Thursday, February 27, 2014

Barack's continued lies and America's response

At ICH, there's an article by Josh Gerstein which opens:

Citing the need to preserve evidence related to pending lawsuits, the Obama administration is asking for permission to keep data on billions of U.S. phone calls indefinitely instead of destroying it after five years.

In a motion filed Tuesday with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the Justice Department says the series of lawsuits over the program — including one filed by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) — create a duty for the government to hang on to the so-called metadata currently in the National Security Agency’s computer systems.


More lies from Barack.  Endless lies.

He says one thing and then tries to do another behind our backs.

Did you read Cedric and Wally today:


They note a new poll where 59% of Americans said they were "disappointed" with Barack.


It's a CBS news poll and they, CBS News, note:

 Amid continued pessimism about the economy and direction of the country, 59 percent of Americans say they are disappointed in Mr. Obama's presidency (including 37 percent who are very disappointed); 40 percent are satisfied. Much of this discontent comes from Republicans and independents, but a quarter of Democrats express at least some disappointment. 


 This also goes to points Trina made yesterday in "Barack realties."

I think the whole country is tired of Mr. Do-Nothing who has failed to provide jobs.


But who can always make time to lie to us.



Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

 
Thursday, February 27, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, the assault on Anbar continues, Nouri doesn't have the forces to enter Falluja but continues to pretend otherwise, Osama al-Nujaifi visits Erbil, Senator Patty Murray fights for veterans and their families, and more.



Starting in the US with Senator Patty Murray.







That's Senator Patty Murray speaking on the floor of the Senate today about a very important issue.  For those who need or prefer text, here are her remarks:


“On Tuesday I came here to the floor to discuss one issue we are rarely divided on in this building. And that is our duty to keep the promise we’ve made to provide not only care - but opportunity - to all those who’ve honorably served in our nation’s Armed Forces. The comprehensive veterans legislation before us today is really the test for many members of Congress. Can we put politics aside for the good of our nation’s veterans to keep that promise? Can we show these heroes that - despite our differences - we will work as diligently toward getting them the benefits and care they’ve earned as they have worked for our nation?
 
“Unfortunately our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are indicating they’d prefer to put politics over promises under the guise of an alternative to this bill. Given what we have seen recently on other bills supported by a majority of Americans, I shouldn’t be surprised. But I truly did think this bill would be a different story. Because it contains ideas from both Democrats AND Republicans. Because this is an issue that has historically united this body. And because we have ALL pledged to do whatever it takes on behalf of our veterans. But once again, our colleagues have decided to use unrelated issues to sour this entire effort for the veterans and their families who stand to benefit the most from this comprehensive legislation.
 
“Additionally, with their alternative bill, they’ve stripped away life changing programs for veterans who are looking to take the skills they’ve learned from the battlefield to the boardroom. They’ve decided to halt the expansion of opportunities for caregivers – who are integral to the health and well-being of some of our most vulnerable heroes. But among these – and many other – examples of the Republican effort to derail this landmark legislation, there is one issue I find most egregious: And that is their shameful opposition to providing our catastrophically wounded heroes with access to the reproductive services they so desperately need to start a family.   
 
“This shouldn’t be a political issue – Because this is about giving veterans who have sacrificed everything -- every option we have to help them fulfill the simple dream of starting a family. As we all know, our men and women in uniform have become increasingly susceptible to reproductive, spinal and traumatic brain injuries due to the changing weapons of war. But thanks to modern medicine, many of these servicemembers are being kept alive and are returning home. In fact, as of the New Year, there are 2,348 servicemembers who are living with reproductive, urinary or pelvic injuries. And like so many of our veterans, these men and women come home looking to return to their lives, to find employment, and so often to start a family. Yet what they find when they go to the VA is that the fertility services available don’t meet their complex needs. 
 
“In fact, veterans suffering from these injuries find that the VA is specifically barred from providing more advanced assisted reproduction techniques such as IVF. They are told that despite the fact they have made such an extreme sacrifice for our nation we cannot provide them with the medical services they need to start a family. Veterans like Staff Sergeant Matt Keil  – and his wife Tracy.
 
“Despite returning home from Iraq a quadriplegic, Staff Sergeant Keil and Tracy started exploring the possibilities of starting a family together. But because his injuries prevented him from having children naturally, Tracy turned to the VA and began to explore her options for fertility treatments.  But because of the VA ban, they were turned away. Out of options, the Keil’s decided this was important enough to them that they were willing to pay out-of-pocket for IVF treatment in the private sector – to the tune of almost $32,000 per round of treatment. Thankfully, Staff Sergeant Keil and Tracy welcomed their twins Matthew and Faith into the world after just one round of treatments.
 
“Tracy told me, ‘The day we had our children something changed in both of us. This is exactly what we had always wanted, our dreams had arrived. The VA, Congress and the American People have said countless times that they want to do everything they can to support my husband or make him feel whole again and this is your chance. Having a family is exactly what we needed to feel whole again. Please help us make these changes so that other families can share in this experience.’
 
“Tracy and Matt are not alone. There are many men and women out there who share this common thread of a desperate desire to fulfill their dream of starting a family only to find the catastrophic wounds they sustained while defending our country are now preventing them from seeing that dream through.
 
“It should not be this way. Unfortunately, Republicans are indicating they will not join us in overturning this absurd and antiquated ban. Apparently they’d rather our nation’s heroes spend tens of thousands of dollars in the private sector to get the advanced reproductive treatments they need to start a family. They don’t see the problem in letting our veterans’ marriages dissolve because the stress of infertility, in combination with the stresses of readjusting to life after severe injury, driving their relationship to a breaking point.
 
“Any servicemember who sustains this type of serious injury deserves so much more. Because we came VERY close to making this bill a reality last Congress. In fact, with Tracy Keil watching from the gallery here, we unanimously passed this legislation. Unanimously. 
 
