Wednesday, August 25, 2010

For two more years, we're stuck with him

Starting off with this from Hillary is 44's "'Relapse Summer' - Where Are The Promised Jobs In The Obama Economy Of Doom?:"

Republicans continue to get rid of the dead wood in their party – the Murkowski clan is the latest sent to the dumper by Sarah Palin and Tea Party forces. What used to be the great Democratic Party continues to shrug shoulders and surrender to the corrupt forces that declared this to be “Obama’s time”. Obama? He’s having a great ol’ time vacationing while the country burns.

And the jobs? Where are the jobs? Obama promised that if his “stimulus” scam was passed unemployment would not rise beyond 8.5%. That was a lot of scams and a lot of Hope ago.

The Obama “stimulus” scam passed in 2009 and the excuse from B.O.T.s (Barack Obama Thugs) now is that ‘well, maybe we were too optimistic and should not have said that’. But the never ending Obama excuse machine has a lot of ’splaining to do. A few months ago, in April 2010 “Nobody messes with Joe” Biden promised more Hope for Change. Remember that scam? We do:

Some time in the next couple of months we’re going to be creating between 250,000 jobs a month and 500,000 jobs a month,” Biden said at a fundraiser today in Pittsburgh.

Next month, Biden predicted, the nation’s employers will add between 100,000 to 200,000 jobs to their payrolls. [snip]

“We caught a lot of bad breaks on the way down,” Biden said. “We’re going to catch a few good breaks because of good planning on the way up.”

Good planning???? This is what they call good planning – waste of trillions of dollars, higher deficits, nation-devouring debt, and no jobs? And Joe said this recently in full knowledge of how badly the Obama scams, plans, and promises have fallen short.

* * * * * *

Before we continue with our autopsy of the Obama Economy of Doom, a very brief discussion of our introductory paragraph is appropriate. First Sister Sarah then the original Mama Grizzly – Hillary.

This year in state after state Republican activists and disgusted Tea Party members are cleaning their barn. While we can disagree on the aims and ideology which drives Sarah Palin and the Tea Party what we admire is that they are doing what the “professional left” is incapable of doing – cleaning out their own barn of the stench in the Republican Party as they smell it.

The latest victory for Sarah Palin and the Tea Party, however it eventually turns out, is the shocking results from Alaska last night. Sarah Palin and the Tea Party activists supported a candidate without any real money, who was outspent tenfold, who was 20 to 30 points down in the polls. He is currently ahead as the few remaining votes to be counted indicate he will win the primary and eventually become a U.S. Senator from Alaska.

In contrast, at a Bill Clinton birthday party, we had this revealing comment from Jon Corzine, the recent loser to Republican Chris Christie in blue state New Jersey:

“…as former New Jersey Senator John Corzine looked on wistfully. “I just wish,” Corzine said shaking his head, “I mean I knew — she would have been able to handle this Congress… but it was just Obama’s time.

What fatalistic bunk! Instead of fighting for what America needed the once great Democratic Party surrendered to the worse of Chicago politics and a Democratic establishment that thought they knew better than the voters. Disgusting.

No, it was NOT Obama's time. Barack cut in line, refused to wait his turn and then cheated, schemed and lied to get the nomination to a job that it turns out he's not only unqualified for, he can't even pretend to be interested in it anymore. Barack's forever on a vacation. Forever.

He pretended he wanted to lead. He pretended he wanted to be president. All he wanted was the title. I really wish he'd announce he was stepping down. I'd prefer Joe Biden in a minute.

As the economy continues to remain in the toilet, it really should be driving home just how much we needed a real leader at this time in history. We needed Hillary. And some of us knew that and we voted for her. In fact, more of us voted for her than those who voted for Barack. But he got gifted with the nomination when he should have been kicked to the curb.

He is forever more a stain on history and the man who came in to continue all the Bush programs. We had so much hope during the Bush years. We just knew that we'd elect a Democrat and that the Democrat would fight for us. Instead we got Barack who fights for no one but himself.

