The divisionary campaign

This is from Barry Grey's "US and allies gear up for protracted war in Libya" (WSWS):

The US-led war coalition rejected ceasefire offers by the Libyan government on Monday and reiterated its demand that Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi and his family leave the country as the precondition for any resolution to the crisis. As the US-NATO war entered its third week, the fig leaf of a “humanitarian” intervention to protect Libyan civilians was further exposed by the preparations of the imperialist powers for a protracted war aimed at ousting Gaddafi and installing a colonial-style vassal state.

British Prime Minister David Cameron made an unannounced visit Monday to an Italian air base that is being used to stage strikes by Royal Air Force (RAF) jets against pro-Gaddafi military forces as well as alleged military targets in Tripoli and other cities. He announced that Britain was sending four more Tornado ground attack jets, in addition to the eight already deployed.

The increase is meant to partly compensate for the imminent withdrawal of American jets from the air war against Libya. NATO requested that Washington delay the end of its direct role in air and missile strikes for 48 hours, and the Obama administration agreed.

Washington will continue to dominate the conduct of the war and dictate the outcome. It not only dominates NATO and provides essential military hardware for an air war, it exerts the dominant influence over the anti-Gaddafi opposition, which is led by former Gaddafi officials and former exiles with ties to the CIA. In addition, the US has CIA and special operations forces on the ground in Libya.

I don't know who Barack thinks he's fooling. And I typed "Bush" and had to go back and fix it.

That's how bad Barack is.

You can so easily confuse him with Bush, they really are two of a kind.

Have you seen Barack's new creepy campaign commercial online?

Lambert notes of the campaign:

The thing that really bugs me about Obama's "Are you in?" / "I'm in" campaign is that it creates a division between the "ins" and the "outs," by definition. So, after all the preaching on Unity in 2008, we get division in 2011-2012.

That's the real Barack though. He stormed into the Democratic Party -- one he had no appreciation for (real Democrats don't gush over Ronald Reagan) -- and divided the party. Since being sworn in, he's divided the country. He's a divider not a uniter.

Haven't watched "No Ordinary Family" yet and am not reading any e-mails until I do. Sorry but I don't want to spoil it. (Can't watch live because I don't have cable and my antenna doesn't pick up NBC.)