“But here I am today, once again imploring Republicans to stand up and explain to our men and women in uniform – who I know are paying very close attention to this debate – And explain to them why they want to turn their back on the catastrophic reproductive wounds that have become a signature of these wars. On Tuesday, I spoke to a crowded room of heroes from Disabled American Veterans – and told them the heartbreaking story of the Keil Family and why we need this critical legislation. And if their cheers and applause are any indication, I’d say they wholeheartedly agree that our women veterans deserve this, our male veterans deserve this, and our military families deserve this.
 
“So I’ve come to the floor today to ask my colleagues a simple question: Are you willing to tell all those brave men and women -- that didn’t ask questions when they were put in harm’s way -- that you are going to let politics get in the way of our commitment to them? The catastrophic wounds we have seen from injuries in Iraq and Afghanistan have meant that our veterans’ dreams to start a family have been put on hold because of the tremendous cost of IVF services. But we believe that’s a cost of war that VA absolutely should cover and it’s unacceptable to let unrelated issues stand in the way.
 
“Even the major Veterans Service Organizations and their leaders have said issues like Iran sanctions have no place in this comprehensive veterans legislation. People like American Legion Commander Daniel Dellinger who said, ‘Iran is a serious issue that Congress needs to address, but it cannot be tied to S. 1982, which is extremely important as our nation prepares to welcome millions of U.S. military servicemen and women home from war.’
 
“Or IAVA Founder and CEO Paul Rieckhoff, who called this comprehensive legislation, ‘a game changer that will change the trajectory for millions of veterans for decades to come.’
 
“As serious and timely as they may be, unrelated issues like Iran sanctions are calculated attempts to intentionally dismantle our bipartisan effort to expand health care, education opportunities, employment and other benefits for our nation’s heroes. We can’t allow our commitment to them to lapse or to get caught up in separate issues or political grandstanding.
 
“I’d like to once again thank the Senator from Vermont and his staff for their tireless work to work to bring this legislation here to the floor.
 

“I hope our colleagues will reconsider opposing this common-sense step that will give those who have sacrificed everything the reproductive treatments they need to start a family.”


Good for Senator Murray.

But I'm really confused here because we've been attending House and Senate Veterans Affairs Committee hearings for years and what Senator Murray's calling for and backing has never been seen as controversial in hearings.  It's been seen as needed and no member of either Committee over the years has ever uttered an objection in a hearing.  So these objections that are coming now?  No one offered to the faces of veterans and their families.


Senator Murray notes the Keil's in her statement today.  And no one had an objection when Tracy Keil appeared before the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee and declared,  "I'd like to emphasize this statement: War time changes a family, it shouldn't take away the ability to have one."


Tracy's husband is Iraq War veteran Matt Keil.  She appeared before the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee June 12. Senator Murray was the Chair of the Committee then (she now chairs the Senate Budget Committee and Senator Bernie Sanders now chairs the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee).  Murray had  S. 3313, The Women Veterans and Other Health Care Improvement Act of 2012.  to address these issue.  We covered that hearing in the June 27th and June 28th snapshots and let's drop back so we can let Tracy Keil discuss why legislation is needed:



My husband Matt was shot in the neck while on patrol in Ramadi, Iraq on February 24, 2007 just 6 weeks after we were married.  The bullet went through the right side of his neck, hit his vertebral artery, went through his spinal cord and exited through his left shoulder blade.  Matt instantly because a quadriplegic.  When I first saw him 3 days after he was injured I was in shock, they explained to me that he had a "Christopher Reeve type injury."  He would be on a ventilator for the rest of his life and would never move his arms or legs.
Matt and I looked at each other in his hospital room at Walter Reed and he asked me if I still loved him? I said "baby you're stuck with me!" at that moment we knew that we would be okay if we stayed in this together.  I knew that we just needed to work really hard to get Matt off his ventilator to increase his life expectancy.  Ultimately we moved to Craigh Hospital in Denver to be closer to family support.
Four weeks to the day of arriving at Craig Hospital in Denver, Matt was officially off of his ventilator and we could truly concentrate on him doing physical rehabilitation.  Matt has regained about 10% function of his left arm but not his hand.  He was feeling good and getting used to his new normal of being in a wheelchair and asking for help for everything.
It was while we were at Craig Hospital that we started talking about having a family.  Craig doctors talked to us about in vitro fertilzation and recommended some doctors for us to speak to when we were ready to start a family.  We started to get really excited that even though so much had been taken away from Matt physically that we could still have the future we always dreamed of. 
My husband is the most amazing man I have ever met, he is strong, honest and loyal and he wanted us to both have everything we always wanted before his injury and we agreed that this injury wasn't the end, it was the beginning of a new life, and we were in this together.
We had our whole lives ahead of us.  Matt was just 24 when he was injured and I was 28.  We are very fortunate that he survived his injuries that day and we made a promise to each other on our wedding day "For better or worse, in sickness and in health" I meant every word and still do today.  It is a challenge for my husband and I everyday but we knew we still wanted to start a family.  I remember back when he was in rehabilitation at Craig  Hospital it's all we could talk about was when we were going to be adjusted to our new normal and when we would we be ready to have children. We always knew we had wanted children.
In 2008 we moved into a fully handicap accessible home built for us by Homes For Our Troops.  We were starting to feel like things were falling into place in our lives.  We felt like we were starting to get back on track to where we were before Matt was injured.
His injury unfortunately prevents him from having children naturally.  In mid 2008 I started asking the VA what services they could offer my husband and I to assist us with fertility.  I can remember hitting road blocks at every turn.  I decided to take things into my own hands and write letters and make phone calls to try and get anyone to listen to us that we needed help.  Fertility treatments are very expensive and since I had left my full time job we were still adjusting to living on one income.
I felt helpless and hopeless and thought that our dreams of having a family may never come true.  The VA finally said that they would cover the sperm withdrawal from my husband . . . that costs $1,000 and that they would store the sperm for us at no charge.


It was very difficult when I found out there was no help available for us from the VA or Tricare. I felt very defeated, sad, disappointed and in some ways I felt helpless.  I researched everything I could about how to get Tricare to cover some of the costs but they couldn't because it was a direct result of my husband's injury and that fell under the VA.  The VA said that they had no programs in place for this sort of thing.  I even started asking non profits to assist with the cost and they couldn't help due to the other immediate needs of injured service members.