And he doesn't even give a damn about unemployment. Anyone who did would not be vacationing on Martha's Vineyard and golfing while the rest of us are either looking for jobs or scared we're going to lose ours.
Going out with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Wednesday August 25, 2010. Chaos and violence continue, Iraq is slammed by bombings, the refugee crisis continues, the political stalemate continues, the Pentagon finds new ways to disrespect gays and lesbians, and more.
Iraq was slammed by violence but before we get to that, the Pentagon found a new way to insult gays and lesbians this week as, apparently, apparently did President Barack Obama. Instead of repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Barack's promised to study it for a year. He didn't need a study when he made it a campaign promise. Don't Ask, Don't Tell is the policy put in place in the early 90s to allow gays and lesbians the ability to serve. It did not allow them to serve openly. The policy was they couldn't tell and they couldn't be asked. It was a compromise policy. People were being asked and were being kicked out the military for their sexuality. The policy never worked the way it was hoped because the questions and witch hunts continued. It was a step and the most then-President Bill Clinton could get in the face of opposition from Congressional Democrats and Colin Powell. Time does move on, thankfully. And Barack campaigned on repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell so that gays and lesbians could serve openly without fear of being kicked out for their sexuality. But instead of doing that, he announced a 'study' was needed. If the study says "Don't Repeal!" will Barack still repeal? Ask Magic 8-ball, it's more honest than Robert Gibbs. As offensive as the study option was, it's now gotten worse. 150,000 questionaires were sent out this month by the Pentagon . . . to the husbands and wives of service members asking for their input.
Next up look for the Pentagon to check with the cable guy of service members and, after that, their dry cleaners. That should eat up enough time that Barack will be out of the White House and his 'promise' long forgotten. If you want to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell, you repeal it. It's not that difficult -- unless Barack's saying that, like his cigarette smoking, homophobia is a personal addiction for him.
In the United States today the Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm Mike Mullen, spoke in Chicago. He was speaking to a variety of business leaders and the thrust of his speech was how returning veterans were a valuable employment resource with skills companies would be more than fortunate to have. He took questions (although he refused to address topics that had nothing to do with him or his position -- including the Water Cooler topic that the chattering types can't shut about). Alex Keefe (Chicago Public Radio -- text and audio) quotes him stating, "This is a - an effort on the part of al Qaeda, in particular, in Iraq to re-ignite the sectarian violence." He addresses the Detroit Economic Club tomorrow and he spoke with Steve Courtney today on the Paul W. Smith AM Show (WJR).
While Mullen offered hypothesis. At least 60 dead at least 265 injured today as Iraq is slammed with bombings -- mocking Joe Biden and the speech he gave to the VFW on Monday. That always happens. Attempt to serve up a wave of Operation Happy Talk and expect Iraq to correct your spin with a bracing splash of reality. As Jackson Browne once sang, "With all the times that I've been burned, by now you'd think I'd have learned" ("Rosie"). Ned Parker and Riyadh Mohammed (Los Angeles Times) explain, "The violence shook at least seven cities from north to south and appeared timed to undermine confidence in the Iraqi army and police as the U.S. military ends it formal combat mission in the country." Anthony Shadid and Stephen Farrell (New York Times) note the assaults appear "to be part of a coordinated wave of attacks" and they quote Mohammed Abbas who lost a cousin in one of today's bombings: "There may be a state, there may be a government. But what can that state do? What can they do with all the terrorists? Are they supposed to set up a checkpoint in every house?"
Kadhim Ajrash and Caroline Alexander (Bloomberg News) explain, "Car bombs were used in the attacks in Baghdad, Basra, Karbala, Baquba, Kirkuk and Wasit, the officials said in statements." In addition, they note, "Vice President Joseph Biden and White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan said at separate events yesterday that the administration is confident Iraqi forces are capable of taking on the primary security role." Barbara Surk and Hamid Ahmed (AP) point out, "The attacks made August the deadliest month for Iraqi policemen and soldiers in two years, and came a day after the U.S. declared that its troop levels were at their lowest level since the war began in 2003." BBC News reminds, "Iraq's top army officer recently questioned the timing of the pull-out, saying the country's military might not be ready to take control for another decade." On the attacks, Reuters notes a Baghdad suicide car bombing claimed 15 lives (plus driver for sixteen) with fifty-six injured, a Kut suicide car bombing which claimed 30 lives (plus driver) and left eighty-seven injured, a Baghdad roadside bombing which injured five people, a Dujail car bombing which injured twenty people, a Basra minbus bombing which injured twelve people, a Kirkuk car bombing which killed 1 person (nine more injured), six Balad Ruz roadside bombings which injured thirteen people, a Falluja suicide car bombing which claimed the life of 1 Iraqi soldier and left ten people injured, a Baghdad, a Muqdadiya car bombing which claimed 3 lives and left eighteen injured, a Ramadi car bombing which claimed 3 lives and left thirteen wounded, a Baghdad roadside bombing which injured three people, a Baghdad car bombing which claimed 3 lives and left fourteen people wounded, two Samarra roadside bombings which wounded Col Mustafa Hameed and three of his bodyguards, a Tikrit roadside bombing which injured two police officers, a Tikrit roadside bombing which injured two college students and five Iraqi soldiers, and a Baghdad attack on a police checkpoint which claimed the life of 1 police officer and left another injured. Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Falluja sticky bombing which claimed 1 life, a Wasit car bombing 10 people (fifteen injured), a Karbala car bombing claimed 1 life (eight more injured) and a Mosul suicide car bombing which claimed the lives 3 Iraqi soldiers (thirteen more injured). By 7:30 a.m. US EST this morning, the totals were at least 60 dead, at least 265 injured. BBC offers a slide show of the aftermath of some of the bombings. Jason Ditz ( reports, "Though the casualty figures are still coming in and may change, at least 86 Iraqis, including a large number of security forces, were killed and 371 others were wounded in the attacks." Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reports "Day of violence hits every corner of Iraq." Mike Hanna (Al Jazeera) states, "It does appear the primary targets are police stations, check points [and other] symbols of the attempt to create a system of law and order within Iraq." Ben Lando (Wall St. Journal) explains, "U.S. commanders and the caretaker government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki repeatedly have blamed the attacks on a hodge-podge of insurgent groups, including extremist groups linked to al Qaeda and, separately, to Iran. They allege the groups are trying to take advantage of a political vacuum -- politicians have yet to form a government after March polls -- and sow fear amid the U.S. withdrawal." Jane Arraf, Laith Hammoudi and Mohammad Dulaimi (Christian Science Monitor and McClatchy Newspapers) report, "No group has yet taken responsibility but Prime Minister Nouri al-Malaki's office blamed the attacks on Al Qaeda and Baathists. The statement said the bombings would not derail the 'historic national achievement' of the troop withdrawal in line with Iraq achieving full national sovereignty." Martin Chulov (Guardian) adds, "The US military faces mounting pleas from Iraqis to reconsider its exit." Tang Danlu (Xinhua) notes the continuing political stalemate as the violence continues.
March 7th, Iraq concluded Parliamentary elections. The Guardian's editorial board notes, "These elections were hailed prematurely by Mr Obama as a success, but everything that has happened since has surely doused that optimism in a cold shower of reality." 163 seats are needed to form the executive government (prime minister and council of ministers). When no single slate wins 163 seats (or possibly higher -- 163 is the number today but the Parliament added seats this election and, in four more years, they may add more which could increase the number of seats needed to form the executive government), power-sharing coalitions must be formed with other slates, parties and/or individual candidates. (Eight Parliament seats were awarded, for example, to minority candidates who represent various religious minorities in Iraq.) Ayad Allawi is the head of Iraqiya which won 91 seats in the Parliament making it the biggest seat holder. Second place went to State Of Law which Nouri al-Maliki, the current prime minister, heads. They won 89 seats. Nouri made a big show of lodging complaints and issuing allegations to distract and delay the certification of the initial results while he formed a power-sharing coalition with third place winner Iraqi National Alliance -- this coalition still does not give them 163 seats. They are claiming they have the right to form the government. In 2005, Iraq took four months and seven days to pick a prime minister. It's now 5 months and 18 days. Phil Sands (National Newspaper) notes that if the stalemate continues through September 8th, it will then be a half a year since Iraqis voted.
Lebanon's Daily Star covers the rumors that Moqtada al-Sadr may move "to Beirut to escape Iranian pressures to endorse a second-term for incumbent Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki" and that "On Tuesday, Ziyad al-Darb, a lawmaker from Iraqiya said Sadrist lawmakers were throwing their weight behind Allawi for prime minister."
BBC News' Hugh Skyes appeared on The Takeaway today supposedly to offer insight but instead apparently wanted to convey that Judi Dench is far from Britian's only drama queen. For the record, if he's going to admonish the host, he ought to get his facts correct. The drawdown is not, IS NOT, mandated by the Status Of Forces Agreement (" . . . that their forces are down to the 50,000 required by the State Of Forces Agreement here"). Know what you're talking about Hugh before you lecture someone else. What a putz. I can't imagine anything more stupid than being a reporter on Iraq and not knowing what the SOFA says and what it doesn't. Especially at this late date. The evening of November 27, 2008, the White House finally provided a copy of the Status Of Forces Agreement to the American people. (Even the US Congress was working with a translation of it prior, the White House did not provide Congress with a copy.) Read over it and find that 50,000 in the SOFA, Hugh Sykes. You won't. Because it's not in there as Karen DeYoung (Washington Post) and countless others have attempted to make clear over and over for nearly two years now. The 50,000 is Barack. It is not the SOFA which was signed on off before he was president. I don't think I've ever heard a guest on American public radio treat a host so rudely. And the reality is that while Hugh got his knickers in a wad, he's the idiot who doesn't even know what the SOFA says. Before he offers his next condescending lecture, he might try familiarizing himself with the basic facts.
Marco Werman: Egyptian society is typical of much of the Middle East. It's conservative. But one country stands out from its neighbors. That's Iraq. Prostitution, drugs and pornography are now widespread there. It wasn't always this way but it's part of the enormous change that the country has gone through in the past eight years. Jane Arraf has witnessed the changes in Iraq as a reporter, first for CNN and now as a freelancer. Jane, how is Iraq different from its neighbors and when did it change?
Jane Arraf: Well I think the thing about Iraq is that with the toppling of Saddam, it basically lifted the lid on pretty much everything. It wasn't as if prostitution didn't exist before the war. It certainly did. And particularly in that period of sanctions when there were international trade sanctions on Iraq in the 1990s and even middle class women who couldn't find food for their families were turning to prostitution. I think the thing is now though that essentially it became lawless after the invasion, after Saddam was toppled, then law was imposed again. It has become quite religious. So it's this really odd combination of increasing religiousness -- Islam, of course -- and an openness and the two things coincide rather unhappily.