Going out with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Tuesday, April 5, 2011. Chaos and violence continue, US war resister Andre Shepherd is denied refugee status in Germany, Falluja remains an issue in Iraq, Iraq's Integrity Commission has findings, Republicans (and some Democrats) lodge objections to the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, and more. We last noted 33-year-old Iraq War veteran Andre Shepherd March 30th. Andre is a US war resister in Germany. After serving in Iraq, he self-checked out of the military. James Dao (New York Times) reported this evening that Andre has been denied asylum: "The German government, in a statement issued on Monday, said it had rejected his petition because Mr. Shepherd could not cite concrete examples of war crimes committed during his first deployment to Iraq. The German government did not say in its statement whether it would try to deport Mr. Shepherd." AFP speaks with his attorney Rienhard Marx who notes Andre is married to a German citizen (Jacqueline Edith) so he does not feel it is likely Andre will be deported. Andre is the only war resister seeking asylum publicly to do so in Germany. James Ewinger profiled Shepherd in 2008 for the Cleveland Plain Dealer: Shepherd said he grew up on East 94th Street in Cleveland, attended Lakewood High School and studied computer science at Kent State University until he ran out of money. He enlisted in 2004 with the hope of flying the Apaches, but was urged to become a mechanic first. Scharf said he doubts that Shepherd's expected order to return to Iraq would, by itself, constitute an unlawful order. "His best argument would be that Apaches are used to kill civilians," Scharf said, but he still viewed it as a weak case. In 2009, AP's Patrick McGroarty reported that Andre was one of 71 US soldiers who had self-checked out from "European bases in 2008". Samantha Haque interviewed Andre for the UK's Channel 4 news in January of 2009: Samantha Haque: As an asylum seeker he is currently in a camp in Germany with people from places like Afghanistan, Somalia and Iraq. All in a similar position to him. The difference is that Andre Shepherd is a US citizen. And an Iraq War deserter. For security reasons, we were not allowed to film in the camp. Shepherd has a friend, a peace activist, who lives within the restricted boundary he's allowed to move in. He took us there. Andre Shepherd: I was working on the Apache helicopter. Those Apaches won't fly unless we take care of them. The Apache helicopter is a deadly weapon a lot of people call it a flying tank. What started my doubts was when I saw the Iraqi people, when they would come and help us, the looks that they gave us weren't the looks of heroes or people that you know were bringing freedom. We looked like conquerors and oppressors. That really bothered me a lot. So I started to look into the reasons why we were actually there in Iraq. I thought that what we were doing was a great thing and a positive thing. That we were actually bringing freedom to people and making them happy but what I found out instead was that we completely destroyed an entire country on a pack of lies. It started to weigh very heavily to the point where my actions when I was a soldier were starting to deteriorate so as this was going on I came to the conclusion that I wasn't going to back to Iraq. Samantha Haque: None of the criteria that the US military offered for discharge were availble to Mr. Shepherd. To be a conscientious objector in the US means to be against all wars, something he was not. While in Germany, he was faced with a second mission to Iraq. On April 11, 2007 he went absent without leave. Unable to apply for German residency without official military discharge papers, he decided that applying for asylum was the only way forward. In terms of US outlets, Andy Eckardt (NBC News) interviewed Andre in February 2009. Andre told NBC, "When I enlisted in 2004 and later was sent to Iraq, I believed I was doing the right thing. But then, like other comrades around me, I started questioning why we were there and what we were fighting for. . . . My job was harmless until I factored in the amount of death and destruction those helicopters caused to civilians every day. The government made us believe we would be welcomed as heroes in Iraq, but we saw nothing but hostility from the Iraqis that came to work for us, they wanted to kill us." Last month, Russia Today reported on him: Ekaterina Gracheva: After hiding out for more than a year, Andre Shepherd surfaced. He married a German, secured himself support from a number of human rights organizations and is now officially seeking asylum. Tucked away on the border of Germany and Austria, Lake Chiemsee has long been popular with holiday makers but now the idyllic spot may go down in history as the home of the first US Iraq War veteran granted political asylum. To become this first is not going to be easy though. Germany is the main staging post for the US military with around 60,000 US troops stationed there. Each year, some of those soldiers go AWOL and get picked up by the police. Jacqueline Edith: The pressure is very high on Germany and Andre often said in his speeches he's so sorry about that, you know, putting so much pressure on the German government. Also he really loves this country so much. The judgment comes at an interesting time. The White House just announced yesterday their State Dinner for German Chancellor Angela Merkel (June 7th). Merkel and US President Barack Obama have frequently been on opposite sides -- here and here and here and here, for example. How interesting that the decision comes just as a thaw is said to be taking place between the two. Turning to Iraq, as protests took hold in Baghdad, Nouri al-Malik and Moqtada al-Sadr joined forces to put up false fronts that would derail public anger. Among the measures they both pushed was just-give-me 100 days. Corruption? Lack of adequate public services? Give the government 100 days and just you wait! For what? They couldn't even settle an election in 100 days. June 7th the 100 days is up. March 23rd, Al Mada reported part two of the 'plan,' demand 100 more days! The latest plan was to declare one hundred days not enough so the government's going to take 200. That's over half a year. And it's been a year since elections but Nouri still doesn't have a full Cabinet. Firas Qaisis (Al Mada) reports today that sources are saying extending the dealine is still being discussed with Nouri seriously examining it. State of Law MP Saad Muttalibi denies that any extension is being considered and, based on his past track record, see that as a confirmation. Iraqiya's Hani Ashour notes that the 100 days include no criteria for the evaluate the performance of the government and sees the 100 days as a tool for procrastination and delay as opposed to a device that will allow for real reforms to be implemented. By contrast, Ashour believes that Parliament has acted clearly in its actions, allowing them to be measured and offers examples such as reducing the salries of the president and two vice presidents as well as the salaries of members of Parliament. It's really amazing to watch nothing happen in Iraq (politically) over and over while people keep insisting 'progress.' Trina called out Tom Bowman for his idiotic remarks on All Things Considered (NPR) yesterday."Iraq is, sort of, you know, working its way out." (That quote's from the official transcript, use link.) As Trina noted, "What a damn fool. Over a year after they held elections, they still do not have a full Cabinet. They have no Minister of the Interior and they have no Minister of Defense. [. . .] Add in that the violence is up again." Working itself out, he said. On the same day when another US soldier was announced dead? Today Tim Arango (New York Times) notes the 4 recent deaths in Iraq of US service members including the 2 who were announced dead on Sunday and 1 announced yesterday. But Bowman saw Iraq working itself out? On the same day Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reported, "Monday was a scary day for Iraqis living in and around Baghdad, as people weren't even safe in their own homes." In Iraq, Parliament's Integrity Committee held a press conference Monday. Dar Addustour reports that among the findings spoken of was that many "Ministers and agents and ministries and general managers and senior officers in the army" had taken part in corruption. They have names for the money wasted buying 'wands' that allegedly detected bombs (if you held the wand just so and stomped your feet on the ground) but those names may or may not be made public. The Committee noted that the British Foreign Office vouched for those wands. (The wands were made by a British company.) In addition, though the US military always ridiculed the wands (and were correct to do so), there was an effort on the part of Americans to push Iraq to buy spare parts for these wands from US companies. Committee member Edoganp Nassif noted that civilian aircraft was purchased which is "unfit for flight" and the Committee states this corruption is via the son of an unnamed official. Al Rafidayn adds that the Committee is in possesion of 9,003 documents and that the names of 35 officials have been passed on for further investigation by legal authorities. Enas Tariq (Al Mada) argues that it makes no difference that it's "a moral crime" or a a misdemeanor, the climate of culture is so entrenched with so many living parasites sucking the life out of the system. Tariq argues this leads to further resentment on the part of the citizenry and continued corruption and that the orruption is now moving into the media where "material rewards" are exchanged for silences on the part of reporters who print only what the officials tell them to. If you're optimistic that the Committee's findings might amount to anything, read Ali Hussein's Al Mada report which notes that it's not for nothing Iraq has made the list of the most corrupt countires in the world and that one of the historic decisions was a law providing the prime minister (Nouri al-Maliki) with the right to decide whether or not corrupt employees are referred to the judiciary. Meanwhile Al Rafidayn notes that Nouri has pulled Kahlid al-Obedi's name as nominee for Minister of Defense (95% of Iraqiya voted against al-Obedi) and is seeking a new nominee. In potentially related news, Kholoud Ramzi (Niqash) reports, "The Iraqi parliament wants to abolish almost 14,000 laws made by both the interim American rulers and former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein's regime. But critics fear replacement legislation will take longer." Iraq's inability, over a year after elections, to name a Minister of Defense or a Minister of Interior does not build confidence in their ability to pass new legislation to replace 13,500 orders. These things they would like to strike and replace also include Bremer orders issued by L. Paul Bremer: Not all of the laws that the CPA instituted were considered negative. Bremer also suspended the death penalty and came up with more liberal criminal defamation laws, which related to media in Iraq. Civil society activists have described these as "worthy reforms". However the Allawi interim government rescinded these too, cancelling the suspension of the death penalty and re-activating criminal defamation laws. The latter threatens journalists found guilty of the defamation of a political figure with capital punishment. Additionally some of Bremer's laws still remain in force today. One of these included legislation that increased the number of expert advisers to each state ministry from two to seven. Having more Iraqi interest groups represented among the advisers was supposed to democratize the flow of information to state decision makers. In reality though, observers say that the advisers, as representatives of different Iraqi groups, are not impartial and act more like partisan lobbyists on a government salary. Meanwhile Falluja's the topic that just won't leave the news cycle. Over the weekend, Al Rafidayn reported the Iraqi National Alliance had started calling for an investigation into "the crime" that took place in Falluja which the Iraqi National Alliance is calling a "genocide" -- Ayad Allawi was prime minister when US forces attacked Falluja -- and it is being compared to the Halbaja genocide when Saddam Hussein ordred a chemical attack on the city March 16, 1988 (the Iraqi Parliament declared the Halbaja assault a genocide in a vote on March 17th). Falluja was twice attcacked by the US miltiary in 2004. First, in April 2004 due to the fact that Paul Bremer was offended by a cartoon of him in a paper. Then the assault was put on hold until after the 2004 US elections as which point the major assault on Falluja took place. Dahr Jamail reported on both Falluja I and Falluja II (as the Iraqi press is calling them). On Falluja I, we'll note this from his piece for The New Statesman: As they had done during the April siege, the military raided and occupied Fallujah general hospital, cutting it off from the rest of the city. On 8 November 2004 the New York Times reported, "The assault against Fallujah began here Sunday night as American Special Forces and Iraqi troops burst into Fallujah General Hospital and seized it within an hour." Of course, this information was immediately followed by the usual parroting of US military propaganda, "At 10pm, Iraqi troops clambered off seven-ton trucks, sprinting with American Special Forces soldiers around the side of the main building of the hospital, considered a refuge for insurgents and a centre of propaganda against allied forces, entering the complex to bewildered looks from patients and employees." Harb al-Mukhtar, my interpreter and driver, arrived at my hotel the next morning in a sombre mood. "How can we live like this, we are trapped in our own country. You know Dahr, everyone is praying for God to take revenge on the Americans. Everyone!" He said even in their private prayers people were praying for God to take vengeance on the Americans for what they were doing in Fallujah. "Everyone I've talked to the last couple of nights, 80 or 90 people, have admitted that they are doing this," he said as I collected my camera and notepad to prepare to leave. Out on the streets of Baghdad, the anxiety was palpable. The threat of being kidnapped or car bombed, or simply robbed, relentlessly played on our minds as Harb and I went about conducting interviews that had been prearranged. We tried to minimise our time on the streets by returning to my hotel immediately on completing interviews. The security situation, already horrible, was deteriorating further with each passing day. In this video, Dahr discusses Falluja and we'll note this on Falluja I. Dahr Jamail: We chose April 9th because according to the US military and, of course, then repeated by a complicit corporate media -- most of the corporate media, April 9th was a ceasefire because of this 'truce negotiation' was ongoing. But when we went into the city, we were watching -- I saw with my own eyes F16s bombing parts of the city, helicopters strafing other parts. Dahr covers both Falluja I and Falluja II in his book Beyond the Green Zone: Dispatches from an