Why did Tracy and Matt suffer?

Because there was nothing in place to take their situation into account.  There are many other veterans families in the same situation.  They're not asking for a high rise or a shiny car, they just want to be able to have a family.  And they can.  It is medically possible.

Matt Keil didn't say, "Hey, I want a vacation.  I think I'll go to Ramadi and work on my tan."  The US government sent him to Iraq and that is where he was injured.  How dare anyone in Congress think they can ignore his needs now.


And there was no objection in the Senate in 2012.  The following year, US House Rep Rick Larsen noted, "The Senate unanimously approved a version of this bill authored by Sen. Patty Murray last year, but the House did not act on the companion legislation that Larsen had introduced before the end of the 112th Congress. Murray reintroduced the Senate version of the bill earlier this year."  So in 2012, universal support and, two years later, someone's 'rethought' it?  Maybe they need to explain to the veterans?  Rick Larsen is a Democrat.  He made his observation when he and Republican House member Steve Stivers joined together to introduce similar legislation in the House.


It also needs to be pointed out that DoD  provides this service  for service members.  It's just VA that's not providing it for veterans.  It is thought that the Iraq War and the Afghanistan War have produced approximately 2,000 veterans who could utilize this service.  Why are they being denied it?  How does this not fall under needed health care.

The costs would not 'break the bank' and it really is the right thing to do.  To quote Tracy Keil one more time, "I'd like to emphasize this statement: War time changes a family, it shouldn't take away the ability to have one."  Shame on anyone in the US Congress who can't grasp -- or refuses to grasp -- that.


Violence has slammed Iraq this month. Just through yesterday, Iraq Body Count counts 853 violent deaths in Iraq so far this month.  And the violence didn't stop yesterday.  The Buenos Aires Herald counts 52 deaths today.


National Iraqi News Agency reports an al-Shaab bus bombing claimed 1 life and left three more people injured, Commander Rashid Falih announced 4 suspects were shot dead in Anbar, a Tarmiyah bombing left three Iraqi soldiers injured, Commander Mohamed Khalaf al-Dulaimi of the 10th Army Division announced 10 suspects were killed in Krahh Village near Kirkuk, 1 person was shot dead in Muqdadiyah, Baghdad Operations Command's Saad Maan announced 7 snipers were shot dead outside Qarma, an armed battle in Albu Jabir left 3 rebels dead (and two more injured), the Ministry of the Interior announced they killed 4 Da'ash "near al-Mowdhafeen bridge in Anbar," a Mosul attack left one police officer injured, the Ministy of Interior says they killed 4 Da'ash in the desert of Ishtar, and a Sadr City motorcycle bombing left 11 dead and 35 injured.

Kareem Raheem, Suadad al-Salhy, Ned Parker and Mark Heinrich (Reuters) report  the death toll of the Sadr City bombing increased to 31 with the number injured increasing to 51.  Mu Xuequan (Xinhau) notes the death toll then rose to 32 with the injured rising to 56.  The Irish Times adds, "The motorcycle was in a market in the Shia Muslim neighbourhood that sells used bikes and was filled with people, mostly young men."

It should also be noted that many outlets are running with usual claims of Sunnis and blah blah.  Why would Sadr City be attacked by Sunnis?  And the attack also comes after yesterday's report that Moqtada al-Sadr had left and returned to Iran for more religious studies.

Who knows who attacked Sadr City?

But the best guess anyone could make right now would be that a Shi'ite group attacked and that possibly the increased danger in Sadr City is why Moqtada left for Iran.


Moving to another topic,  Anadolu Agency reports Iraq's Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi went to Erbil (in the Kurdistan Region) today to meet with  KRG President Massoud Barazni and discuss the "tension between the sides [Baghdad and Erbil] over oil exports and budget distribution."  NINA reports Sadr bloc MP Bahaa al-Araji has talked about the visit, "Al-Araji told the National Iraqi News Agency / NINA / that Nujaifi’s visit to the Kurdistan region came upon the authorization of the heads of political blocs , who met with him in order to finally resolve the standoff between the federal government and the Regional government. " Hiwa Barznjy (Niqash) explains the issues behind the conflict:

Conflict between Baghdad and Iraqi Kurdistan over oil exports has resulted in something of a financial crisis in the northern region. State employees haven’t been paid, MPs are threatening to resign and there are rumours that Turkey was asked for a loan. Negotiations are continuing but some senior politicians are saying that Iraqi Kurdistan is ready for financial independence if a compromise is not reached soon.

Negotiators from the semi-autonomous region of Iraqi Kurdistan have visited Baghdad three times already this year. They went there to discuss many of the seemingly-intractable conflicts that the partially-independent region populated mainly by Iraqis of Kurdish ethnicity is having with the rest of the country, as governed from Baghdad.

The list of these conflicts is similar to those of past years: The disputed areas of Iraq which the Iraqi Kurdish say should belong to their region but which Baghdad says belong to Iraq proper. The oil and gas law - Iraqi Kurdistan has one and Baghdad does not. Who pays for the services of the Iraqi Kurdish military, the Peshmerga. Iraqi Kurdistan’s share of national income, based on oil earnings.




Nouri al-Maliki has been unable to stop the KRG's various oil and gas deals because there's no national oil and gas law.  Along with stomping and screaming like an angry child, Nouri's also attempted to use the country's budget to blackmail the Kurds.   Press TV (link is text and video) notes:

The president of Iraq’s Kurdistan Region says Baghdad’s decision to withhold the budget is a declaration of war against Kurdistan. President Massoud Barzani’s comments come as Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki continues to withhold Kurdistan’s share of the national budget. That includes monthly wages of more than $700m for hundreds of thousands of government employees. 


Rudaw adds, "The Iraqi government has suspended the flights of two small airlines that operate between Europe and the Kurdistan Region, an airport official in Erbil said, the latest in an oil feud between Baghdad and the autonomous Kurds."  NINA reports:

The President of Kurdistan, Massoud Barzani said: "The source of the problems is (breach the constitution and the monopoly of power and the failure to provide security)."
Barzani added, during a meeting with the Director General of the Department of Middle East and North Africa in the French Foreign Ministry, Francois Giroux, according to a statement to the presidency of the Kurdistan region, " getting Iraq away from all the meanings of the state and non- delivery of services and the failure to provide security is the result of breaching the Constitution and the monopoly of power."
Barzani expressed his hope that "the political parties' commitment by the constitution and hold elections for the House of Representatives opens avenues towards resolving the problems in Iraq."