Marco Werman: Gives ua an example. Perhaps you can talk about the pornography situation in Iraq. I mean what was Saddam's point of view on pornography and what is the kind of the national approach to pornography today?
Jane Arraf: Well, essentially pornography is bad. It's about as simple as that. It certainly doesn't jive with any sort of religion and it's frowned on. But, having said that, this is a country where young men particularly do not have many avenues open to them. They can't really have sex. They certainly can't have sex with women for the most part. And pornography is one of the few ways that they have access to that sort of thing. It's the same on US military bases. There's a prevalence of pornography on the bases even though it's officially banned there. But really the thing about Iraq is, well, I think is, it's a country that's very much still coming to grips with what kind of country it wants to be. And we've seen that in the spate of recent killings of gay men. This has been an openness that many people have taken advantage of. They couldn't have dressed the way they dress under Saddam Hussein's era. They couldn't have engaged in the kind of behavior, danicing in clubs, that they did then. Men with men. But, having said that, it's collided with an increasingly religious atmosphere here. It has resulted in the death of at least a dozen gay men and they've eseentially gone underground, gone to Syria, gone to other places and gotten the message very clearly that even though things seem open here, they're not really.
Jane Arraf went on to explain, "Sexual experiences between young men are considered fairly normal before they get married. So that if you have an experience of that sort with another man, you're not necessarily considered gay here. The thing that really offends people is not so much the sex, it's the appearance of being gay. It's the perception that you're gay, that you're effeminate."
Psychologically speaking, it is the rejection of self and what the man has done which frequently manifests itself in homophobia and leads to lashing out -- verbally and/or physically -- at those who may or may not be gay (or bi) but whose appearance might result in that assumption. Along with the rejection, there's the projection and, of course, the almighty quaking fear that if "Mustaffa" is gay and you don't attack Mustaffa, you may be thought to be gay as well.
Turning to the issue of Iraqi refugees, as July was winding down, Iraqi Osman Rasul took his own life. Owen Bowcott and Natalie Hanman (Guardian) reported that the 27-year-old man who was seeking asylum in England lept to his death after being "perched on railings surrounding the seventh floor balcony of a Nottingham tower block. He blanked out police officers attempting to talk him down and [. . .], placing his hand on his heart, he looked up to the sky and leapt." He was not allowed to work in England and his legal aid was cut off. Corin Faife (Ceasefire Magazine) remembers him: "Over the three months that he lived with me I heard more stories from him: of the murder of his father and brother by a militia in Iraq, and his fear for his own life; of his journey to the UK in the hold of a ship, and his impossible struggle to prove his origin and identity when he had arrived with nothing; of his arrest and imprisonment after a false accusation, and his bitter disbelief when he was aquitted, a year later, to be thrown back out on the street with no life to go back to. Living with Osman I saw firsthand the spirit-crushing inhumanity of the British asylum system, and how unremittingly bleak life can be for those who are left in limbo. Prohibited from working, with no access to housing or financial supports after his first claim was rejected and still awaiting furhter documents to make a fresh claim, he was left destitute, forced to rely on the charity of others to his continual chagrin." Great Britian's Socialist Worker adds, "He had applied for asylum, but it was denied because he could not prove he had a legal right to be in the country. He then applied to stay so that he could be with his children, who have British citizenship. This too was turned down. He was destitute and had been forced to sleep on friends' floors or on the street. Osman was not alllowed to work and was living on food parcels and charitable donations." His wife, Malgorzata Gajda, told the Coventry Telegraph that she believed he phoned her before he lept to his death, "I said 'Hello, hello' but no one answered. I'm sure it was him. He wanted to hear me and the kids for the last time."
This week UN Dispatch's Mark Leon Goldberg published a list of "The Top 5 Most Ignored Humanitarian Crises" and coming in at number one: Iraqi refugees: "The invasion, occupation and subsequent civil war in Iraq war caused one of the biggest refugees crises in recent history. According to the UN Refugee Agency, there are 1.7 million Iraqi refugees living in Syria and Jordan. There are another 1.5 million Iraqi IDPs. The UN office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs released its regional response plan for Iraqi refugees in January. The appeal called for $367 million to support the refugees. So far, though, only 17.9% or $65 million is funded. The United States has contributed $17 million to the fund."
In the United States, candidate Barack Obama swore he would provide $2 billion for Iraqi refugees. President Barack Obama has yet to do so. Kevin Robillar (PolitiFact) explained at the start of this year that the money wasn't being allocated: "If Obama is going to provide $2 billion over the course of four years, he would need to spend $500 million a year. That would be more than a third of the total amount the United States spends on refugees in 2010, which would seem unlikely." Today Mary Beth Sheridan (Washington Post) reports on the State Dept's Eric P. Schwartz and on the issue of Iraqi refugees. Sheridan's reporting on Schwartz' life and his testimony (before a body staffed with US lawmakers) and mentions a body of lawmakers. The Commission On Security & Cooperation in Europe aka the US Helsinki Commission -- not a Congressional committee. But they did issue a statement this month:

WASHINGTON--The United States needs to develop a plan to assist the tens of thousands of Iraqis who have worked, or continue to work, for the U.S. in Iraq, 22 U.S. Senators and Representatives said today in letters to both Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates.

The letters authored by U.S. Senator Benjamin L. Cardin (D-MD), Chairman of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (U.S. Helsinki Commission), and Co-Chairman Congressman Alcee L. Hastings (D-FL) follow a recent hearing titled "No Way Home, No Way to Escape: The Plight of Iraqi Refugees and Our Iraqi Allies" that highlighted the dire situation of Iraqis employed by the United States. These men and women are considered "traitors" or "collaborators" and are marked for assassination by Al Qaeda in Iraq and other terrorist groups.

"Time is of the essence in developing a plan to address this looming crisis as the August 31, 2010 withdrawal date rapidly approaches," the letters say. "The United States has a moral obligation to stand by those Iraqis who have risked their lives -- and the lives of their families -- to stand by us in Iraq for the past seven years, and doing so is also in our strategic self-interest."
(Full text of both letters below. To view a pdf of the letter to Secretary Clinton click here. For the letter to Secretary Gates, click here.)

Since resettlement to the United States is the safest option for many of our Iraqi allies, the signatories of the letters called for changes to the Special Immigrant Visa program to accelerate the application process and fulfill more of the current availability of 15,000 visas, only 2,145 of which have been used to date. This follows the legislative work of Co- Chairman Hastings, whose successful amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 calls on the Departments of Defense and State, in consultation with other federal agencies, to develop a plan to expedite resettlement of U.S.-affiliated Iraqis at risk as the United States withdraws from Iraq.

"Providing support for our Iraqi allies will advance U.S. national security interests around the world, particularly in Afghanistan, by sending a message that foreign nationals who support our work abroad can expect some measure of protection," the letters state.