Unembedded Journalist In Occupied Iraq. Dropping back to The New Statesman piece, Dahr notes the crackdown on the media for Falluja II: Media repression during the second siege of Fallujah was intense. The "100 Orders" penned by former US administrator Bremer included Order 65, passed on 20 March 2004, which established an Iraqi communications and media commission. This commission had powers to control the media because it had complete control over licensing and regulating telecommunications, broadcasting, information services, and media establishments. On 28 June, when the US handed over power to a "sovereign" Iraqi interim government, Bremer simply passed on his authority to Iyad Allawi, who had long-standing ties with the British intelligence service MI6 and the CIA. The media commission sent out an order just after the assault on Fallujah commenced ordering news organisations to "stick to the government line on the US-led offensive in Fallujah or face legal action". The warning was circulated on Allawi's letterhead. The letter also asked the media in Iraq to "set aside space in your news coverage to make the position of the Iraqi government, which expresses the aspirations of most Iraqis, clear". Of course, not everyone was barred. Dexter Filkins wrote "In Falluja, Young Marines Saw the Savagry of an Urban War" for the New York Times and won a little prize for it. As we noted the day the piece ran, "The point here is that the story on today's front page (November 21, 2004) begins with a battle from November 15th without ever alerting the reader to this fact. An occurence six days prior is their front page Iraq story." See, when you have to let the military vet your copy, you can't make it into print the next day or even the day after that. Dexy wrote just what the military wanted him to -- always. For example, once, Dexy was off to the meet the resistance. But -- Dexy couldn't stop singing his own praises and just knew military brass would be thrilled for him. So he goes bragging to them. He gets a dubious look and Dexy cancels the meet up. What the brass wanted done, Dexy did. May his tombstone include that notation. Darh and Jonathan Steele (Guardian) noted of Falluja II: This time Washington's allies had been talked to in advance. Consistent US propaganda about the presence in Falluja of a top al-Qaida figure, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, was used to create a climate of acquiescence in the US-appointed Iraqi government. Shia leaders were told that bringing Falluja under control was the only way to prevent a Sunni-inspired civil war. Blair was invited to share responsibility by sending British troops to block escape routes from Falluja and prevent supplies entering once the siege began. Dahr took part in the documentary Fallujah: The Hidden Massacre which Democracy Now! broadcast in full November 8, 2005. Falluja I and Falluja II are two big events in the Iraq War. And when opponents raised it over the weekend, New Sabah noted that Ayad Allawi leveled his own charge: a "coup" has taken place because KRG President Massoud Barzani has not implemented the 19 terms he agreed to including the creation of the National Supreme Council which would have been headed by Ayad Allawi. This is in reference to the deal made in Erbil by State Of Law, the KRG, Iraqi, the National Alliance, the Sadr bloc and Joe Biden to 'end' the political stalemate and allow Nouri al-Maliki to continue as prime minister. The two sides made charges against one another and who was going to blink first? It wasn't Iraqiya. Yesterday Alsumaria TV reported that the vote on whether or not Falluja was a massacre has been shot down "due to rows between the National Alliance and Iraqiya on considering Falluja incidents as a massacre." Ayas Hossam Acommok (Al Mada) noted that many saw the proposal as political jockeying and notes that most of the parties in Parliament were members in 2004 and that such a measure would point the finger at more than just Ayad Allawi (Allawi was prime minister then). Today New Sabah reports Ayad Allawi is stating that the ones resonsible for for the mass murder in "Falluja I and Falluja II" are the ones calling for an investigation into his actions (he was prime minister when the US assaulted Falluja in 2004). He says those who spoke the accusations live "in glass houses." He also states that he is ready to go before the Iraqi people with any accusation of his actions. Alsumaria TV reports, "Iraqiya bloc threatened to reveal 'massacre' scandals in some Iraqi provinces if leader Iyad Allawd is summoned over 2004 Fallujah incidents, a source told Alsumaria." UPI notes that one bloc is objecting to some of the language being used: "Kurdish lawmakers objected to putting Fallujah on the same footing [genocide] as the gassing of the Kurds by Saddam Hussein's forces in Halabja in 1988." In today's reported violence, Reuters notes a Baghdad sticky bombing left provincial council member Jasim Mohammed injured, two Baghdad roadside bombings claimed 2 lives and left six people injured, a Baaj suicide bombing claimed the life of the bomber and 3 other people while leaving seven injured, a Mosul attack left 1 person shot dead and the corpse of a kidnap victim was discovered in Mosul. Turning to the US, last week Lewis Griswold (Fresno Bee) reported on 26-year-old Petty Officer 2nd Class Derek Morado who was facing a discharge hearing. GetEQUAL has this action alert. Ashley Ritchie (KMPH) reported Friday that Morado was not discharged. While he wasn't discharged, Don't Ask, Don't Tell remains law: "In fact, a navy spokesperson tells KMPH News, the repeal of the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy has to be certified by the Secretary of Defense, Chairman and President. After that, it will take another 60 days before it goes into effect." Joseph Neese (RNN) notes Morado isn't the only one who will face a discharge hearing and Pentagon spokesperson Eileen Lainez states, "The law commonly known as 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' remains in effect until 60 days following certification." And will it be certified? Nothing is a done deal until it is, in fact, done. Friday we concentrated (in the snapshot) on the protests in Iraq and I had to hold off on a Congressional hearing. A DADT hearing took place and there's another this week so we'll squeeze Friday's into this snapshot. "It is now essential that the Congress ask some of the questions that were glossed over during the comprehensive review. We must get the process for considering the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell back on track and ensure that our military is truly prepared to allow the open service of gays and lesbians," declared Joe Wilson Chair of the US House Armed Services Subcommittee on Military Personnel in his opening remarks. Wilson objected to the fact that Don't Ask, Don't Tell legislation took place in the lame duck session. The Subcommittee heard from the Joint Chiefs of Staff's Vice Adm William Gortney and DoD's Clifford L. Stanley. In his questioning Wilson touched on many topics that would appear to indicate his opposition. "How will you know the troops in the field believe they're prepared to cope with the complications that will follow?" he wondered at one point. At another, he wanted to know how chaplain's would be protected. (I'm avoiding a cheap shot there -- feel free to insert your own.) . US House Rep Susan Davis is the Ranking Member. In reply to her questions, Stanley said that "to date" there had been no visible impact on recruitment. Stanley then tossed to Gortney for further remarks. Vice Admiral William Gortney: Once again, all of the subjective assessment from the commanders have been that the training has gone well. None of the issues that have come up were not things that we were not already aware of as a result of the survey that was out there that we were then able to tailor the training to to then answer. So thus far, no surprises. uh, and we're pretty pleased with where we are. And, again, 90% of the force has been trained. "Bottom line," Stanley would note after Gortney, "is that the training has been very effective, and we've been very pleased with what we're seeing but our antenna our up because this is not a rushed process and we want to be deliberate and purposeful in doing this." Ranking Member Susan Davis: The Army, as I understand it, is going to be the last to conclude their training and I wonder what timeline you would expect then, if they do do meet their deadline, what is the timeline that you would expect the President, the Secretary [of Defense] and the Joint-Chief [of Staff], that they could actually send that certification to Congress? Have you looked at that and what we might be looking at here in terms of a timeline? Vice Admiral William Gortney: Yes, ma'am. As-as the Secretary said, we anticipate about mid-summer in order to meet the completion of the preponderance of the force to be trained and the regulations to be in there and to get the recommendations from the service secretaries and the service chiefs to the -- to the Chairman. That deadline is really a function of the Army in order to get, just because of the size of the force and to include the Reserves and the National Guard in that, that's really the long goal there. And it's just a function of numbers that have to be trained. Davis (and many other Democrats) spoke in terms of "where are we in the process"; however, that was not the case with the Republicans. US House Rep Mike Coffman objected to the fact that he had requested data "and I think that that was not provided until about a month after the vote and I want to say for the record that I think that was intentional." Combat personnel "opposed in greater numbers" a repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell and if his request on the data had been completed in a timely manner, he believes the discussion would have been different. He registered his objection to a repeal and deemed the findings of the study "a conclusion looking for a study" and objected to repeal because he believes "this is a political decision made by the Executive Branch". In his second round of questioing, he was highly concerned about sleeping arrangements. Democrat David Loesbsack appeared to be siding with Republicans. (General rule: Watch for those who use "homosexual" and especially when they have a special way of pronouncing the word.) Republican Allen West referred to being gay as "a behavior" -- which, yes, sounds an awful like "a choice" since behavior can be modified. He made one of the strangest remarks in the entire hearing, saying of repeal, "I'm just very worried that this could be the camel getting his nose under the tent." Was that a sexual euphamism? (No, but it might make more sense if it were.) He then brought up the Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan (November 5, 2009) and his "disturbing behaviors." Apparently, the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell will leave gays and lesbians with itchy trigger fingers? He wondered whether those seeing failures "in the implementation of this program" were "free to speak up"? He fears "a witchunt" because of "social engineering" -- apparently unaware that the witchhunt took place in targeting gays and lesbians to begin with. As usual, US House Rep Niki Tsongas attempted to provide a calming and informed voice. US House Rep Niki Tsongas: But just to reiterate why we moved to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Since 1993, more than 14,000 gay service members have been discharged under the discriminatory Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy. And of these discharges, nearly 1,000 were specialists with vital mission critical skills -- Arab linguists, for example. We hear those figures over and over again. I have always believed that this policy actually threatens the readiness of our military by discharging hundreds of military personnel critical to our national security and shutting the door to thousands more. And it's also unconscionable to maintain a policy when at least 24 other countries including allies such as Great Britain, Australia, Canada and Israel already allow open service by lesbian and gay service members. And that's why I've always strongly supported repeal of this policy. And I concur wholeheartedly with Adm Mike Mullen's distinguished leadership about this issue, his assessment when he stated in his testimony before the Armed Services Committee last year that this policy "forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens." Undermining a basic tenet of military service which is to be honest. US House Rep Vicky Hartzler declared, "I'm new, I wasn't here when it passed." She's a Republican who deemed repeal "radical" and thought it would harm "the ability to win wars." (Real quick, what war does she think the US is currently winning? Other than the spending war, of course.) "I'm new, I wasn't here when it passed." Put that with the other statements including Georgia's Austin Scott who was very clearly opposed to repeal and everyone needs to remember a "done deal" isn't done until it's done. Thursday the Subcomittee meets again on this issue. Many comments made Friday by Republicans (and Dems who appeared not to support repeal) appeared to be trial balloons for future lines of attack. Reminder: If you served in the US military and you were stop-lossed, you are owed additional money. That money needs to be claimed. DoD announces the date to file for that additional payment has been extended: The deadline for eligible service members, veterans and their beneficiaries to apply for Retroactive Stop Loss Special Pay (RSLSP) has been extended to April 8, 2011, allowing personnel more time to apply for the benefits they've earned under the program guidelines. The deadline extension is included in the continuing resolution signed by President Obama Friday, providing funding for federal government operations through April 8, 2011. Retroactive Stop Loss Special Pay was established to compensate for the hardships military members encountered when their service was involuntarily extended under Stop Loss Authority between Sept. 11, 2001, and Sept. 30, 2009. Eligible members or their beneficiaries may submit a claim to their respective military service in order to receive the benefit of $500 for each full or partial month served in a Stop Loss status. When RSLSP began on Oct. 21, 2009, the services estimated 145,000 service members, veterans and beneficiaries were eligible for this benefit. Because the majority of those eligible had separated from the military, the services have engaged in extensive and persistent outreach efforts to reach them and remind them to apply. Outreach efforts including direct mail, engaging military and veteran service organizations, social networks and media outlets, will continue through April 8, 2011. To apply for more information, or to gather more information on RSLSP, including submission requirements and service-specific links, go to http://www.defense.gov/stoploss. iraq the new york times tim arango dahr jamail the guardian jonathan steele the committee to protect journalists dar addustour al rafidayn al mada enas tariq the fresno bee lewis griswold cnn mohammed tawfeeq