Nouri has been a huge failure.  The Economist notes of his assault on Anbar:


Since sending the Iraqi army to dismantle a protest camp in Ramadi, the capital of Anbar, in December, Iraqi security forces have been embroiled in a standoff with tribal fighters, some backed by al-Qaeda types who are also fighting in neighbouring Syria. From a former American base, the Iraqi army has mortared the outskirts of the city of Fallujah, sending over 300,000 civilians fleeing in the biggest displacement since the civil war of 2006-2007.
Iraq’s government bills the battle as a fight against al-Qaeda rather than a struggle against Sunni Iraqis who say the government arrests and executes its young men and has shut it out of power. Unable to speed up delivery of American attack helicopters, the Iraqi government has persuaded the American government to lease it some. Both Iraqi and foreign journalists are banned from the area.

All Iraq News notes that Sabah Karhot, Chair of the Anbar Provincial Council, is declaring that Nouri's extended a 'cease-fire,' "'The duration granted by the Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki to suspend the military operations in Fallujah city, was extended for a week.''

What a load of nonsense.

Nouri did a 72-hour move he called a 'cease-fire' (one he called '72 hours' as well) and it wasn't (see Monday's snapshot).  Civilians in Anbar were injured and killed by the military's bombings.

Get honest, it's insulting at this point to lie so.

Nouri doesn't have to forces to enter Falluja.

He's been threatening to count to three and turn this car around, he means it, for about five weeks now.

Why?

Because it's past time to enter Falluja.

But he can't.  The military keeps deserting on him.  They don't want to go in.  I doubt they're 'scared,' it's like Nouri 2008 attack on Basra.

That resulted in mass exodus from the ranks.  They self-checked out because they didn't want to go hand-to-hand with other Iraqis, they didn't see signing up for the Iraqi military meaning they had to kill Iraqis.  It's happened again.  It's the least reported development in the assault on Anbar, the defections. There was a very high profile one over the weekend but AP, Reuters, AFP all ignored it.  All Iraq News reported, "The chairman of the military council of Anbar, Ali Hatim al-Sulaiman, fled of Anbar to unknown destination."


Nouri's a War Criminal.  He's not being nice or doing a 'cease-fire.'  He's had an excuse one week after another.  And the reason for these excuses?   He doesn't have the forces to enter Falluja successfully.


Despite Nouri's attacks on the Iraqi people, the White House keeps insisting he must armed and armed again.   Erin Evers (Human Rights Watch) observes:

The US has long supported the Iraqi government with arms, though the Iraqi government has committed serious, widespread abuses against its own people in the name of counterterrorism. That has proven ineffective in combating terrorism but has stoked resentment. Psaki acknowledged that the US has “providedthe Iraqi military and security forces with more than $15 billion in equipment, services, and training,” and recently delivered to Iraq “Hellfire missiles and hundreds of small arms along with large quantities of small arms and tank ammunition,” but did not address the copious evidence giving cause for concern that Iraq will use these weapons to continue abuses.
The State Department’s own 2012 Human Rights report noted that “Human rights violations committed by [Iraqi Security Forces] personnel were rarely investigated, and perpetrators were seldom punished,” and that the government “did not take widespread action to reform security forces to improve human rights.”
The new Human Rights Watch research about the treatment of women in Iraq’s criminal justice system, for example, shows that security forces frequently subject detained women to torture and ill-treatment, including the threat of sexual abuse. In early January, Anbar residents told us that the army’s mortar fire on residential neighborhoods had killed at least 25 residents in the first few days of fighting in Fallujah.

In November, we documented how Iraqi security forces, including agents from Special Weapons and Tactics [SWAT] in the Counterterrorism Service [CTS]—precisely the security forces who, along with the army, are at the forefront of the fighting in Anbar—abused residents by surrounding and closing off majority Sunni neighborhoods, illegally raiding homes and carrying out mass arrests. Since 2010 we have repeatedly reported that security forces including SWAT, Federal Police, and the army use unlawful force against peaceful protesters; carry out illegal arrests, interrogations, and detentions, and systematically use torture during interrogations.




It's just one critical pan after another for thug Nouri al-Maliki.  Justin Marozzi (The National Newspaper) reviews constitutional attorney Zaid al-Ali's new book The Struggle for Iraq's Future: How Corruption, Incompetence and Sectarianism Have Undermined Democracy:


Much of this book, in fact, can be read as a passionate polemic against Al Maliki who, with the Americans, must surely take a great share of the responsibility for the unholy mess in which Iraq is now stewing.
Instead of seeking to build an Iraq that eschewed sectarianism, al-Ali writes, “his sole concern became to capture the state and to divide and conquer opponents, to remain in power for as long as possible”. By those limited, cynical criteria, so typical of Iraqi politics in living memory, and perhaps far beyond, Al Maliki’s efforts have been an unqualified success: parliament emasculated; armed forces shunted under his direct control; the judiciary nobbled; critics intimidated and silenced.



















 


Wednesday, February 26, 2014

Revolution returns

Revolution returned on NBC tonight with new episodes.

And I picked up the phone.

Twice.

I thought both must be emergencies because both know don't call me during this show.

Neither was an emergency.  But if I miss something, that's why.

Let's start with Munroe and his son Conner.

Remember, last December, they and Charlie tried to pull some sting and Munroe and Conner (or Monroe) got caught after.

They're now going to have to fight to the death.

Conner hopes they can escape but Monroe tells him he's not being realistic.  He tells him he always leads from his right because -- and no one, not even Miles know this -- an injury has left him with a blind spot on his left side.

Conner doens't want to use that but agrees once Monroe tells him that he exposed Conner's mother leading to her being shot and killed.