The letters are signed by:
U.S. Senator Benjamin L. Cardin (D-MD), Commission Chairman*
U.S. Representative Alcee L. Hastings (D-FL), Commission Co-Chairman*
U.S. Senator Richard J. Durbin (D-IL), Senate Assistant Majority Leader
U.S. Senator Richard G. Lugar (R-IN)
U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR)
U.S. Senator Robert P. Casey, Jr. (D-PA)
U.S. Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH)*
U.S. Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand (D-NY)
U.S. Representative Ike Skelton (D-MO)
U.S. Representative Howard L. Berman (D-CA)
U.S. Representative Jim McDermott (D-WA)
U.S. Representative Earl Blumenauer (D-OR)
U.S. Representative William D. Delahunt (D-MA)
U.S. Representative James P. McGovern (D-MA)
U.S. Representative Shelley Berkley (D-NV)
U.S. Representative Janice D. Schakowsky (D-IL)
U.S. Representative Darrell E. Issa (R-CA)*
U.S. Representative G.K. Butterfield (D- NC)*
U.S. Representative Russ Carnahan (D-MO)
U.S. Representative Gwen Moore (D-WI)
U.S. Representative Joe Sestak (D-PA)
U.S. Delegate Eni Faleomavaega (D-AS)

* denotes member of the U.S. Helsinki Commission

Text of letters follows:

August 12, 2010

The Honorable Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street, NW
Washington, DC 20520

Dear Madam Secretary:

We write to bring to your attention the plight of our Iraqi allies, those Iraqis who have worked alongside our troops and diplomats as interpreters and in other capacities since 2003, and who are now threatened for their service. We urge you to work with the Department of Defense and other federal agencies to develop contingency plans to protect these allies as our forces redeploy.

Since 2003, tens of thousands of Iraqis have worked, or continue to work for, the Department of Defense, the Department of State, U.S. government contractors and other U.S. government funded entities in Iraq. Al Qaeda in Iraq and other terrorist groups affiliated with the Islamic State of Iraq have labeled these Iraqis traitors, collaborators and worse. Many have already paid the ultimate price for their service, and many more may be at risk after U.S. troops depart Iraq.

Resettlement to the United States could be the only safe option for thousands of our Iraqi employees. We commend the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security for expanding and accelerating the admission process for Iraqi refugees during the past three years. However, we are advised that the application process for Iraqi refugees currently takes a year or more on average, and that fewer than 5000 of those resettled to date were employed by the United States in Iraq. This process will not work quickly enough when U.S.-affiliated Iraqis need it the most urgently.

A second path to resettlement, Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs), has also underperformed the current need. As you know, the National Defense Authorization Act of 2008 expanded the availability of SIVs to enable our Iraqi employees to resettle to the United States. Out of a current availability of 15,000 SIVs, only 2,145 have been issued to principal applicants to date. We believe that the underuse of the SIV program is due in large part to a consular interpretation that improperly restricts the scope of that legislation by extending eligibility only to Iraqis who had worked for the United States as direct hires, contractors, or subcontractors. This has denied eligibility to a class of Iraqis whom the Act sought to protect -- Iraqis who have worked for NGOs or private implementing partners funded by the United States Government through grants and cooperative agreements. Many of these individuals provided critical support to U.S. efforts and personnel in Iraq and face threats that are just as grave as the threats faced by direct hires and contractors. It is extremely unlikely that Iraqi extremists will consider the difference in funding mechanisms between grants to NGOs or contracts to companies when choosing which Iraqis to kill. We urge you to amend this interpretation as quickly as is practical.

Finally, we should consider an airlift, for later processing, out of Iraq for those Iraqis who worked for or on behalf of the United States, who wish to leave Iraq, and who cannot be processed before all U.S. troops depart. The British did exactly this as they departed Basra and militant thugs openly hunted Iraqis who had worked for the British, airlifting their surviving Iraqi employees directly to a Royal Air Force base in England. Each of America's principal coalition partners -- Britain, Denmark, and Poland -- has honored its moral obligation to endangered Iraqi employees through airlifts to military bases.

There is precedent for a similar undertaking by the United States in Iraq. In the 1996 Operation Pacific Haven, the United States airlifted more than 6,000 Iraqis to Guam in a matter of weeks, where they were safely processed for resettlement to the United States. While circumstances are somewhat different, our country also used Guam as a processing center for tens of thousands of Vietnamese refugees in 1975.