No Ordinary Family season finale tomorrow night

This is from Hillary is 44's "It's A Pink World - Hillary Clinton 2012:"

Another Obama promise broken today. We’ll give Michelle Malkin gloating rights on the Third Bush Term:

“Buzz out of Washington this morning is that the Obama administration has signaled it will end efforts to try 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a civilian trial and instead will use the Gitmo military tribunal system pursued by, yes, George W. Bush.”

Male Republican/conservative HotAir chortles, “The Obama administration finally surrendered to political and military reality today.” Didn’t Obama say for years that Guantanamo had to be closed because it was a horror pit that made America evil? Well, never mind those promises. And it bears repeating that as we have written many times before, not a single fact changed from the time Obama made his promises to today.

Add to those broken promises on Guantanamo and military trials the rising tsunami of Obama health scam waivers which have yet to swamp the shore. The waivers will continue to come in waves because Obama and his Obama Obamination party know that “A vote for health reform reduced election margins by six to eight percent for Democratic members of Congress in the 2010 midterm elections, according to a new study by two political scientists to be unveiled this weekend in Chicago.”

Things are so bad that crazy stories are emerging that Big Media might actually decide to report, not distort, in 2012. In an interview with Howard Kurtz Politico’s Roger Simon said “The bloom isn’t entirely off the rose between Obama and the press, but reporters are starting to concentrate more than ever on what he says rather than how he says it.” Don’t bet on it. Politico will soon be mainlining syringes filled with Hopium into corroded veins.

Are you surprised the War Monger broke his word again?

If so, where have you been for the last three years?

Barack is so disgusting. I don't even want to waste time on him tonight.

Tomorrow is the season finale of "No Ordinary Family."

Someone's supposed to die in the episode. I told you that you could e-mail or leave a comment if you had a guess, hunch or desire.

21 e-mails voted. The big vote getter? George.

George: 10

Daphene: 7

JJ: 2

Katie: 1

If you don't know, George is Jim's sidekick. Daphene is Stephanie and Jim's daughter. JJ is Stephanie and Jim's son. Katie is Stephanie's lab assistant.

Of the four, Katie's my favorite. I really don't think she could be killed off. (Hopefully no one will be.) That's because her fetus has super powers and has already demonstrated s/he will use them to protect Katie from danger.

Unless Daphene loses her voice, she should be able to talk anyone out of killing her since all she has to do is utter a suggestion and people agree to it.

So that leaves George and JJ.

I don't see them killing off JJ.

George?

Supposedly, if there's a season two, he gets super powers.

SO I don't think they'll kill him off.

I hope it's no one. But if they have to kill off one of the four and I was asked to vote, I would make it clear that Katie is my pick to survive.

I hope it will have a second season.

It's really a strong show. And it got so good as the season continued.


Going out with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Monday, April 4, 2011. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces deaths, protesters in the KRG demand the government resign, journalists remain under attack, political jockeying in the Parliament and more. Today the US military announced: "BAGHDAD -- A U.S. service member died April 3 in a non-hostile incident in northern Iraq. The name of the deceased is being withheld pending notification of next of kin and release by the Department of Defense. The names of deceased service members are announced through the U.S. Department of Defense official website http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/. The announcements are published on the website no earlier than 24 hours following notification of the service member's primary next of kin. The incident is currently under investigation." Today's announcement follows yesterday's: "Two U.S. service members died April 2 of wounds suffered when enemy forces attacked their unit with indirect fire. The names of the deceased are being withheld pending notification of next of kin and release by the Department of Defense." Dar Addustour reported on the two deaths and noted that "indirect fire" usually means mortars or rockets. The paper added that a Babel police source reports 3 rockets hit/landed on the US military base Camp Kalsu in Iskandariya. Those three deaths bring to 26 the number of US service members who have died serving in Iraq since August 31st when Barack Obama declared combat operations over. Cpl Brandon Hocking died March 21st in an enemy attack and was buried March 29th. He died ten days before he was scheduled to return home. Brandon Hocking's family spoke to Eric Wilkinson (KING 5 News). His father Kevin Hocking said, "We were counting down the days not only for him to bet back but for him to be moved up here for his family to be around him." He worries that Iraq has become the forgotten war and stated, "I don't want him forgot. I don't want any of them to be forgot." Megan McCloskey (Stars and Stripes) speaks with the family and Brandon's sister Britney explains that when she tells people about her brother's death, "I've actually had people ask me: 'Do you mean Afghanistan?'" McCloskey observes, "Iraq was once the dominant story on any given front page and nightly newscast. Today, attention has dropped to less than 1 percent of the daily news, according to the Pew Research Center." Iraq receives so little attention that even hosts of the Sunday chat & chews are unaware of what is going on. Yesterday, Senator Lindsay Graham appeared on CBS' Face The Nation today (here for transcript, here for video). We'll focus on his Iraq War remarks. "Well, here's the back-up plan. If all military forces have withdrawn from Iraq in 2011, the State Department has come to the Congress and said we're going to need over fifty MRAPs, mine resistant vehicles. We need a fleet of helicopters and thousands of private security guards to protect us as we go to the four consulates in Iraq to do our job to help the Iraqis build a civil society out of a dictatorship. I think that is a losing formula. I do not believe the State Department should have an army, that-that that's not the way to provide security to our State Department." On that, he's correct. And militarizing diplomacy should be a non-starter for all members of Congress. Here's the section where host Bob reveals he's unaware of the plans to militarize the State Dept if the SOFA isn't extended. Bob Schieffer: I -- I -- I'm sorry. But I find this a -- a hard to believe. Are you talking about we're going to arm our diplomats and put them in these kind of vehicles that people are driving around Iraq now? US Senator Lindsey Graham: Yeah. You -- you -- you've got it, Bob. That we're going to have private security guards providing security. I think American soldiers and the Iraqi army should provide security. We're talking about helicopters, a fleet of helicopters so they can get around to the four consulates, spread throughout Iraq. We're talking about MRAPs, mine resistant vehicles bought by the State Department, a mini State Department army. We've never done that before. That will fail. I'm urging the Obama administration to work with the Maliki administration in Iraq, to make sure that we have enough troops ten to fifteen thousand beginning in 2012, to secure the gains we've achieved to make sure Iran doesn't interfere with the Iraqi sovereignty and-- and to develop this country. We can't do it with a State Department army and I will not support that. This is a defining moment in the future of Iraq. And the Obama administration has the wrong strategy in Lib -- Libya and, in my view, they're -- they're going down the wrong road when it comes to Iraq. Bob Schieffer: Well, I find all of it hard to believe. [. . .] All right. We'll you certainly made some news this morning, Senator. I'll give you that. Amazingly, Bob Schieffer expresses surprise when Graham's speaking of the State Dept using contractors and US forces -- and this has been discussed at length by Congress. I know it wasn't reported at length by the media so we won't mock Bob for not knowing. But it's been addressed at length. And Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee have signed off on it in a report they issued earlier this year. From the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's [PDF format warning] "IRAQ: THE TRANSITION FROM A MILITARY MISSION TO A CIVILIAN-LED EFFORT:" But regardless of whether the U.S. military withdraws as scheduled or a small successor force is agreed upon, the State Department will take on the bulk of responsibility for their own security. Therefore, Congress must provide the financial resources necessary to complete the diplomatic mission. Consideration should be given to a multiple-year funding authorization for Iraq programs, including operational costs (differentiated from the State Department's broader operational budget), security assistance, and economic assistance programs. The price tag will not be cheap -- perhaps $25 - 30 billion over 5 years -- but would constitute a small fraction of the $750 billion the war has cost to this point. Under either scenario, the Iraq War doesn't end. And what the White House -- and its groupies -- are counting on is that as long as it two US deaths every other month or so, you won't give a damn. If the two plans are new to you, you can start by referring to "Iraq snapshot," "In appreciation of Lindsey Graham (Ava)," "It's a bi-partisan hole (Wally)," "John McCain, Kelly Ayotte and Jim Webb," "Iraq snapshot," "The forgotten covert wars on Latin America (Ava)," "It's a boom economy!" and "Senate Foreign Relations Committee." At the February 3rd Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, Chair Carl Levin noted in his opening remarks, "One major question is what security relationship the United States and Iraq will have once the 2008 Security Agreement expires in December. It is unclear whether the Maliki government will seek any type of continuing US military presence after December given the terms of the security agreement that all our troops be removed by this December. Iraq needs to engage with the United States sooner rather than later if such a request is going to be forthcoming." At the same hearing, in his questions, Ranking Member John McCain noted one obvious problem with the claim that US forces leave at the end of December. Ranking Member John McCain: Are they [Iraq] going to be able to build an air force without US presence there? Gen Lloyd Austin: They-they do have a number of options to both aquire equipment from-from or training from other nations. Certainly -- Ranking Member John McCain: So they would have to acquire equipment and trainers from other nations? Gen Lloyd Austin: They-they would. Walter Pincus (Washington Post) reported on Robert Gates' Congressional appearance February 16th: "In an impassioned plea during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on next year's Pentagon budget, Gates cited the loss of more than 4,000 American lives in Iraq and the expenditure of some $900 billion. He said it is 'a critically urgent concern' that a planned $5.2 billion allocation for fiscal 2012 be approved, so that the State Department can carry on the training of Iraqi police and other programs once handled by the Pentagon." From the Feb. 16th snapshot: US House Rep Dunan Hunter: Let's talk about Iraq for a minute. If the Status Of Forces Agreement is not changed or the Iraqis do not ask for our help and ask us to stay, what is our plan for 2012? At the end of this year, what's going to happen? Secretary Robert Gates: We will have all of our forces out of Iraq. We will have an Office of Security Cooperation for Iraq that will have probably on the order of 150 to 160 Dept of Defense employees and several hundred contractors who are working FMS cases. US House Rep Duncan Hunter: Do you think that represents the correct approach for this country after the blood and treasure that we spent in Iraq? My own personal time of two tours in Iraq. There's going to be fewer people there -- and that 150 -- than there are in Egypt right now. Somewhere around 600, 700 of those types of folks in Egypt. How can we maintain all of these gains that we've maintained through so much effort if we only have 150 people there and we don't have any military there whatsoever. We have more military in western European countries than we'd have in Iraq -- one of the most centralized states, as everybody knows, in the Middle East. Secretary Robert Gates: Well I think that there is -- there is certainly on our part an interest in having an additional presence and the truth of the matter is the Iraqis are going to have some problems that they're going to have to deal with if we are not there in some numbers. They will not be able to do the kind of job and intelligence fusion. They won't be able to protect their own air space. They will not -- They will have problems with logistics and maintenance. But it's their country, it's a sovereign country. This is the agreement that was signed by President Bush and the Iraqi government and we will abide by the agreement unless the Iraqis ask us to have additional people there. One way or another US troops stay -- either under DoD as they are presently or under the State Dept. The last weeks have not been a pleasant time to be an Iraqi journalist. As the protests got into full swing, the government began attacking journalists. Not just preventing them from covering protests (bad enough -- and that happened again Friday) but hunting them down in Baghdad cafes after the protests, beating them up and hauling them off to jails where they were tortured. The Journalistic Freedoms Observatory explains the latest journalist to be targeted is Morteza Aahtor who was arrested in Nasiriya by a "special security force sent from Baghdad" for articles he'd written. Attorney Ghassan Saleh states that Morteza was arrested not on a court order but on a government order. The Journalistic Freedoms Observatory is calling for the immediate release of Morteza. Assaults on journalists have included Iraqi forces raiding news outlets in Baghdad and throughout Iraq such as February 23rd when the Journalistic Freedoms Observatory was raided by Iraqi forces who smashed the equipment. Dropping back to that day's snapshot: Iraq where the governmental war on the press never ends. Dar Addustor reports on the Iraqi military raid of the Journalistic Freedoms Observatory in Baghdad after midnight this morning with the military seizing things including computers and personal items. Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) quotes JFO's Bashar al-Mandalawy stating, "The only reason behind this is to stop freedom of the press and expression in this country." Wael Grace and Adham Youssef (Al Mada) report [. . .] that it was the Iraqi military and the police raiding the Journalistic Freedoms Observatory and that they entered by breaking down the main door and that the Baghdad Centre for Media was also raided at the same time. March 9th, the JFO calculated the numbers for two weeks and found that there were 60 attacks on journalists in the KRG and 150 in the rest of Iraq. At that point, those two weeks, 33 journalists had been arrested. In last week's Tikrit assualt, journalists Sabah al-Bazi (or al-Bazee) and Muammar Khadir Abdelwahad were killed. UNESCO released the following today: The Director-General UNESCO, Irina Bokova, today condemned the killing of Iraqi freelance journalist Sabah al-Bazee in a gun attack on a government building in Tikrit, Iraq, in which more than 20 people were killed and dozens injured. "I condemn the killing of Sabah al-Bazee," the Director-General declared. "The vicious attack that took his life, and many others as well, is an attack against the whole of Iraqi society and must not go unpunished. "Free and independent information, the basis of open informed debate, is essential for the reconstruction of Iraq where all too many journalists have been paying with their lives to keep civil society at home and abroad informed. "I encourage the authorities in Iraq to do everything possible to bring the perpetrators to justice." Sabah al-Baze, 30, worked for several media organizations including Reuters, CNN and other international news outlets. He was among more than 20 people who were killed on 29 March when gunment seized control of the provincial government building in Tikrit, 140 kilometres northwest of Baghdad. Reporters Without Borders notes the various journalists that have recently gone missin gin Iraq. Naliya Radio and Television's Dana Bakir went missing at the start of the month "when security forces attacked journalists who were covering a demonstration in Freedom Square (Saray Azadi) in Sulaymaniyah." Sources state he was arrested and is in prison. The same day Lvin Magazine's Jiyar Omer was taking pictures in the square, "At no point did I think they [security forces] would target me until the moment when they tried to arrest me. Demonstrators came to my aid. Later, when I tried to take photos of security forces firing on the crowd, they hit me in the stomach and back with the butts of their Kalashnikovs." The next day security forces attacked Kornal's Goran Othman, Hakar Muhammad, Mohamed Jamal and detained Zmnako Ismail. Those are only some of the journalists listed. Grasp how this has taken place with little-to-no Western press coverage (the Washington Post has covered some of it in reports, they've also done an editorial on the subject; the New York Times hasn't reported on it but they have done an editorial). Excuse me but did Barack Obama not say last Monday that he declared war on Libya becuase, "Journalists were arrested, sexually assaulted and killed"? Yes, he did say that. Meanwhile that's happening in Iraq, in the US client state of Iraq where puppet Nouri al-Maliki is allowed to terrorize the people and to wage war on a free press. And while the US government uses it as a reason for the Libayn War and while the press repeats it unquestioningly, we're all supposed to play Diane Rehm and ignore what's going on in Iraq. Diane and the others have ignored the attacks on journalists in Iraq, the power plays, the protests, everything. Al Mada reports on the protest in Baghdad Friday with "security forces surrounded [Tahrir Square] and blocked citizens access to the square." Al Mada notes that many families were present carrying photos of their family members who had disappeared into the Iraqi 'justice system,' calling for the release of their loved ones. As protests took root in Iraq, Nouri al-Maliki began desperately spinning for time and came up with a "100 days reform" -- the political equivalent of hitting the snooze button. The 100 days come to a conclusion on June 7th. Today Nouri al-Maliki tells the Associated Press that it will not be any problem for he and his Cabinet to meet the deadline: "But Premier Nouri al-Maliki opened several escape clauses for his ministers should they fail to meet the June 7 deadline, which he set in an effort to appease protests by crowds demanding better public services and an end to corruption. He also dodged questions in an interview with The Associated Press about whether he would also step down if his government is deemed to have fallen short of demands for change that have resonated throughout Iraq over the last six weeks." Press TV calls Nouri's statements of Iraq's future "an optimistic picture." Is there a scramble on to replace Nouri? May be. Various parties are now throwing accusations at one another when they were oh-so-close last November. Over the weekend, Al Rafidayn reported the Iraqi National Alliance had started calling for an investigation into "the crime" that took place in Falluja which the Iraqi National Alliance is calling a "genocide" -- Ayad Allawi was prime minister when US forces attacked Falluja -- and it is being compared to the Halbaja genocide when Saddam Hussein ordred a chemical attack on the city March 16, 1988 (the Iraqi Parliament declared the Halbaja assault a genocide in a vote on March 17th). Meanwhile New Sabah noted that Ayad Allawi's Iraqi was stating a "coup" has taken place because KRG President Massoud Barzani has not implemented the 19 terms he agreed to including the creation of the National Supreme Council which would have been headed by Ayad Allawi. This is in reference to the deal made in Erbil by State Of Law, the KRG, Iraqi, the National Alliance, the Sadr bloc and Joe Biden to 'end' the political stalemate and allow Nouri al-Maliki to continue as prime minister. The two sides made charges against one another and who was going to blink first? It wasn't Iraqiya. Today Alsumaria TV reports that the vote on whether or not Falluja was a massacre has been shot down "due to rows between the National Alliance and Iraqiya on considering Falluja incidents as a massacre." Ayas Hossam Acommok (Al Mada) notes that many saw the proposal as political jockeying and notes that most of the parties in Parliament were members in 2004 and that such a measure would point the finger at more than just Ayad Allawi (Allawi was prime minister then). In other news from Iraq's Parliament, Aswat al-Iraq reports that Saturday, approximately 95% of Iraqiya MPs refused to vote in favor of Khalid al-Obaidi for the post of Minister of Defense. Kadhim Ajrash (Bloomberg News) reports that Ali Youssef al-Shukri was confirmed by Parliament as the Minister of Planning today. Now if only a Minister of the Interior and a Minister of Defense could be found. Meanwhile protests took place in the Kurdistan Regional Government today. Reuters counts "thousands" and states they demand "the immediate resignation of the entire regional government, saying it had failed to provide democracy and justice." AP reports the response of the government: Arrest two clerics said to have supported protests. Mulla Mohammed Nasrallah's wife Fatime is quoted stating, "He did nothing wrong. He was calling upon the protesters to resort to peaceful means to achieve their goals. And he demanded the Kurdish government not to use violence against the protesters and listen to their demands." The KRG has members in the Iraqi Parliament. The KRG also has its own parliament. Aswat al-Iraq reports that "opposition blocs decided on Monday to boycott all regular sessions of the Kurdistan parliament, uring the parliament's chairmanship to hold extraordinary sessions to discuss developments in the region and the protestors' demands in Sulaimaniya." Protests around Iraq have asked for many things, including basic services. Al Rafidayn reports the Minister of Electricity declared yesterday that there will be 8 hours of electricity this summer and 16 next summer. Iraqis will probably hold off on the cheering until they see how sincere the words are. Meanwhile journalist Jane Arraf Tweets: In #Baghdad - dusty, already almost 90 degrees but the real sign of summer - rows and rows of generators on sale for the coming power cuts about 6 hours ago via Twitter for BlackBerry® Since long before the start of the Iraq War, Iranian dissidents have lived in Iraq. Following the US invasion, the US made these MEK residents of Camp Ashraf -- Iranian refuees who had been in Iraq for decades -- surrender weapons and also put them under US protection. They also extracted a 'promise' from Nouri that he would not move against them. July 28, 2009 the world saw what Nouri's word was actually worth. Since that Nouri-ordered assault in which at least 11 residents died, he's continued to bully the residents. Iran's Fars News Agency reports that the Iraqi military is denying allegations that it entered the camp. Specifically, Camp Ashraf residents state, "The forces of Iraq's Fifth Division invaded Camp Ashraf with columns of armored vehicles, occupying areas inside the camp, since midnight on Saturday." The International Parliamentary Campaign in Defence of Ashraf condemns in the strongest manner the occupation of Camp Ashraf on Sunday by Iraqi armed forces at the behest of the Iranian regime. Camp Ashraf houses 3,400 members of the main democratic opposition group People's Mojahedin Organisation of Iran (PMOI) who are "Protected Persons" under the 4th Geneva Convention. The camp is a civilian zone. In an extremely hostile act on the orders of Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, overnight and during the day, Iraqi armed forces entered the camp with at least 30 BMP armoured personnel carriers and Humvees. They have taken up positions in hostile formation. The military siege and occupation of parts of the camp by Iraqi forces violates the Geneva Conventions and international law. There is a serious risk of bloodshed. The United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) and US forces in Iraq must urgently intervene to ensure that the Iraqi military withdraws from the refugee camp. UNAMI should also establish a formal and lasting presence at the camp, under US army protection, to monitor the situation and thereby restrict the sorts of abuse that is currently taking place. International Parliamentary Campaign in Defence of Ashraf 3 April 2011 Rt. Hon. Lord Archer of Sandwell QC President Former UK Solicitor General Rt. Hon. Lord Fraser of Carmyllie QC Co-President Former Lord Advocate for Scotland Turning to some of the reported violence today . . . Xiong Tong (Xinhua) reports a Ramadi bombing late last night claimed the lives of 3 police officers and left thirteen injured while a Baghdad roadside bombing claimed 1 life (bodyguard for "a senior official of the Iraqi industrial ministry") and left three more injured while a second Baghdad roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 Sahwa member and a third Baghdad roadside bombing injuring Razzaq Issah ("director general of the government-owned Iraqi Investments Board") and leaving one more person wounded. Reuters adds that a Kirkuk roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 Iraq soldier and left two more injured, a Yusufiya home invasion resulted in the deaths of 6 "young brothers" and the injuring of their mother and two sisters and a Jurf al-Sakhar bombing which claimed the lives of 5 Sahwa. In other news, Al Mada reports Iraqi President Jalal Talabani congratulated the Iraqi Communist Party on their 77th year anniversary: "I congratulate you heartily on the seventy-seventh anniversary of the founding of your party [. . .] [which] worked hand in hand with the other political parties to fight for a free Iraq that would be free of social injustice and discrimination." No reports on Nouri congratulating them but he probably feels he did 'his part' by ordering the military to evict them from their Baghdad headquarters last month. We'll note with this from John V. Walsh (Dissident Voice): So contemptuous of the people is the elitist Barack Obama that he has plunged the United States into yet another war without so much as pretense of a Congressional vote. He emerges as more brazen by far than George W. Bush, who lied about Saddam Hussein's Al-Qaeda link and his weapons of mass destruction, in order to win a Congressional "authorization" for war. Obama simply ignored the Constitution and is playing the part of King. This is the highest of crimes and misdemeanors and the profoundest of threats to our already weakened democratic institutions. Hence, we have begun a Right/Left Coalition to impeach President Barack Obama for violation of Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution which gives Congress, not the Executive, the sole right to declare war. Reminder: If you served in the US military and you were stop-lossed, you are owed additional money. That money needs to be claimed. DoD announces the date to file for that additional payment has been extended: The deadline for eligible service members, veterans and their beneficiaries to apply for Retroactive Stop Loss Special Pay (RSLSP) has been extended to April 8, 2011, allowing personnel more time to apply for the benefits they've earned under the program guidelines. The deadline extension is included in the continuing resolution signed by President Obama Friday, providing funding for federal government operations through April 8, 2011. Retroactive Stop Loss Special Pay was established to compensate for the hardships military members encountered when their service was involuntarily extended under Stop Loss Authority between Sept. 11, 2001, and Sept. 30, 2009. Eligible members or their beneficiaries may submit a claim to their respective military service in order to receive the benefit of $500 for each full or partial month served in a Stop Loss status. When RSLSP began on Oct. 21, 2009, the services estimated 145,000 service members, veterans and beneficiaries were eligible for this benefit. Because the majority of those eligible had separated from the military, the services have engaged in extensive and persistent outreach efforts to reach them and remind them to apply. Outreach efforts including direct mail, engaging military and veteran service organizations, social networks and media outlets, will continue through April 8, 2011. To apply for more information, or to gather more information on RSLSP, including submission requirements and service-specific links, go to http://www.defense.gov/stoploss. iraq xinhua xiong tong alsumaria tv aswat al-iraq al mada ayas hossam acommok bloomberg news kadhim ajrash dar addustour cbs news face the nation

The Birdcage

I think I'm going to make April about the 90s. I'm going to focus on movies from the 90s this month. I would say "some you may have heard of, some you may not," however, you guys have heard of everything. I got an e-mail from Bob outlining his 100 favorite movies -- wait, I'm not done -- for 2003.

So I doubt I'll find any that you don't know.

One of my favorite films of the 90s is the comedy "The Birdcage."

The 1996 film's cast includes Robin Williams, Gene Hackman, Nathan Lane, Calista Flockhart, Dianne Wiest, Hank Azaria, Dan Futterman and Christine Baranski. I'd say everyone does a great job except Christine Baranski.

She's really not much of an actress. Appearing opposite Cybill Shepherd in the TV show "Cybill," it didn't matter that Baranski always seemed to be acting into her chest and ignoring co-actors and the audience. Cybill had enough charm to carry the scenes and make Baranski's Maryanne seem likeable. Without Shepherd, Baranski's just cold and never comes across to the audience or seems like a human being.

In the film, her role is brief but important. She and Robin Williams shared a one-nighter. Robin's gay. She ends up pregnant. She has their child and leaves it with Robin who raises it with his boyfriend Nathan. Years later, when the son has decided to get married, she's invited back in but she doesn't seem to fit. Not just with Robin and Nathan and Dan Futterman (the son) but with others present who are not family.

She just can't act with others and can only do that one performance over and over. With Shepherd, it seemed funny. But a few short years later, she was doing the same performance on a series of Fraiser episodes as "Dr. Nora." That drove home that she might be good in an actor's workshp but she can never connect with the audience.

Every one else is great.

Dan Futterman's first scene? I think he hits a few false notes but assume it was intentional and part of the plan to make sure they didn't run off people nervous about a gay theme.

Mike Nichols directed the film so you know it's going to hit the right notes.

But better than that, the screenplay is by Elaine May so you've got an excellent comedy.

Not only do you get the main storyline, you get a commentary on the media, running media commentary, throughout the film. I don't think a lot of people register that.

Nathan Lane really shines in this film. I don't think he's had as good a role before or after and Hank Azaria lights up the screen every time. You get exited because you know he's going to do something funny so all the camera has to do is find him for you to get excited.

Dianne Weist gets to add another layer to her character when they arrive at Robin Williams and Nathan Lane's home. Prior to that, her Louise seemed sweet but daft. Instead, you discover that Louise is a lot more on the ball than she seems and probably the real reason her husband has made it into the Senate and remains in the Senate.

That husband is Gene Hackman and this is one of his two great comedy performances, the other being in "Heartbreakers." Here there's no reason to give the senator a second look, he's disgusting, he's irritating . . . until he meets "Mother Coleman" (Nathan Lane in a wig) and finds himself enchanted. Hackman is amazing.

The whole film is.

It's so great you wish the rumors of a sequel had been true.



Going out with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Friday, April 1, 2011. Chaos and violence continue, Diane Rehm continues to ignore Iraq for the tenth straight week, protests continue in Iraq with at least 50 injured in the KRG, a woman attempts to set herself on fire in Baghdad, and much more. The Great Iraq Revolution reports Iraqi security forces attempted to disperse protesters. As usual and, as usual, barbed wire is roped around to stop mobility and hinder access and the press are being harassed. Alsumaria TV reports that they were "calling for the release of detainees and urging to end unemployment and corruption in Iraq mainly in governmental institutions. Protestors urged to provide them with ration cards." Chanting and carrying banners (video here) what appeared to be thousands occupied Liberation Square. Al Mada reports that many more attempted to join the protesters but Iraqi forces surrounded the scene of the protest and blocked access. As with last Friday, those protesters who had family members imprisoned carried photos of their loved ones. They were easy to spot amongst the crowd with their photos and generally clad in black. On his album . . . Nothing Like the Sun, Sting has a song for the wives and daughters in Chile whose husbands were imprisoned, tortured and murdered under the terrorist reign of Augusto Pinochet and the song, sadly, fits so many regions including Iraq. Why are there women here dancing on their own? Why is there this sadness in their eyes? Why are soldiers here Their faces fixed like stone? I can't see what it is that they despise They're dancing with the missing They're dancing with the dead They dance with the invisible ones Their anguish is unsaid They're dancing with their fathers They're dancing with their sons They're dancing with their husbands They dance alone They dance alone -- "They Dance Alone" written by Sting Kitabat has multiple videos on their home page of today's protest in Baghdad. One woman holds photos of four missing men. She yells out for Allah to help her while others around her note that [Nouri al-] Maliki does nothing. In another video, twenty-one women dressed in black and holding photos gather together chanting while one woman wipes her tears with the back of one hand, displaying the photo of her missing family member with the other hand. A woman, Um Ahmed attempted to set herself on fire, the Great Iraqi Revolution notes. They explain she is "the mother of a detainee" and the other protesters prevented the fire and rescued her. The two main groups behind this protest were the Youth Movement of Liberty and the Coalition of the Revolution. The Youth Monument of Liberty states, "We are not asking, we are calling for the immediate trial of all detained Iraqis who were not brought before a judge within 24 hours of their arrest because that is a violation of the Constitution's Article 19's thirteenth paragraph." That paragraph reads: The preliminay investigative documents shall be submitted to the competent judge in a period not to exceed twenty-four hours from the time of the arrest of the accused, which may be extended only once and for the same period. And they report protests took place in Falluja and in Sulaymaniya. Alsumaria TV notes of the Sulaimaniyah Province demonstration in Kaler (or Kellar) that eye witnesses say Kurdish security forces threw stones at members of the Change Political party. The Great Iraqi Revolution notes that the protest in Kellar "started peacefully but then the Kurdish Militias and Assayesh brought in their thugs and fighting started." AFP reports, also in Sulaimaniyah province, but in the city of Sulaimaniyah, approximately 4,000 protesters gathered and chanted slogans agains the two main Kurdih political parties -- the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan and the Kurdistan Democratic Party -- and that police used batons on protesters who used stones on the police resulting in 35 people being injured. MaximumEdge.com News notes, "City health official Rekard Rasheed said at least 38 of the injured were policemen in the melee of protestors demanding better government services, ending corruption and more jobs in the autonomous Kurdish region in Iraq's north." Press TV reports that "at least 50 people" were injured. Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) also notes "at least 50 people were wounded". Yesterday on All Things Considered (NPR), Kelly McEvers reported on the protests in northern Iraq, especially in relation to the disputed Kirkuk: McEVERS: In recent protests that were part of a larger wave of demonstrations around Iraq and the region, intellectuals like Farouk Rafiq said the Kurdish success story is a myth. Mr. FAROUK RAFIQ: This is a myth that there is economical opportunity. Do you know why? Because political parties, they captured the market. They have their own companies for themselves, for politicians, for those who are on the top. McEVERS: So far, those politicians don't show any signs of relinquishing power. In fact, it's support from the Kurds that helped Iraq's incumbent prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, recently secure a second term. In exchange for this support, the federal government in Baghdad recently agreed to let Kurdistan proceed with agreements to pump and sell its own oil. Now, says analyst Jutiar Adel, the Kurdish leaders see economic growth as a way to continue asserting their autonomy. Mr. JUTIAR ADEL: (Through translation) The economical presence, the economical strength is very important, and they want to guarantee that there is an economical power for Kurdistan. McEVERS: That means in addition to ignoring protesters' demands for a bigger piece of the economic pie, other issues might be on the back burner, issues like who will control the area around the city of Kirkuk, where Kurds were the majority until Saddam sent Arabs to settle there. Unidentified Man #1: (Speaking foreign language). McEVERS: At a recent conference, Kurdish President Massoud Barzani told followers it's likely his grandson will still be fighting for Kirkuk. For those who would like more audio of past protests in Iraq, Hamzoz has filed audio reports at Alive in Iraq on the March 11th protest in Baghdad. Rania El Gamal (Reuters) observes, "Iraq's protests have not reached the critical mass of those in Tunisia and Egypt, but Iraqis are tired of shortages of food rations, water, power and jobs, and widespread corruption, eight years after the U.S.-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein." At the Los Angeles Times, the Carnegie Endwoment for International Peace's scholar Maria Fantappie weighs in on Iraq noting: While the protests in Iraq may not threaten an entire leadership, they could shift the balance of power within the ruling coalition. With both promises and targeted public policies in southern Iraq, the Sadrists could infiltrate Maliki's strongholds -- especially Basra and Baghdad -- consolidate their popular support there, and increase their pull within the new government, most likely at the expense of Maliki's State of Law coalition. As a result, the Sadrists could regain politically what they lost militarily in the 2007 Battle of Basra to Maliki-affiliated armed forces and emerge as a key player in the government. During the protests, the Sadrists lobbied for the resignation of several State of Law governors and high-ranking officials in Baghdad and Basra, accusing Maliki's administration of being lax in combating corruption. This move may turn the Sadrists from an indispensable ally for Maliki's reelection into his chief competition. Maliki already seems to be avoiding alienating the Kurds over the issue of Kirkuk, possibly to secure them as an alternative ally. The winners of this period of social unrest will be those who heed the call of the Iraqi street, and hold the potential to respond at the local level. The Sadrists have a golden opportunity to overshadow their past as a sectarian militia and recast themselves as populist policy makers who are receptive to the people's demands. Whether they do so remains to be seen. And whether Nouri al-Maliki and the other puppets controlling Iraq can stop torturing, remain s in doubt. Wally slid the following over from MADRE: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: MADRE: Rights, Resources and Results for Women Worldwide CONTACT: Stephanie Küng, MADRE (212) 627-0444, media@madre.org Pro-Democracy Youth Activist in Iraq Tortured and Threatened Monday, March 28, 2011 -- New York, NY -- Last week, a youth activist organizing pro-democracy protests in Iraq was kidnapped, detained and tortured. MADRE learned of the attack on Alaa Nabil from our partner organization, the Organization of Women's Freedom in Iraq (OWFI). Alaa Nabil and OWFI believe the men who carried out the attacks to be Iraqi security agents. Today, MADRE and OWFI sent an official letter to the Iraqi government condemning the attacks and calling for action to protect Iraqis against such human rights violations. On March 23, Alaa Nabil was kidnapped from the area around his residence by men who transported him to an unknown location. They forced him to face a wall, and they beat, kicked and whipped him with hoses and cables on his back and his arms. Before releasing him, the men issued direct death threats against him and against his activist colleagues, saying, "We will cut your tongues, you and your organizing colleagues, Firas Ali, Suad Shwaili, and Falah Alwan, if you dare to reach Al Tahrir Square. And if you insist on continuing this work, we will shoot each one of you and throw you where your bodies cannot be found." Yanar Mohammed, Director of the Organization of Women's Freedom in Iraq, said today, "The kidnapping and torture of Alaa Nabil are a violation of his human rights and a violent attack on legitimate calls for democracy in Iraq. Through weeks of protests, I joined Alaa in our demonstrations calling for jobs, for justice and for our human rights, and I stand with him now." Yifat Susskind, MADRE Executive Director, said today, "In organizing pro-democracy protests, Alaa Nabil exercises internationally recognized human rights that the Iraqi government is legally obligated to uphold, yet he has been tortured and his life threatened. Iraqis have joined with people across the region calling for democracy, and they have been met by repression at the hands of their government, which is heavily supported by the US. We join with our partners in Iraq in raising our voices to denounce the attacks and death threats against Alaa Nabil." To read the letter submitted by MADRE and OWFI to Iraqi officials, click here. The following people are available for comment: Yanar Mohammed, Director of the Organization of Women's Freedom in Iraq (OWFI), co-founded OWFI after the US invasion in 2003. She set up a series of shelters that served as an underground railroad for women escaping the violence and death threats that escalated dramatically during the occupation. Yifat Susskind, Executive Director of MADRE, an international women's human rights organization. Yifat has worked extensively with women's human rights activists from the Middle East, Latin America and Africa to create programs in their communities to address violence against women, economic development, climate change, and armed conflict. ### For more information about MADRE, visit our website at www.madre.org. Meanwhile Denise Natali (Foreign Policy) also weighs in on the ongoing protests: Nuri al-Maliki also assured that the opposition would remain localized by keeping the protestors away from each other. During the demonstrations, for instance, he controlled communication services and set up road blocks so that protestors had to walk about five kilometers to reach the central square in Baghdad. These measures may not have deterred the demonstrations, but they shifted them to outlying localities. Residents in Basra, Fallujah, and Ramadi overthrew their provincial governments and burned down public buildings. Gunmen in Tikrit attacked their local government and took hostages. In Anbar, the sheikhs seek to remove the governor, provincial council chairman and operations centers commander. The unrest has had political fallout in Baghdad. Maliki's power base has been further undermined as Ayad Allawi and Moqtada al-Sadr have threatened to withdraw support from the government. Even some members of Maliki's State of Law party have distanced themselves from the prime minister by forming a 'White Block" in parliament and calling for Maliki's resignation if the situation does not improve in 100 days. Developing alongside these political rifts is the strengthening of the position of Ayatollah al-Sistani, who has taken credit for the non-violent nature of the demonstrations without really having been involved in them. As expected, Maliki has responded by trying to control and appease his challengers. While clamping down on protestors, he has promised political reforms and strengthened the state's distributive function through increased allocation of revenues for public goods and services. Furthermore, he has attempted to co-opt western Sunni Arab tribes by negotiating an amnesty with the "Jihad Reform Group", an ensemble of five Iraqi resistance groups based in Syria. The tribe's perception (and distrust) of Maliki as a Shi'a with Iranian backing, as well as its lucrative trade along the border area, will hinder Maliki's effort to draw Sunni Arab tribes back into the state and to undermine Ayad Allawi's tribal support base. And even though Maliki has licensed the Sadrists' "Sit in against Occupiers" demonstration planned for April 9, he needs to assure that the event does not become violent or further erode his fragile government. At the New York Times, the paper can't find the protests already noted today; however, they can go to town for Ahmad Chalabi. Maybe Tim Arango's attempting to show how Chalabi continues to attempt to spin. Chalabi wants to be Minister of the Interior. So many people don't want him to be. He's using unrest in Bahrain to try to make himself appear in touch with 'the people.' And insisting -- as Arango sketches out -- that a near 100% Shi'ite is a mixed turnout. Arango is incorrect when he refers to the Parliament's ten day vacation/holiday as "Parliament briefly suspended its work to protest the Bahrain's crackdown" He's incorrect because ten days is significant. The ten days off came after the body had grandstanded that they were going to put Iraq first and therefore were cancelling their April vacation. It also came when Nouri's one-hundred days 'till reform kicked off. Using a tenth of those reform days is not "briefly." The Speaker of Parliament, Osama al-Nujafi has repeatedly denied it was a vacation or holiday. In rather striking news, Reuters reports that the number of people killed in Iraq (Iraqi "civilians, police and soldiers") "rose in March" and uses a Ministry of Health count of 136. However, that number is a huge undercount. Let's review, March 1st 1 person was reported killed. March 2nd 5 people were reported dead and twenty-nine injured. March 3rd 11 were reported dead and twenty-six injured. March 5th 5 people were reported dead and nineteen wounded. March 6th 21 were reported dead and twenty-six wouned. March 7th 2 were reported dead, two were reported wounded. March 8th 4 dead and seven wounded. March 9th 5 were reported dead and ten wounded. March 10th 10 were reported dead and twenty-two injured. March 11th 7 dead and eleven injured. March 12th three were reported injured. March 13th 17 were reported dead and seventeen injured. March 14th 14 were reported dead and forty-two injured. March 15th 1 was reported dead and seventeen injured. March 16th 1 person was reported dead and thirty-three injured. March 17th 5 were reported dead and fourteen injured. March 18th 2 dead and one injured. March 19th 11 were reported dead and twenty-four injured. March 20th 2 were reported dead and fifteen injured. March 21st 7 were reported dead and fifteen wounded. March 22nd 4 were reported dead and thirteen injured. March 23rd 6 were reported dead and twenty-five injured. March 24th 2 were reported dead and three were reported wounded and -1 on dead because Maj Gen Ahmed Obeidi was reported dead the day before but was alive. March 25th 9 were reported dead and thirty-four injured. March 26th 3 were reported dead and five injured. March 27th 12 were reported dead and sixteen injured. March 28th 20 were reported dead and fifty-two injured. March 29th 60 were reported dead and one-hundred-and-three injured. March 31st 7 were reported dead and thrity-one injured. Check my math but that comes to 251 reported dead and 615 reported injured. Those deaths include everything but US service members. So 251. And that's an undercount. All the deaths are not reported and all deaths reported don't get noted in the snapshot. Alsumaria TV reports the death toll given by the Ministries of Defense, Health and Interior is 247 with 370 injured. Iraq Body Count does the numbers and finds "287 CIVILIANS KILLED" in the month of March. Reuters publishing 136 is laughable. It's all the more laughable when you note this sentence from the report: "Many of the deaths in March were the result of an attack on Tuesday on the provincial council of Salahuddin in Tikrit" -- we counted 58 for that (some counts were 60 and higher but for our 251 for the month, we only counted 58). Subtract 58 from 136 and you end up with 78. Reuters, which does a daily count of violence, seriously thought only 78 people were killed on all the other days this month? Seriously? If you think that means Iraq gets attention from the media, you don't know Diane Rehm. Each Friday, The Diane Rehm Show offers an hour of discussion on domestic news in the first hour and an hour of discussion on foreign news in the second hour. If you set aside Nadia Bilbassy's two brief sentences on February 25th ("There was demonstration in Iraq. There was two people dead in Iraq today, in Baghdad and in Basra.") as she went over demonstrations in the Middle East, current events in Iraq have not been discussed since January 21st when CNN's Elise Labott was asked about Iraq by Diane. Today continued Diane's pattern of silence. Grasp, please, that TEN FRIDAYS IN A ROW have found Diane and her guests (or substitute host Susan Page and her guests) ignoring Iraq on the second hour of The Diane Rehm Show. Violence has increased, US service members have died in Iraq during this time. Protests have taken place. Journalists have been beaten by Nouri's security forces. This week alone provincial council offices in Tikrit were turned into a hostage scene in which US forces and Iraqi forces stormed in but didn't manage to save anyone and at least 58 people died. Nouri spent all of February denying Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) Human Rights Watch's documentation of the secret prison forces under his immediate command were in charge of. That lie would continue until March 15th -- at which point, oops-we-do-have-a-secret-prison! None of that was news to Diane and her guests. None of it merited discussion. To listen to The Diane Rehm Show's international hour for the last ten Fridays was to think Iraq must have fallen off the face of the earth and, certainly, the war had ended. Those who sold the Iraq War probably should be working overtime to pay their debt off. March 3, 2003, Diane could talk about the financial cost of a potential Iraq War, but not about the human costs. Gordon Adams and Loren Thompson were her guests. And Loren Thompson -- of a think tank that's really a lobbyist for the defense industry -- sure did pop up a lot as a guest on Diane's show during the lead up to the Iraq War, didn't he? Such as January 21, 2003. She'd return to "economic implications" February 3rd. Or how about the laughable January 13, 2003 episode billed as an hour on the anti-war movement but included David Corn who was Red-baiting A.N.S.W.E.R. and countless others during that time period. Corn -- opposed to the illegal war but more strongly opposed to the peace movement -- got to be a guest many times -- March 7th, for example. March 17th, she had Robert Kagan as one of her guests. Making the case for war. Somehow, Diane 'forgot' to inform her listeners that Kagan's wife was working for Dick Cheney. Conflict of interest? Not to Diane. How about February 6, 2003 when Colin Powell's lies (The Blot) to the United Nations was 'analyzed' by War Hawk Ruth Wedgwood (Johns Hopkins University, of course) and cave-boi David Corn who insisted, "I give him credit, a very good case from a p.r. aspect." "Far more concrete evidence about these deceptions," Corn insisted were provided by Powell. He couldn't call it out. He could raise a few questions but he couldn't (try "wouldn't") call it out. So you had a weak and uninformed David Corn making a weak, kind of case sort of against the war and War Hawk Ruth Wedgwood insisting that the case was made. Thanks, Dave, you really went out on a limb there, didn't you? Ruth Wedgwood can declare the case has been made and David Corn's idea of offering a 'rousing' refutation was to say, "The question still is what do you do about it?" He repeatedly accepted the premise in his own remarks. (He cited, for example, one person who questioned Powell's presentation in the Washington Post. But in his own remarks he found Powell convincing. Again, thanks, David Corn, for nothing.) Contrast Corn's weak-ass garbage with Amy Goodman's Democracy Now! of the same day Phyllis Bennis "there were no smoking guns, but a lot of smoke and mirrors." Even in headlines, the spin wasn't being accepted the way Corn did on The Diane Rehm Show (which airs several hours later than Democracy Now!). From that day's opening headline. Amy Goodman: But much of the Powell -- much of the evidence Powell presented is impossible to verify. Powell's speech was peppered with assertions like "Our sources tell us" or "we know that . . . " Defectors and detainees were not named. Goodman's first segment after headlines was the seventy-plus minute speech Powell gave to the United Nations. Phyllis Bennis and James Paul were the guest offering analysis. (From Iraq, Jeremy Scahill offered the response from Iraq's government.) Via telephone, As'ad Abukhalil noted that the original Arabic recordings -- which Powell was translating to the UN -- "the translations are not really that good." the original Arabic is far more general and could mean a lot of things. By contrast, for Diane and her guests, the original Arabic meant only what Powell said it did. The Iraq War hasn't ended. And every Friday, US citizen Diane Rehm has a whole hour to discuss world events but doesn't feel that the US war in Iraq is worthy of discussion -- for ten weeks now (that includes today), she's felt that way. It's going to be fun to watch Ann monitor the show to point out Diane's huge gender imbalance among guests. In some of today's reported violence, which Diane also couldn't be bothered with though it was all in the news cycle before her show went live, Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reports a Falluja suicide bombing has claimed the life of the bomber plus that of "at least three Iraqi soldiers." Bushra Juhi (AP) reports that at least six people were injured (and identifies one of the dead as "a passer-by" as well as 2 Iraqi soldiers) and that the suicide bomber passed for "a street cleaner". Reuters states all 3 dead are Iraqi military and notes one man was shot dead in Mosul and a Mosul grenade attack injured two people. Meanwhile Al Mada reports rumors that Nouri al-Maliki is planning to alter the political scene in Iraq and create "a majority government." What is public is that Sabi al-Issawi attempted to resign as the Secretary of Baghdad but Nouri al-Maliki refused to allow it, Al Mada reports. Al Rafidayn adds this was the second time al-Issawi has attempted to resign. Reminder: If you served in the US military and you were stop-lossed, you are owed additional money. That money needs to be claimed. DoD announces the date to file for that additional payment has been extended: The deadline for eligible service members, veterans and their beneficiaries to apply for Retroactive Stop Loss Special Pay (RSLSP) has been extended to April 8, 2011, allowing personnel more time to apply for the benefits they've earned under the program guidelines. The deadline extension is included in the continuing resolution signed by President Obama Friday, providing funding for federal government operations through April 8, 2011. Retroactive Stop Loss Special Pay was established to compensate for the hardships military members encountered when their service was involuntarily extended under Stop Loss Authority between Sept. 11, 2001, and Sept. 30, 2009. Eligible members or their beneficiaries may submit a claim to their respective military service in order to receive the benefit of $500 for each full or partial month served in a Stop Loss status. When RSLSP began on Oct. 21, 2009, the services estimated 145,000 service members, veterans and beneficiaries were eligible for this benefit. Because the majority of those eligible had separated from the military, the services have engaged in extensive and persistent outreach efforts to reach them and remind them to apply. Outreach efforts including direct mail, engaging military and veteran service organizations, social networks and media outlets, will continue through April 8, 2011. To apply for more information, or to gather more information on RSLSP, including submission requirements and service-specific links, go to http://www.defense.gov/stoploss. iraq cnn mohammed tawfeeq the associated press bushra juhi the los angeles times maria fantappie al mada al rafidayn npr all things considered kelly mcevers