Charlie's trying to rescue them.  She goes to the woman Duncan and asks for help, even points out Duncan once slept with Monroe.

Duncan orders her goons to capture Charlie.

She then turns Charlie over to the same wackjobs that have Monroe.

I thought this was a fake out and Duncan was really helping Charlie.

No.

But Duncan's efforts?  They don't protect her and Charlie's the one who rescues her and then they rescue Conner and Monroe.

To thank Charlie, Duncan offers five of her men.  Monroe wrongly thinks they'll be part of his militia under his command.  Nope, they'll be under Charlie's command.

(Before, when Monroe thought he was going to die, he asked Charlie to find someone -- "not Charlie" -- and start a family and not be alone.)

Miles and Rachel are dealing with Jason and Nevil who want to lead them somewhere.

A trap as Miles gets.  He asks Rachel not to go with because, he says, he can't do anything if he's worried about her.

Miles is calling Jason "nipples" -- I must have been on the phone when the reason for that was stated.  I'm not complaining.  I think it's a funny name for Jason.

It is a trap, Rachel shows up with firepower.  (I'm on the phone during the bulk of this.)  At the end, Jason and Nevil explain they're being forced to find Monroe and kill him to save Julia (Nevil's wife, Jason's mother). 

They wish them luck but Rachel and Miles aren't going to give up Monroe.

Aaron and Priscilla are in Texas, remember?  Locked in a hotel room by their old partner Peter.

Aaron sees his dead recent wife (Priscilla's his wife from before the blackout) and Priscilla sees her father.

Both tell them that they're sick.  Aaron's wife adds she's dying.

Peter is thrilled they saw it.

It's the nanoites speaking.

Aaron tries to isolate the code.  And there's a flash and things stand still.  Then Aaron wakes up in bed with Priscilla and the blackout never happened.

Preparing us for next week's episode where Aaron is seeing what would happen if the blackout never happened.


Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

 
Wednesday, February 26, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, Nouri's assault on Anbar continues, Osama al-Nujaifi says Anbar requires a political solution, new rumor is Moqtada al-Sadr has left Iraq, American business is going into Iraq -- northern Iraq -- specifically the KRG, Nouri continues to attempt to blackmail the Kurds with the national budget, and much more.


Senator Patty Murray is the Chair of the Senate Budget Committee and serves on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee.  Her office issued the following:





FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                                            CONTACT: Murray Press Office
Wednesday, February 26th, 2014                                                                           202-224-2834
 
Senator Murray Strongly Denounces Republican Efforts to Continue Ban on In Vitro Fertilization for Veterans
 


Republican bill would leave in place “absurd and antiquated” ban that prevents catastrophically wounded veterans from starting their own families using VA services

 
Young Iraq and Afghanistan veterans with reproductive injuries from combat wounds would continue to be forced to pay tens of thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket cost under Republican bill
 


(Washington, D.C.) – Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray, a senior member of the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee and author of legislation to overturn a ban on providing in-vitro fertilization services as part of VA medical care, denounced Senate Republicans for leaving that provision out of their own veterans’ legislation that they are introducing on the floor of the U.S. Senate. Murray’s provision to overturn the ban is included in The Comprehensive Veterans Health and Benefits and Military Retirement Pay Restoration Act of 2014 which was introduced by Senator Bernie Sanders and is currently being considered on the floor of the U.S. Senate. Senator Murray told the personal story of one family forced to pay thousands out-of-pocket because of the ban on the Senate floor yesterday.
 
“I’m stunned that Senate Republicans are indicating that they will not join us in overturning this absurd and antiquated ban,” said Senator Murray. “The catastrophic wounds we have seen from injuries in Iraq and Afghanistan have meant that our veterans’ dreams to start a family have been put on hold because of the tremendous cost of IVF services. We believe that’s a cost of war that the VA absolutely should cover and that it’s unacceptable to let politics stand in the way. I truly hope that Republicans will reconsider opposing this common-sense step that will give those who have sacrificed everything the reproductive treatments they need to start a family.”
 
###
---
Meghan Roh
Press Secretary | New Media Director
Office of U.S. Senator Patty Murray
Mobile: (202) 365-1235
Office: (202) 224-2834


Senator Patty Murray's office
 
 
 
RSS Feed for Senator Murray's office



Why are we opening with that?

Since we opened with a hearing on veterans yesterday, I planned to include the above statement at the end of the snapshot.  But a writer whose work does not get noted here because he is attack, attack Republicans objected.

I need to make this point clear (I think Shirley did in an e-mail reply six weeks ago to this same writer).  I'm not interested in your partisan b.s. to win elections.  I'm not interested in demonizing one half of the country. When Republicans were in power, I called them out.  By contrast, a lot of writers have spent the last years zooming in on Republicans to avoid holding Barack Obama accountable. So they, as the writer in question does, churn out 'scandals' to try to whip up a frenzy.  I don't have time for that nonsense or that distraction.

Senator Murray is a Democrat, I think she has a strong voting record with much to applaud.  I also know that she reaches across the aisle repeatedly.

When she issues a statement calling out obstruction -- by anyone -- we will note it.

In terms of the topic itself?

We've covered that topic repeatedly here.  Time permitting, we'll go into this topic again this week.  It's one that seriously matters.

The Kurds.  The peaceful area, the non-squeaky wheel.  I'm as guilty as anyone else of putting the KRG off to another day due to more dramatic events in central Iraq.  So let's move over to Iraq and start with the Kurds.


February 15th, in DC, Peter Galbraith did a presentation the Kurds.  Mutlu Civiroglu (Rudaw) reported on it last week noting:


Speaking about the current situation in the Kurdistan Region, and contrasting it with the rest of Iraq, Galbraith noted that American citizens needed a visa to travel to Iraq, but not to the Kurdistan Region. 
He noted that many international airlines do not fly to Baghdad, but they do to Erbil. 
Talking about his most recent visit to Kurdistan, Galbraith said each time he goes to Erbil he cannot recognize the city because of the rapid development.

The success of the KRG -- especially when compared to other parts of Iraq -- really inflame Iraq's chief thug and prime minister Nouri al-Maliki.  Eight years, Nouri's had to bring peace to Iraq but he's failed.  He's failed so poorly that his actions only encourage more violence.  And yet, in the north, it's a completely different story for the Kurdistan Regional Government.

Monday, the US Consulate in Erbil issued the following:




Deputy Principal Officer Stephen Gee and Consulate General Erbil staff joined businesspeople, members of the diplomatic community and friends from around the Iraqi Kurdistan Region to attend the opening of well-known U.S. franchise Pizza Hut on February 18 in Erbil.
Kuwait-based Kout Food Group  plans to open a second Pizza Hut restaurant in Erbil, provide a pizza delivery service and expand to Dahuk and Sulaimaniyah.




And this week, more business news for the KRG, not for Nouri.  First off, let's note Joseph Pennington:


Joseph Pennington, a Career Member of the Senior Foreign Service with the rank of Counselor, assumed his duties as Consul General in Erbil in July 2013.  Prior to his arrival in Erbil, Mr. Pennington served as Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Prague, Czech Republic (2010-13) and held the same position in Yerevan, Armenia (2007-10).


Here's a photo of Pennihgton:



On February 15, Consul General Joseph Pennington attended the grand opening of U.S. franchise Cinnabon/Carvel Ice Cream's first shop in Iraq, in Erbil. Storeowners plan to expand to Dahuk, Sulaimaniyah, Baghdad, Basra, and Najaf. 


Judit Neurink (Rudaw) reports Ace Hardware, Marriot and Hyatt Hotels are among those "setting up shop in Kurdistan" and a reception Pennington attended to note continued interest on the part of American businesses.  Neurick reports:


American companies in Kurdistan are mainly active in oil and gas, security and building. Pennington expects these activities to broaden in the future. “There is a lot of interest in the States for doing business here. But as it is Iraq, security plays a role and companies are cautious. Of course, here are fewer attacks than elsewhere in Iraq, but there still are threats.”
The reception was held at a moment of diplomatic tension between the US and Kurdistan, with Kurdish President Massoud Barzani cancelling a visit to the White House over the fact that Kurdistan’s two main political parties – the Kurdistan Democratic Party and Patriotic Union of Kurdistan -- still feature on a terrorism blacklist from the days they resisted Saddam Hussein’s regime.
Kurdish politicians have shown frustration over the lack of support from Washington in their conflict with Baghdad over oil revenues, which has recently led to Baghdad withholding Kurdistan’s constitutional part of the national budget.
Although none of the diplomats at the reception wanted to comment on this hot issue, Qubad Talabani, the KRG Minister for Coordination and Follow Up, voiced some frustration. Until a year-and-a-half ago he was the KRG representative in Washington, where he set up the business council.
“I’d like the United States to see us as an asset, but they still see us through the Iraqi lens,” he said when asked for his dearest wish for the relations with the US. “What we do here has implications in Turkey, in Syria and on the oil markets. Our relationship should reflect that.”


Qubad Talabani's words matter.  Not just due to his position, but especially due to his family.  Those are stronger words than his father's ever managed.  He is the second son of Iraq's First Lady Hero Ibrahim Ahmed  and Iraq's President Jalal Talabani.  In recent weeks, Hero has spent her time in dialogue with the Iranian government (primarily reassuring them that a government would be formed in the KRG following last fall's elections).  Jalal?  December 2012,  Iraqi President Jalal Talabani suffered a stroke.   The incident took place late on December 17, 2012 following Jalal's argument with Iraq's prime minister and chief thug Nouri al-Maliki (see the December 18, 2012 snapshot).  Jalal was admitted to Baghdad's Medical Center Hospital.    Thursday, December 20, 2012, he was moved to Germany.  He remains in Germany currently.

Qubad is correct, there are regional implications and the US government needs to see the KRG through its own lens, not as it seen by Baghdad.

As the business continues to pour into the KRG, it must be very humiliating for Nouri.  The security levels in the KRG, contrasted with the non-stop violence in the rest of Iraq, must leave Nouri feeling small and impotent.  And that must mix with his own greed leading him to rage against the KRG and attempt to destroy its efforts to transport oil to Turkey via a pipeline.  Nouri's government repeatedly insisted last week that Turkey had agreed not to provide Turkey with oil via a KRG and Turkey pipeline but would instead provide crude oil only via Iraq's State Oil Marketing Organisation.  Business Day Online notes that KRG spokesperson Safeen Dizayee disagrees and states, "Absolutely we have not reached any agreement to export oil via SOMO. The dialogue and discussions are still underway."
\
Nidal al-Leithi (Al-Monitor) reports:

Former Iraqi Oil Minister Issam al-Chalabi revealed that a latent crisis is brewing between Iraq’s Oil Ministry and the largest oil companies in Iraq.
In a statement to Azzaman, Chalabi, who is now serving as an international adviser for energy affairs, held the Ministry of Oil responsible for this crisis, saying that it will affect oil production in the long run.
Chalabi criticized the role Turkey played in the oil crisis between the federal government and the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG). He told Azzaman that Turkey would have to terminate its contract with the KRG and go back to its previous policy, which is contracting with the federal government in terms of oil investments and pipeline extensions.


I'm not really sure why his opinion is worth quoting.  He was an Oil Minister.  Decades ago.  March 1987 to October 1990.  (He then fled Iraq.)  And he's been making this argument for years.  Not really sure why anyone cares.  There is no oil law.  Nouri  swore to the US government in 2007 that he'd get the oil and gas law passed, he never did. Chalabi insists this means Saddam's oil law is in place.

That's really not how it works.  And the KRG has more rights -- and has since 2003 -- than it did under Sadam Hussein's presidency.  Kirkuk Now notes, "On Sunday, Nechirvan Barzani, the Prime Minister of the KRG, held talks in Baghdad with the Kurdish ministers and the members of the Iraqi Parliament concerning the continuing disagreements between the two governments."  On that Sunday meeting, the Kurdistan Regional Government notes:


Several viewpoints were exchanged regarding recent developments throughout the course of the meeting. A four-point declaration was unanimously adopted outlining the Kurdistan Region’s position:
 

  1.    Iraqi Kurdistan is part of Iraq according to the Constitution and is therefore entitled to all rights and authorities granted to it as stipulated by the Constitution. This includes its share of the budget derived from the national income. The central government cannot cut salaries under any pretext to use as leverage against the KRG.
     