Madam Secretary, time is of the essence in developing a plan to address this looming crisis as the August 31, 2010 withdrawal date rapidly approaches. The United States has a moral obligation to stand by those Iraqis who have risked their lives -- and the lives of their families -- to stand by us in Iraq for the past seven years, and doing so is also in our strategic self-interest. Providing support for our Iraqi allies will advance U.S. national security interests around the world, particularly in Afghanistan, by sending a message that foreign nationals who support our work abroad can expect some measure of protection.
SIGNED (listed above)
Let's hope Hillary tossed that letter in the trash can. (She didn't, but she should have.) Why?
Pay attention -- and how stupid and uninformed are members of the US Congress -- Hillary's not over Iraq. Maybe it's time to bring back a literacy test? Not for voters, mind you, but for members of Congress. If you can't pass it, you're out. That's how it should work. And Cardin and the rest need to stop wasting Hillary's time with letters that should have never been sent.
In a suitcase tied with string
On the highest shelf
In the closet down the hall
Hidden from myself
Fits of madness, pools of grief
Fevers of desire
How peculiar these remain
Salavaged from the fire
For some I crumpled
Some I burned
Some I tore to shreds
Liftetimes later, here they are
The ones I saved instead
Letters never sent to you
Letters never sent to you
Letters I never sent
Letters never sent to you
-- "Letters Never Sent," written by Carly Simon and Jacob Brackman, first appears on Carly's Letters Never Sent album.
Why should that letter have never been sent to Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State? Because she's not over Iraq and it is damn well known -- or damn well should be -- that she's not over Iraqi refugees. Press statement by Robert Gibbs, White House spokesperson and plus-size model, on August 14, 2009:
Further to discussions that took place during Prime Minister Maliki's recent meetings in Washington, President Obama is pleased to announce that Samantha Power, Senior Director for Multilateral Affairs and Human Rights at the National Security Council in the White House, will coordinate the efforts of the many parts of the U.S. government on Iraqi refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs), including the Department of State, U.S. Agency for International Development, Department of Homeland Security, and Department of Defense.
Who did Barack put in charge of Iraqi refugees? That's right. The old War Whore Samantha Power. So why the hell are lawmakers wasting time by addressing the letter to Hillary? And when can we propose a literacy test for all members of Congress?
And continuing this week's plan to highlight at least one truth teller on the drawdown in each snapshot, today we'll note Camilo Mejia, Iraq War veteran, conscientious objector, speaking to Juan Gonzalez and Amy Goodman on Democracy Now! last Friday (link has video, audio and text):
JUAN GONZALEZ: Camilo, your reaction now to this so-called news of the withdrawal of the last combat brigade from Iraq?

CAMILO MEJÍA: My reaction is that this is just another media stunt, because what is not being reported as strongly as the final troop leaving Iraq is that we're still leaving 50,000 troops in country, not to mention that the 4,000 who are leaving are being replaced by 7,000 security contractors, called "dirty gangs" by Iraqis. I think that basically what we have is just a recycling of forces in what effectively could be called a transferring of military duties from the US military into the hands of corporate paramilitary forces in Iraq.

AMY GOODMAN: Camilo, as you see the coverage over the last twenty-four hours, first, you know, as one of the leaders of Iraq Veterans Against the War, do you think this is the right move, what President Obama is doing? And then, what are your thoughts, hearing, watching soldiers talking about their experiences?

CAMILO MEJÍA: I have not been really tracking the testimonies of soldiers about the alleged withdrawal of the troops. But I do think that it's very troubling to see how the corporate media are covering this withdrawal, because very little to nothing has been said about the fact that we are privatizing just absolutely everything. Now we have the situation in Iraq where huge contracts are going to be given to these corporations to do what the US Army used to do, not that one is better than the other. I think there probably will be less accountability for private security contractors to be doing the job that soldiers, who are at least subject to be court-martialed, but are now going to be in the hands of people like Erik Prince and people like that. We already have over 100,000 contractors in Iraq operating, many of them operating in the capacity of mercenaries. If you read the coverage by the New York Times, you realize that these are not just going to be security guards, these are going to be highly specialized former military personnel who are going to have the skills and the ability to operate radars, to go out there and find improvised explosive devices, so we're talking about EOD personnel. You're talking about people who are pilots. You're talking about people who are going to be operating drones in Iraq. So this is not just people who are going to be bodyguards. You're talking about highly specialized individuals who are going to be replacing soldiers from the US military and other special operations units within the Army. So, basically, it's the privatization of a military occupation. It is what we're witnessing right now, the transferring of military authorities and duties from the US military into corporate paramilitary forces.

No comments: