graham"
"Beyonce and her fluffer"
"Whitney"
"Zero Big Thirty"
"Arrow: Vertigo"
"The Grouch of Wrath"
"The government finds a new way to screw up our kids"
"Nikita: Survival Instincts"
"I heard a rumor"
"All the questions"
"THIS JUST IN! THE QUESTIONS!"

THIS JUST IN! THE QUESTIONS!

BULLY BOY PRESS &  CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE

SO MANY QUESTIONS SWIRL AROUND THESE DAYS?  THE ECONOMIST, FOR EXAMPLE, WONDERS WHETHER KILLER BARRY O WILL LET JOHN KERRY BE JOHN KERRY?  APPARENTLY, KILLER BARRY HAS ORDERED THE CREATION OF A BLOND HILLARY WIG AND HAS IT AND A POWER SUIT WAITING FOR KERRY.

THE HUFFINGTON POST REVEALS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY TOOK MONEY FROM A LEADING ANTI-TEACHER UNION GROUP FOR THE 2012 CONVENTION LEADING TO QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT THAT MEANS FOR LABOR GROUPS?

THE WHOLE WORLD WONDERS IF YESTERDAY'S SENATE HEARING INTERRUPTED CHUCK HAGEL'S NAP AND THAT WAS WHY HE WAS SO DAZED AND CONFUSED?

AND, LASTLY, THE ISSUE OF WHY LONDON'S INDEPENDENT BOTHERS TO COVER U.S. GOVERNMENT NOMINEES?  NOMINEES.  WE THOUGHT IT MEANT THE SAME THING IN ENGLAND BUT APPARENTLY NOT.  YESTERDAY WAS THE HEARING ABOUT CHUCK HAGEL'S NOMINATION TO BE THE NEXT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE BUT THE INDEPENDENT PROCLAIMS HIM "OBAMA'S NEW SECRETARY OF DEFENSE" AS THOUGH A SENATE VOTE IS A MINOR DETAIL.

FROM THE TCI WIRE:



In the moment that probably best captured 'support' for Chuck Hagel and his 'team skills' in today's Senate Armed Services Committee, 85-year-old John Warner was pulled out of mouthballs to drone on about Hagel ("of how he will serve the president") this afternoon.  Warner left the Senate four years ago.  And, if you know Warner (I do), you know if he's talking his time in the Senate, he can't shut up about his attendance record.  Some might point out with that voting record, attendance is better focused on.  But that's what Hagel had to offer for his defense, a retired US Senator, someone who only got into the Senate to begin with because of Elizabeth Taylor, someone who thought small and played the country mouse in the big bad Senate.  That was what Hagel was reduced to: A geriatric with no notable achievements singing his praises.  The hair deserves remarking on as well. Hagel probably thought he was wearing a longer Caesar cut but with it bushing out on the sides it looked more like a modified Bea Arthur from The Golden Girls era but with a tad more length in the back, it could have been a Maude.  But it seemed more Golden Girl, especially as he stumbled throughout the hearing, often taking long pauses to complete his thought in the midst of a sentence.  Is Hagel mentally up to the challenge of being Secretary of Defense? 

We've noted before the position needs someone with passion and energy and, for that reason, stated that former US House Rep and Iraq War veteran Patrick Murphy should be considered and US Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice should be considered for the post.  Those aren't the only two.  But watching today as Hagel looked like Bea Arthur and testified like Deputy Dawg, the issue of energy level needs to be raised.

In the questioning, Committee Chair Carl Levin was most concerned with the issue of the relationships between the governments of Iran and the US and whether Hagel could reconcile his various positions over the years on sanctions.  Hagel stated he was for sanctions -- when they were multi-lateral.  But he admitted he had opposed unilateral sanctions in the past.

Senator Chuck Hagel:  As to my records on votes in the Senate regarding unilateral sanctions, I have differed on some of those.  I have voted for some as well.  Uh, it was always on a case-by-case basis when I, uh, voted against some of those unilateral sanctions on Iran.  It was a different time.  For example, I believe one was in, uh, 2001, 2002.  We were in a different place with Iran during that time.  Matter of fact, uh, I recall the Bush administration did not want a renewal -- a five-year renewal of ILSA [the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996] during that time because, uh, they weren't sure of the effectiveness on sanctions.  That, uh, wasn't the only reason I voted against it.  It was because I thought that there might be other ways to, uh, employ-employ our, uh, vast ability to harness power and allies.  It was never a question of did I disagree with the objective.  The objective is, I think, very clear uh-uh to both of us.  Uhm, I recall for example in, uh, 2008, Secretary of State [Condi] Rice sending a letter to the Finance Committee, Senator [Max] Baucus requesting that, uh, a sanction resolution, unilateral, in the Finance Committee, not come out of the, uh, Finance Committee because the Bush administration at the time was working with the, uh, Russians specifically but with the Security-Council of the United Nations to try to get international sanctions which, I think, that effort in 2008 led to the, uh, 2010 international sanctions

Committee Chair Carl Levin: Can you give us your view on the size of the US force which might be necessary, or would be necessary, after 2014?  The so-called 'residual force,' if you have an opinion on the size.  You indicated in your opening statements, two missions for that residual force.  Can you also give us your opinion of the size of the Afghan National Security force after 2014 and whether you agree with me and Senator Lindsay Graham on this Committee and others that we ought to reconsider the position that the Afghan National Security Force should be reduced by a third starting in 2014 -- to about 230,000 from what it's current goal is which is about 350,000.

Chuck Hagel:   Uh, as you all, uh, know now, General Allen has presented his options to the president for the president's consideration.  As far as I know, as of this morning, the president had not made a decision, uhm, uh, on what a residual force -- numbers-wise -- would look like?  I have not been included inn those discussions, so I-I don't know other than knowing that he's got a range of options as you do.  But I would say that from what the president has told me, what Secretary Panetta has told me,  that that decision will be made to assure resourcing the mission and the capability of that mission.  As to, uh, what kind of a force structure should, uh, eventually be in place by the Afghans, I don't know enough about the specifics to give you, uh, a good answer other than that I think that has to be uh-uh a decision that is, uh, made certainly with the president of Afghanistan, uh, what we can do to continue to support and train and, uh, protect our interests within the scope of our  ability to do that.  Obviously, the immunity for our troops is an issue which was an issue in Iraq.  All of those consider -- considerations will be -- will be important and will be made if I'm confirmed and in the position to give the President advice on that.  I will, with consultations of our commanders on the ground and our chiefs, give him, the best, uh, options that we can provide.


Hagel was willing to say anything.  Fortunately for him, the senators were, with few exceptions, willing to play along and nod.  Far too much time was spent on Israel -- that includes some very annoying testimony from Senators Jack Reed and Kay Hagen who seemed to be in a competition over who would win Most Loyal To Israel (Hagan won by a hair, if only because she could boast of the most recent visit).  Senators -- and those were just two of them -- felt the need to discuss Israel and what Hagel had told them privately and how they were so glad to know that it would be an act of war for Palestine to declare the area their own, that Hagel favored a two-state solution and all the other sop that's always tossed out.

I find Hagel's remark referring to the "Jewish lobby" objectionable.  I've stated that before.  Hagel addressed that (more than once) in his testimony.  He said, on the record, that he mispoke and that it was one time.  For me, that one time on the record (answering on the record) was more than enough.  I found him to be believable on that issue because he spoke in what I took to be an honest manner. Also true, he proved himself to be a very poor speaker throughout his testimony.  When Senator Bill Nelson (I know Bill and like Bill) wasted everyone's time giving Hagel a make up test (after he failed to answer Senator John McCain's basic question), Hagel insisted his opposition to the 'surge' in Iraq, "We lost almost 1200 dead Americans in the surge."  The 'surge' was an escalation, an increase, in the number of US troops on the ground in Iraq following the 2006 elections.  The 'surge' was a failure.  We'll talk about that in a moment but "We lost almost 1200 dead Americans in the surge"?  We lost those dead Americans?  And we're not searching for them still?  "We lost almost 1200 Americans in the surge" is how you word what he was attempting to say.

Let's go back to the surge.  It allowed Iraq to be noted for a few seconds by a body that did nothing to stop the Iraq War.  Hagel did nothing to stop it and that's on him. 

Senator John McCain:  Senator Hagel, members of this Committee will raise questions reflecting concerns with your policy positions.  They're not reasonable people disagreeing, they're fundamental disagreements.  Our concerns pertain to the quality of your professional judgment and your world view on critical areas of national security including security in the Middle East.  With that in mind, let me begin with your opposition to the surge in Iraq.  2006, we lost -- Republicans lost -- the election and we began the surge and you wrote a piece in the Washington Post called "Leaving Iraq Honorably."  In 2007, you said it's not in the national interest to deepen its involvement.  In January, 2007, in a rather bizarre exchange with Secretary Rice, in the Foreign Relations Committee, after some nonsense about Syria and crossing the border into Iran and Syria because of the surge and a reference to Cambodia in 1970, you said, "When you set in motion the kind of policy the president's talking about here, it's very, very dangerous.  Matter of fact, I have to say, Madam Secretary, I think the speech given last night by this president represents the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam.  If it's carried out, I will resist it." And then, of course, you continued on and on for months afterwards talking about what a disaster the surge would be, even to the point where it was clear the surge was succeeding.  In March 2008, you said, "Here the term quagmire could apply.  Some reject that term, but if that's not a quagmire, then what is?"  Even as late as August 29, 2011, in an interview -- 2011 -- in an interview with the Financial Times, you said, "I disagreed with the president -- Obama --  his decision to surge in Iraq, because I disagreed with President Bush on the surge in Iraq."  Do you -- do you stand by that -- those -- those comments, Senator Hagel?

Senator Chuck Hagel:  Well, Senator, I stand by them because I made them and --

Senator John McCain: -- stand by --  Were you right? 

Chuck Hagel:  Well --

Senator John McCain:  Were you correct in your assessment?

Chuck Hagel:  Well I would defer to the judgment of history to sort that out.  But I'll --

Senator John McCain: I think -- this  Committee deserves your judgment as to whether you were right or wrong about the surge.

Chuck Hagel: I'll explain why I made those comments and I believe I had but --

Senator John McCain: I want to know if you were right or wrong?  That's a direct question, I expect a direct answer.

Chuck Hagel:  The surge assisted in the objective.  But-but if we review the record a little bit --

Senator John McCain: Will you please answer the question?  Were you correct or incorrect when you said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam?  Were you correct or incorrect?

Chuck Hagel:  My --

Senator John McCain: Yes or no?

Chuck Hagel:  My reference to the surge being  --

Senator John McCain: Are you going to answer the question, Senator Hagel?  The question is: Were you right or wrong?  That's a pretty straighforward question.

Chuck Hagel: Well --

Senator John McCain: I would  -- I would like to answer whether you were right or wrong and then you are free to elaborate.

Chuck Hagel:  Well I'm not going to give you a "yes" or "no" answer on a lot of things today.

Senator John McCain:   Well let the the record show that you refused to answer that question.  Now please go ahead.

Chuck Hagel:  Well, if you would like me to explain why --

Senator John McCain: No, I actually would like an answer.  Yes or no?

Chuck Hagel: Well I'm not going to give you a yes or no. I think it's --

Senator John McCain: Okay.

Chuck Hagel:  -- far more complicated than that.  As I've already said, my answer is I'll defer that judgment to history.  As to the comment I made about the most dangerous foreign policy decision since Vietnam?  Was about not just the surge but the overall war of choice going into Iraq.  That particular decision that was made on the surge -- but more to the point, our war in Iraq -- I think was the most fundamentally bad, dangerous decision since Vietnam.  Aside, uh, from the costs that occurred in this country, uh, in blood and treasure, aside from what that did to, uh, take our focus off of Afghanistan -- which in fact, uh,  was-was the original and real focus of a national threat to this country -- uh, Iraq wa-wa-was not -- I always, uh,  tried to frame all the different issues before I made a decision on anything.  Now just as you said, Senator, we can have differences of opinion, uh,  --

Senator John McCain: But --

Chuck Hagel: -- that's essentially why I took the position I did.

Senator John McCain: It's a fundamental difference of opinion, Senator Hagel.  And Senator Graham and I and Senator [Joe] Lieberman -- when there were 59 votes in the United States Senate --  spent our time trying to prevent that 60th.  Thank God for Senator Lieberman.  I think history has already made a judgment about the surge, sir, and you're on the wrong side of it.  And your refusal to answer whether you were right or wrong about it is going to have an impact on my judgment as to whether to vote for your confirmation or not.  I hope you will reconsider the fact that you refused to answer a fundamental question about an issue that took the lives of thousands of young Americans.

Chuck Hagel: Well, Senator, there was --there was more to it than just flooding a zone.

Senator John McCain: I'm asking about the surge, Senator Hagel.

Chuck Hagel: I know you are and I'm trying to explain my position.  The beginning of the surge also factored in what General Allen had put into place in Anbar Province -- the Sunni Awakening.  We put over, as you know, a hundred thousand young --

Senator John McCain: Senator Hagel, I'm very aware of the history of the surge and the Anbar Awakening and I also am aware that any casual observer will know that the surge was the fundamental factor, led by two great leaders, General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker.
.                                            
Chuck Hagel:  Well I don't know if-if that would have been required and cost us over a thousand American lives and thousands of  wounded.

Senator John McCain: So you don't know if the surge would have been required?  Okay, Senator Hagel, let me go back -- to to Syria now.  More than 60,000 people have been killed in Syria.  Do you believe --

The surge was a failure.  That Hagel can't answer the question -- regardless of where he stands -- is disturbing.  If you can't answer that basic of a question, what questions will you be able to answer before the Congress?  We are aware that if Hagel's confirmed, he'll be appearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee to provide testimony many times in the future, right? 



Recommended: "Iraq snapshot"
"The abuse in Iraqi prisons"
"Iraq admits to holding Nadir Dendoune and the rain..."
"Happy Endings"
"Go already 30 Rock"
"How I Met Your Mother"
"revenge (yawn)"
"The New Adventures of Old Christine"
"It was about chemistry"
"Fringe"
"Arrow"
"Smash"
"Bob's Burgers"
"Uncle Drunkard is the reason for now"
"THIS JUST IN! THE REASON FOR NOW!"

THIS JUST IN! THE REASON FOR NOW!

BULLY BOY PRESS &  CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE

TUESDAY KILLER AND DRONE COWARD BARRY O INSISTED THAT IT WAS TIME TO FIX IMMIGRATION IN THIS COUNTRY, NOW WAS THE TIME, IT WAS NOW.

SINCE HE'S GOING INTO HIS FIFTH YEAR OF OCCUPYING THE WHITE HOUSE, THE URGENCY BARRY O SUDDENLY FELT WAS RATHER SURPRISING.

UNLESS . . .

YOU GRASP THAT UNCLE DRUNKARD ONYANGO OBAMA GOT HIS DEPORTATION HEARING DATE YESTERDAY: DECEMBER THE 3RD.

FOR THE RECORD, NO OTHER DRUNKARD WHO ALMOST HIT A POLICE SQUAD CAR BECAUSE HE WAS SO DRUNK AND WAS THEN DISCOVERED TO HAVE ENTERED THE COUNTRY THROUGH BACKDOOR CHANNELS WOULD STILL BE IN THE COUNTRY TODAY.

IF UNCLE DRUNKARD ONYANGO WERE ANYONE ELSE'S UNCLE, HE WOULD HAVE ALREADY BEEN DEPORTED TWO YEARS AGO. 

UNCLE DRUNKARD TOLD THESE REPORTERS HE MUST STAY IN AMERICA "BECAUSE I FINALLY FOUND MY CALLING.  IN MY HOLDING CELL AFTER THE POLICE PINCHED ME, I MET A KEYBOARD PLAYER AND I'VE ALWAYS LOVED 80S POP SO WE'RE STARTING OUR OWN 80S COVER BAND CALLED ONYANGO BONYANGO.  GET IT?"


FROM THE TCI WIRE:


Starting in England where two sides continue pleading their case before two judges -- one side insisting allegations of abuse of Iraqis can be handled internally, the other side insisting a public hearing is necessary.  Laurence Lee (Al Jazeera -- link is video) reports:


Laurence Lee:  The tenth anniversary of the Iraq War is fast approaching.  It seems this may be the place and time when the most serious allegations against the British army may come out.  It had already been officially recognized by the establishment here that sections of the army operating around Basra in southern Iraq were engaged in abuse in practices banned under international law.  That all came to a head in the inquiry a couple of years ago into the death of Baha Mousa -- an innocent young hotel worker wrongly suspected by British troops of collusion with insurgents.  They beat him to death.  The Ministry of Defense, accused of a corporate failure to ensure standards of conduct.   They're about to be accused of a lot more because lawyers now have testimonies from 180 Iraqis who say they were abused as well.  The Ministry of Defense here has always insisted that abuse that did take place by British soldiers was disgraceful but that it was isolated, it wasn't systemic.  Lawyers for the Iraqis have always said that they didn't believe that.  Now they say, they've got the evidence to prove it.  The Baha Mousa Inquiry found that soldiers were using the so-called five techniques: hooding, sleep deprivation, use of noise, wall standing and food deprivation.  They'd all been banned by the British government in 1972 but somehow the soldiers knew all about them. Now lawyers acting for the Iraqi civilians want an open, public inquiry into a much wider allegations of abuse issues  and the extent to which soldiers were trained in torture.  A particular focus will be the treatment of long-term prisoners   Claims for example of forced nudity and sexual and religious humiliation, of inmates being routinely assaulted. 

Kevin Laue (human rights activist): After all this country is often critical of abuses committed abroad, rightly so.  But it's hypocritical if the UK doesn't itself uphold these standards. 



 
Laurence Lee:  The establishment here portrays the armed forces as a self-less group of people prepared to commit the ultimate sacrifice in the name of protecting the weak.  The Ministry of the Defense continues to insist it would rather investigate itself than have these embarrassing allegations exposed to public scrutiny.  Laurence Lee, Al Jazeera, London.







Omar Karmi (The National Newspaper) adds, "According to Phil Shiner, of Public Interest Lawyers, the firm representing the Iraqis, another 871 Iraqis are waiting to come forward and there are 'tens of thousands of allegations.'  They range from accusations of unlawful killing, sexual abuse, food, water and sleep deprivation to mock executions, religious abuse and abuse by dogs."  Press Trust of India quotes Shiner discussing how a grandmother "is led away alive . . . Seen by her husband and her son alive, then found a few hours later in a British body bag very much dead, with signs of torture.  I could go on and on."  RT notes, "MOD lawyers have assured the High Court that comprehensive steps are being taken to ensure that lessons are learned from the mistakes made in Iraq.  However, the MOD seems intent on glossing over its past failings: in December, the ministry paid over $22 million (£14 million) in compensation to hundreds of Iraqi citizens who claimed to have been illegally detained and abused by British forces posted in the country. "


Meanwhile in Iraq, Nouri al-Maliki is stripping political rivals of their protection according to charges made to Alsumaria.  Sheikh Ahmed Abu Risha, a leader in the Sahwa forces, told the network that he had lost his bodyguards and when he asked why he was told it was on the orders of Nouri al-Maliki.  What seems to be happening is this:  government forces providing protection to various politicians throughout Iraq are being ordered by Nouri to return to Baghdad out of some fear -- real or imagined -- on the part of Nouri that he's about to be overthrown.

If you're thinking, "This seems familiar," it's because it has happened before.  Like a bad meal, Nouri always repeats.   In March of last year, Toby Dodge explained at Open Democracy:




In order to secure his position, al-Maliki focused his energies on gaining complete control of the security services.  He set about subverting the formal chain of command, tying senior army commanders, paramilitary units and the intelligence services to him personally.  In doing so he ‘coup proofed’ the security forces but also politicised and personalised its chain of command. He created the Office of the Commander in Chief in 2007 and used this platform to appoint and promote senior officers who were personally loyal.  As responsibility for security in each province was handed from the United States military to Iraqi control, the Prime Minister set up a number of operational commands to bring both the army and the police force together under one regional organisation.  These operational commands were run by a single commanding officer who managed all the security services operating in his province.  These officers are appointed and managed from a central office in Baghdad under the control of al-Maliki.  The appointment of these powerful generals reflected the Prime Minister’s personal preferences.   Through the use of these joint operational commands al-Maliki bypassed his security Ministers and their senior commanders and parliamentary oversight, locating control of Iraq’s armed forces in his private office. 
Furthermore, in April 2007, as control of Iraq’s Special Forces was handed from the US to the Iraqi government, a Counter-Terrorism Bureau was set up to manage them at ministerial level.   This effectively removed control of Iraqi Special Forces, with 6,000 men in its ranks, from the Ministries of Defence and Interior and placed them under the direct control of the Prime Minister, well away from legislative control or parliamentary oversight.  This force is considered to be the best trained in the Middle East.  It operates its own detention centres, intelligence gathering and has surveillance cells in every governorate across central and southern Iraq. It now forms al-Maliki’s Praetorian Guard. Since the force was removed from the formal chain of command and from legal oversight, it has become known as the Fedayeen al-Maliki, a reference to their reputation as the Prime Minster’s tool for covert action against his rivals as well as an ironic reference to Saddam’s own highly unpopular militia.[5] 
Finally, al-Maliki moved to bring Iraq’s intelligence services under his direct control. This became apparent when Mohammed al-Shahwani, the head of the National Intelligence Service, came into an increasingly public conflict with Sherwan al-Waeli, appointed by al-Mailki in 2006 to be the Minister of State for National Security Affairs. The National Intelligence Service was established by America’s Central Intelligence Agency and al-Shahwani enjoyed a long and close working relationship with Washington over many years.  Al-Waeli, conversely, was considered to be al-Maliki’s man.[6]  Things came to a head in August 2009 after a series of major bombs in the centre of Baghdad.  Al-Shahwani argued in the Iraqi press that there was clear evidence linking the attacks to Iran.  In the subsequent fallout surrounding the incident al-Shahwani was forced to resign and delivered Iraq’s security services into al-Maliki’s grasp. 

The use of Iraq’s security services to personally protect Nuri al-Maliki reached its peak at the end of March 2008.  Al-Maliki believed at that time he faced a coordinated plot to unseat him.  An upsurge in militia violence in the southern port city of Basra would be used as a pretext to push a vote of no confidence through the parliament in Baghdad and unseat al-Maliki as Prime Minister.  To outflank this plot al-Maliki sent four divisions of the Iraqi army into Basra to seize control of the city back from the militias that were threatening his rule.  The resulting military campaign almost ended in disaster and defeat.  This was only avoided by the extended intervention of US troops and air support.  However, al-Maliki used this eventual victory to stamp his authority on the Iraqi government and the armed forces and to reshape his political image country-wide as an Iraqi nationalist and the saviour of the country. 


Toby Doge's new book is  Iraq: From  War To A New Authoritarianism  which was released two weeks ago.  From the security forces Nouri controls to the prisons and detention centers, Ayad al-Tamimi (Al Mada) reports that an MP sitting on Parliament's Security and Defense Committee is charging that Nouri is operating secret prisons including one in the Green Zone.  The Green Zone prison is said to be part of the intelligence Kitabt notes that MP Hamid Mutlaalak states that the secret prisons are under Nouri's command, that they are unconstitutional and that Iraqis are being intimidated and tortured in these secret prisons and detention centers. 

Today CNN's  Arwa Damon ‏@arwaCNN Tweeted:

Note to all media colleagues working in #iraq...you need permission to shoot garbage dumps...

Expand




Dropping back to yesterday's snapshot:

As we noted this morning, Nadir  Dendoune, who holds dual Algerian and Australian citizenship was covering Iraq for the fabled French newspaper Le Monde's monthly magazine.  His assignment was to document Iraq 10 years after the start of the Iraq War.   Alsumaria explains the journalist was grabbed by authorities in Baghdad last week for the 'crime' of taking pictures.  (Nouri has imposed a required permit, issued by his government, to 'report' in Iraq.)  All Iraq News adds the journalist has been imprisoned for over a week now without charges.


This afternoon, the Committee to Protect Journalists finally issued a statement on the matter:



"The arbitrary jailing of a journalist is a vestige of the Saddam Hussein regime that is completely out of place in Iraq's democracy today," said CPJ's Middle East and North Africa Coordinator Sherif Mansour. "Nadir Dendoune should be released immediately."
The Iraqi Syndicate for Journalists condemned Dendoune's detention, calling it a violation of Iraqi law and the constitution and saying that it distorted the country's image in front of the international community.

• For more data and analysis on Iraq, visit CPJ's Iraq page here.

Protests continue in Iraq.  And a new one emerges as college students make their voices heard at Diyala University.  Alsumaria explains students are threatening an ongoing sit-in over what they are calling the abuse of religious symbols by a professor.  Iraqiya is calling on the Ministry of Education to step in and mediate the dispute.  Iraqiya is a political slate made up of various sects.  Ayad Allawi heads the slate and they came in first in the March 2010 parliamentary elections.  Those were the most recent elections and provincial elections are supposed to take place in April.   Alsumaria notes the president of the university has identified the professor in question as a law professor and states the teacher has been stopped from teaching classes while the university investigates the situation.  If you click here, you can see a photo of the protesters.


RECOMMENDED:  "Iraq snapshot"
"Does the Constitution already limit Nouri to two t..."
"The continued military stand-off"
"The morality police"
"Mars"
"Barnes & Noble intends to shutter more stores"
"some good news for soap fans"
"Chris Cuomo follows Jake Tapper's lead"
"We won't miss you, Fey"
"Boy Scouts try to repair their image"
"Cissy Houston The Homophobe"
"But they're so cute!"
"Mark Epstein's a F**king Idiot"
"He's a fashionista"
"THIS JUST IN! THE FASHION MODEL!"

THIS JUST IN! THE FASHION MODEL!

BULLY BOY PRESS &  CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE

 

 

POOR KILLER BARRY O, TO HIS FAN CLUB, HE'LL ALWAYS BE PRINCESS BARACK.  EVEN THE GLOBAL GRIND GETS INTO THE PRINCESS FANTASY AS THEY PROPOSE A NEW LOOK WITH LAURA PETRI TYPE CAPRI PANTS, NO SOCKS AND A KICKY STARS AND STRIPES PURSE.  KILLER BARRY RECENTLY ADDED HIS OWN ACCESSORY -- A FLY -- BUT NOT MANY NOTICED.

SADLY, HIS LITTLE FIB ABOUT SHOOTING DID GET NOTICED.  THEN AGAIN, MAYBE HE'S CONFUSING DRONES WITH RIFLES AND GOES 'SKEET SHOOTING' BY CALLING IN DRONE STRIKES? 

"PULL!"



FROM THE TCI WIRE:



We're going to have to deal with something first.  Women in America are under enough assault.  If you have a problem with a woman, call her out. If you're making blanket statements attacking women -- large swaths of unnamed women -- you need to stop calling yourself a feminist.  You're not a feminist.  You're a pain in the ass -- I'm referring to Zillah Eisenstein, you're a Marxist, you're a woman who needs to learn how to use brush on that ratty hair (or is grooming not important at Ithaca College), but you're not a feminist.

Cindy Sheehan shared her opinion on the change regarding combat and allowing US women into combat and did so without insulting women.  For Cindy, instead of including women in combat, she felt the world would be better served by having men banned from combat as well and ending wars.  That is a feminist view.  We were happy to include it.

But not everyone has Cindy heart and the result is that a lot of women are getting pissed off because they're being insulted.  I understand the feeling and you can include me on that list.  This topic is currently the number one issue today in the e-mails to this site according to Martha and Shirley who informed me last night that it was also the number one topic yesterday.   You may or may not choose to join the military.  If you do, you may or may not choose to go for combat.  These are choices.  And women can be make any choice they want.

Zillah Eisenstein's assault at Al Jazeera is only the latest thing angering women.  She feels the need to refer to Iraq War veteran Jessica Lynch as "the now famous blond."  Excuse me?  What the hell does Jessica Lynch's hair color have to do with one damn thing?  Oh, yeah, we get the coded language you're trying to speak in Zillah.  (And your hatred for the pretty girl, yeah, we get that too.)  She makes other insane comments. "The pay" is not "about equal between Wal-Mart and the military" and that's an offensive statement.  Wal-Mart has a pledge to hire vets.  I've been asked why we're not applauding that.  Wal-Mart screws over people regularly, they underpay and they also have a real problem of requiring people to work off the clock.  A job at Wal-Mart is better than a job no where but I'm not going to praise it. Equally true, if you join the military, you've got health care.  If you're married to a member of the opposite sex (and hopefully this will shortly be true if you're married to a member of the same sex), they have health care coverage.  If you honorably discharge or retire from the service, you've got the VA for health care.  Do not pretend that Wal-Mart and the military are "about equal" in terms of pay.  That's disgusting.  And you would think a Marxist would go out of her way to avoid making such an idiotic statement.

Zillah wants you not to "confuse the presence of females, especially in combat, with gender 'equality'."  No problem, Zillah.  I see Al Jazeera offering token American women as columnists.  I never mistake these women for feminists. Including Zillah. 

Throughout time and history, women have shown various sides and carried out various roles.  But Zillah wants you to be 'dainty.'  If you want combat, there's something wrong with you and you're not a woman or you're a woman who loves drones or whatever else garbage Zillah's tossing out in her badly written article that goes to how academic 'feminists' really need to learn to write for the masses when they're writing columns for the people. Amazons are a part of Greek mythology.  That's Hippolyta and her sister Penthesilea.  So in 7th century BC, women fighters could be envisioned but it's somehow unknown to Zillah?

Women can be whatever they want to be and should be.  We don't question a man's identity because he wants to go into combat, nor should we question a woman's identity.

Right now, women veterans and women service members are watching as various men attack them and insist that they couldn't handle combat.  At the same time, do we really need Zillah and her kindred also attacking women and suggesting there's something wrong with them if they want to take part in combat?

I don't think so.  Equally true, we're talking about different genders, not different species.  This nonsense has to stop.

You want to call out women?  There are plenty worth calling out.  Choose a name and have at it.  But don't insult a group of women and think you're a feminist because you're not.  Don't degrade their dreams and desires because your own are different.  That's not feminism.  What Zillah practicies does have a name: Know-it-all-ism. 

By contrast, Laura Browder (Time magazine) listens to women:
As I talked to more than 50 women who have deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan—or both—I was struck by how determined many of these women were to serve their country on the battlefield. Army Staff Sergeant Jamie Rogers told me, “As a soldier, it’s something that you always want to do. For myself, I felt it was my obligation and that’s what I had been training for all these years, to do my job in combat. And I was very honored. I got to lead soldiers in combat, and I proved to myself that all this training was worthwhile.”
Rogers, who was in the military police, was out on patrol 12 hours of every 24. As she said of the experience, “It’s very life-changing.” While civilians may still see women in the military as being marginal, no female soldier I ever talked to saw herself as anything less than a military professional on par with her male comrades in arms.
As one West Point graduate explained to me, it felt as though she had been reading technical manuals on how to ride a bicycle—but to really be a soldier, she had to get on the bike itself. I heard variations of this sentiment from many women. And of course, many of the women I talked to did serve as explosives-sniffing dog handlers, military police whose jobs involved busting down doors and conducting house-to-house searches, and convoy gunners like Bumgarner.

Still on the military, he wants to shake hands with Blake Shelton and he's looking forward to the day he can drive again.  Those were two of the answers Iraq War veteran Brendan Marrocco gave today at a Johns Hopkins Hospital news conference in Baltimore Maryland today.  An April 12, 2009 bombing left him a quadruple amputee.  Yesterday, came news that last month Brendan received a double-arm transplant.  Today he participated in a news conference wearing a "Keep Calm and Chive On" t-shirt.

Brendan Marrocco:  I hated not having arms.  I was alright with not having legs. Not having arms takes so much away from you, even your personality. You know, you talk with your hands, you do everything with your hands basically, and when you don't have that, you're kind of lost for awhile.


About his donor, Brendan Marrocco declared,  "I don't know too much about the donor, but I would like to thank them.  I'm humbled.  They've changed my life."  Christina Lopez and Matthew Larotonda (ABC News) report on the news conference here. CBS News covers the news conference here and Linda Carroll (NBC News) covers it here.  (Quote and answers are from the conference.  A friend was supposed to have help covering the news conference.  He did not.  So while he got images, he left the phone line open and I took notes for him.  I heard the conference, I was not present.)

Brendan Marrocco:  You know I never really gave up on too much that really mattered to me.  If I didn't care, I gave up in a second but if I truly cared about it in my heart, uh, if it really meant something to me, I would go through hell to do it so that's basically what I'm doing now.


Today Wladimir van Wilgenburg (Rudaw) observes, "The British government remains reluctant to recognize the 1988 gassing of thousands of Iraqi Kurds by Saddam Hussein as genocide, saying it is waiting for an international judicial body to make sure a declaration first."  That's not the only thing the British government is struggling to deal with.  Sky News explains,  "Scores of lawyers representing Iraqis are going to the High Court seeking an 'independent' public inquiry into allegations that British interrogators were guilty of the systemic abuse of civilians in Iraq."  ITV notes that Public Interest Lawyers' Phil Shiner is representing 192 Iraqis.  So what was taking place at the High Court today?  Al Bawaba explains that arguments were being delivered as to "whether a previous inquiry run by the British Ministry of Defence was robust enough and sufficiently independent, as well as if mistreatment was systematic. The case is expected to last three days."

That'll be much shorter than the days spent behind bars in Iraq for a  Le Monde journalist.  As we noted this morning, Nadir  Dendoune, who holds dual Algerian and Australian citizenship was covering Iraq for the fabled French newspaper Le Monde's monthly magazine.  His assignment was to document Iraq 10 years after the start of the Iraq War.   Alsumaria explains the journalist was grabbed by authorities in Baghdad last week for the 'crime' of taking pictures.  (Nouri has imposed a required permit, issued by his government, to 'report' in Iraq.)  All Iraq News adds the journalist has been imprisoned for over a week now without charges.

The 'crime' of taking pictures?  You may remember Nouri immediately launched a war on the press in the summer of 2006.  Let's drop back to the October 2, 2006 snapshot:

Operation Happy Talkers are on the move and telling you that Nouri al-Maliki offers a 'four-point' peace plan.  You may have trouble reading of the 'four-point' plan because the third point isn't about "peace" or "democracy" so reports tend to ignore it. The first step has already been (rightly) dismissed by Andrew North (BBC) of the "local security committees": "In fact, most neighourhoods of Baghdad set up their own local security bodies some time ago to protect themselves -- because they do not trust the authorities to look after them."  AP reports that the Iraqi parliament voted in favor of the 'peace' plan (reality title: "continued carnage plan").  Step three?  Let's drop back to the September 7th snapshot:

 

 

Switching to the issue of broadcasting, were they showing episodes of Barney Miller or NYPD Blue? Who knows but police pulled the plug on the satellite network al-Arabiya in Baghdad. CNN was told by a company official (Najib Ben Cherif) that the offices "is being shut for a month." AP is iffy on who gave the order but notes that Nouri al-Malike started making warnings/threats to television stations back in July. CNN reports: "A news alert on Iraqi State TV said the office of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki ordered the office closed for a month."

 

Ah, yes, the puppet's war with the press.  The so-called peace plan is more of the same.  The third 'plank' is about the media. Which is why the "brave" US media repeatedly cites the first two and stays silent while a free media (something a democracy is dependent upon) walks the plank.

 

It's disgusting and shameful, the third 'plank.'  The whole 'plan' is a joke.  Reuters is one of the few to go beyond the first two 'steps' but even it does a really poor job and those over coverage of Iraq in the mainstream (producers to suits) are very concerned about this.  (So why don't they report it?)  The "plan" isn't a plan for peace, it's a plan for the puppet to attempt to save his own ass for a few more months. Lee Keath (AP) is only one of many ignoring the third step (possibly AP thinks readers are unable to count to four?) but does note that al-Maliki took office last May with a 24-point plan that, to this day, "has done little to stem the daily killings."  Nor will this so-called 'peace plan.'  The US military and the American "ambassador" have announced  that Nouri al-Maliki better show some results ('after all we've paid' going unspoken). 

 

To praise his plan back then, reporters had to ignore the third plank.  Fortunately for Nouri, western reporters have always been more than willing to cover for him despite -- or maybe because of -- his attacks on the press.  It's why they continue.  Mohammed Tawfeeq does real reporting for CNN out of Iraq.  Today he Tweets:

1. 6h Mohammed Tawfeeq ‏@mtawfeeqCNN

   @arwaCNN & @cstreib doing piece 2 cam in #Baghdad #Iraq, moments before police ordered us to stop filming! pic.twitter.com/ivaeksPZ

   View photo

   • Reply
   • Retweet
   • Favorite
   • More

And, of course, there's  Aziz Ghazal Abbas, the Alsumaria journalist that the Iraqi military fired on in Falluja Friday.  That's when the Iraqi military opened fire on protesters killing 7 people and injuring at least sixty (including the Alsumaria journalist). 


RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Nouri and State of Law smear Anbar, Ramadi protest..."
"Nouri imprisons Le Monde journalist"
"Tina frets and worried"
"A movie review"
"Django Unchained"
"no revenge"
"Wonder Woman"
"Bette continues to soar while Barbra sinks"
"Barack keeps targeting whistle blowers"
"The Good Wife"
"Worse than the Kent State Masscre"
"Two shows that aren' t cutting it"
"They're as fake as he is"
"THIS JUST IN! AS FAKE AS HIS SUPPORTERS!"