  2. Although the KRG has other options at its disposal to provide salaries and meet other needs of its people, negotiations should continue between the Iraqi Federal Government and the KRG based on the fulfillment of the Kurdistan Region’s constitutional rights.
     
  3. We call upon the Iraqi Prime Minister to rescind this illegal and unconstitutional policy. The Kurdistan Region’s share of the budget and salaries is a constitutional right and should be disbursed. Pending issues with the KRG should be resolved through dialogue and negotiation.
     
  4. We call upon respected religious authorities, the United Nations, governments of countries with relations with Iraq, member states of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, and member states of the Arab League to take responsibility by using their influence to end the policy of economic sanctions levied against the people and the government of the Kurdistan Region. This policy is unjustified in its entirety, blatantly violates constitutional law, and stands against international accords and the basic principles of human rights.  


NINA reports that the Patriotic Unionf of Kurdistan's Deputy Chair, Barham Salih, met with representatives from Turkey to discuss developments:


The Web site of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) said that Saleh received the new Turkish Ambassador Farouk Qamakja , and the Turkish Consul in the Kurdistan region Mohammed Akef, and discussed with them the latest developments of the situation in Iraq and the region , in addition to the problems between the province and the federal government .

Over the weekend,  Press TV reported:

Baghdad is withholding wages for hundreds of thousands of Kurdish employees in an attempt to apparently punish the semi-autonomous Kurdish region over its controversial oil exports.
“There is this mindset and now a continuation of this mindset whereby the central government does not believe in the existence of Kurdistan region. If we look back their opposition was contained to the parliament and the government but now we see that their opposition is directly towards the income of the people, which is the wages,” said Kurdish MP Umed Khoshnaw from the Kurdistan Democratic Party.
Last week, Iraq's Kurdish Deputy Prime Minister Roj Nuri Shawais called on Kurdish ministers in the Iraqi cabinet to resign if Baghdad refused to solve the problem.


Aswat al-Iraq notes the KRG is calling for the international community and religious clerics within Iraq to call on "Baghdad to end the economic blockade and negligence policies against the Kurdish people and government."  NINA adds that MP Ashwaq Aljaf of the Kurdistan Alliance joined that call today:


She said in a statement today : "The logic of humanitarian , legal, constitutional and religious criteria do not give the right to Baghdad to fight the sons of the region using of employees' salaries as a lever to force the region to succumb to the policies of Baghdad , adding that the region is seeking by Constitutional and Legal means to resolve the outstanding problems with Baghdad , but did not think one day that central government of Baghdad use the employees' salaries as leverage to impose the will of political conflicts as doing Baghdad government.


At Rudaw, Yerevan Saeed weighs in with his opinion:

When it comes to oil, for me it’s a matter of survival or death. It’s about whether KRG has to give the sharpest ever sword to Baghdad to slaughter us or keep it and leverage it to ensure its political and economic survival.
Indeed, it’s just unthinkable that the KRG should grant Baghdad authority over its oil to fund the central government’s multi-billion dollar arm deals. These could potentially be used against Kurdistan once more, even as Baghdad refuses to compensate thousands of Kurdish victims due from the genocidal campaigns in Kurdistan.
How can the KRG trust Baghdad? What guarantee that, if KRG gives up its right to export oil, Iraq will not come up with more excuses? Oil is the biggest card KRG currently holds. If it loses, the next thing to expect could be the dispatching of the Iraqi army to Kurdistan under different pretexts.


The US government has verbally insisted they are staying out of the matter but if they were staying out of the matter, they'd stop backing Nouri and quit pressuring the Kurds to agree to what Nouri wants.


Cleric and movement Moqtada al-Sadr announced his political retirement February 15th.  February 18th, he delivered a speech --  CounterPunch posted the speech in full  -- emphasizing his decision.  NINA notes the rumors that Moqtada left Iraq today, "The sources noted in a press statement that Mr. Muqtada al-Sadr left today's afternoon the city of Najaf heading to the Islamic Republic of Iran in order to complete his religious studies and stay away from the political scene as he officially announced for all Iraqis."



MondayAhmed Rasheed (Reuters) reported, "Iran has signed a deal to sell Iraq arms and ammunition worth $195 million, according to documents seen by Reuters - a move that would break a U.N. embargo on weapons sales by Tehran."  The Tower points out, "The Obama administration, which has been criticized for allowing Iraq to slip into Iran’s orbit even as the U.S. continued supplying Baghdad with Hellfire missiles and small arms, assured journalists that American officials were pressing for answers at the highest levels." Reuters adds, "Some in Washington worry about providing sensitive U.S. military equipment to a country they worry is becoming too close to Iran."

There are humanitarian issues and concerns to the US government arming Nouri.  Human Rights Watch's Erin Evers has a column at Huffington Post detailing the many abuses of Nouri al-Maliki's government and concluding:


The government failed to protect its citizens, instead further entrenching abuses and giving further momentum to Iraq's cruel cycle of instability. The United States government should be taking every possible step to ensure that its weapons are not going to be used for further abuses.
In contrast, the administration's concern about the possibility of Iran's arms sale to Iraq seems disappointingly misplaced in light of the overwhelming evidence of abusive and illegal techniques by SWAT, the federal police, and the army -- strong evidence that the weapons being supplied would be used for further abuse. With Congress too having missed the boat on its responsibility to make decisions in line with the US's human rights obligations, the inevitable result is that the US becomes complicit in the rapidly devolving situation in Iraq. 

At least someone remembers the Iraqi people when having this discussion. Monday,  The Hill published a column by retired General Ron Griffith and retired Lt Gen Jay Garner who argue:

The latest rise in violence and increasing crackdowns on al-Maliki’s political opponents should raise concerns about the Iraqi government’s use of U.S.-provided weapons, and the conditions under which the United States should allow more weapons to Iraq.   
Iraq’s recent budget, which passed with no Kurds represented, combined with al-Maliki’s threat to cancel the KRG budget predicts the length to which he may go to inflict his political will. This has heightened Kurdish and Sunni concerns about al-Maliki's ability to buy advanced weapons to punish political disagreement with Baghdad.  
The January 15, 2014 U.S. Presidential Policy Directive unequivocally mandates that U.S. arms transfers not violate human rights or any international humanitarian law.  Thus, it is imperative that if the United States is to continue providing arms to Iraq, then, at a minimum, conditions and monitoring mechanisms should be imposed to prevent either deliberate or unwitting misuse of those weapons (for example, against Iraqis who oppose the government).   

Harvey Morris (Rudaw) notes the column and offers:

The territory of the Kurdistan Regional Government has been spared the turmoil that has engulfed other regions of Iraq. But General Griffith and General Garner said the KRG was being short-changed by Baghdad when it came to assisting its own measures to combat al-Qaeda infiltration.
They cited Mr. Maliki’s threat to cancel the KRG budget as indicative of the lengths he might go to impose his political will.
“The Kurdistan region also faces an al-Qaeda threat on its western border with Syria - the same threat facing the rest of Iraq,” they wrote.  “But, as the U.S. provides Baghdad with weapons to combat al-Qaeda, the Iraqi government refuses arms for the Kurdish Peshmarga to protect against the very same threat.”That amounted to Mr. Mailiki putting political considerations above national security requirements. “U.S. policy in this violence-plagued region should be that of an honest broker rather than an arms broker to an unstable government,” the retired generals concluded.Critics of the Obama administration’s policy towards the Maliki government include not only retired military men but also politicians concerned about Baghdad’s close ties with Iran.


Aref Youssef (Turkish Press) notes a statement from the Ministry of Defense insisting there is no deal and "MP Hassan al-Saneed, who is also head of the Iraqi parliament's security and defense committee, said Tuesday that Iraq had signed a deal to import light weapons from Iran."

Who?

In December of 2011, Michael Kamber (New York Times) described Hassan al-Saneed as "a close ally of the prime minister's" and, in July 2010, Caroline Alexander (Bloomberg News) described him as "a senior advisor to al-Maliki."

Danielle Wiener-Bronner (The Wire) hypothesizes about the alleged weapons deal, "Still, the Iranian arms contribution would be negligible compared to America's, suggesting that the deal is a political move for Maliki -- who would need Iranian support to win a third term in office."


Through Tuesday, Iraq Body Count counts 822 violent deaths in Iraq so far this month.

At least 35 are dead and forty-five injured in today's violence.

National Iraqi News Agency reports an east Kirkuk bombing left one police member injured, an armed battle in Albu Fashgah Village left 3 rebels dead, an al-Habbaniyah roadside bombing left 3 Iraqi soldiers dead, a Mosul grenade attack left four Department of Health employees injured, a second Mosul grenade attack (this one near the Kurdistan Democratic Party's headquarters) left six people injuredNouri's forces say they killed 8 militants in Ramadi, Nouri's forces say they killed 3 members of Da'ash, a Hermat car bombing left 2 Iraqi soldiers dead and five more injured, a Bani Saad car bombing left three people injured, a Kirkuk roadside bombing left two "protection team" members injured (the bomb apparently targeted an "office manager of fight against crime"), a Kanaan sticky bombing left 2 people dead and three more injured,  a Ramadi roadside bombing left 3 Iraqi soldiers dead and two more injured, a Kirkuk sticky bombing ("near the cotton gin") left 1 person dead, a western Baghdad sticky bombing (al-Ghazaliya district) left 1st Lieutenant Mohammed Abdul-Hussein dead, a western Baghdad roadside bombing left six people injured, 1 person was shot dead in Baghdad's Amil district, 1 person was shot dead in Baghdad's Shaab district, 1 person was shot dead in Baghdad's Zafaraniyah area, a southern Baghdad bombing (Abu Dshir) left two people injured, a Mosul suicide bomber took his own life and the lives of 2 other people while leaving six more injured, Nouri's military shelling of Falluja left five family members ("including two children") injured,
and late last night a bombing "between Amiriyat al-Fallujah and Jurf al-Sakar" left 1 military officer and 3 police members dead.

Nouri's assault on Anbar continues.  Aswat al-Iraq notes Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi again this week pointed out Anbar requires a political solution, not a military one.  Hamza Mustafa (Asharq Al-Awsat) adds, "Iraqi Parliamentary Speaker Osama Al-Nujaifi echoed calls for a ceasefire in Fallujah earlier this week. Nujaifi, who heads the Sunni Arab Mutahidoun bloc, called for a suspension of military operations across Anbar during a press conference in Baghdad on Monday."

As Speaker al-Nujaifi pointed out, there is no military solution.  Not only is Nouri not going to find a solution via assaulting Anbar, he's inept even at the attack on Anbar.  Loveday Morris (Washington Post) reports on strategic problems with Nouri's assault on Anbar Province:


“There were no maps, there were no details,” he [Lt. Col. Ihab Hashem] said in an interview last month while on leave, recovering from an injury. The convoy lost eight Humvees after coming under fire and hitting a roadside bomb, he said, and at least one soldier was killed.
“We reached the bridge but it was a disaster,” he said, describing the purpose of the mission as “just to be there.”












 




 















Tuesday, February 25, 2014

The Originals



Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Old Man Seth" went up today.  Seth really did suck and why can't they get Donald Glover or someone of color to host?

Anyway, the latest episode of The Originals aired on The CW tonight.

The witches had gone after vampires Rebecca and Klaus.

In the episode I saw Friday (a repeat), Celeste revealed to Elijah that she was Sabine.  She and the other witches had set a trap.

Eli could save his brother Klaus, his sister Rebecca or the werewolf who is pregnant by Klaus.

He went and saved the werewolf.

And the witches thought this proved something.

What?

Elijah, Rebecca and Klaus are The Originals -- original vampires.  They can't be killed.

So why wouldn't Elijah  go and save the only one who might die?

(Yeah, I know, he's sweet on her.  But still.)

This was a slower episode.

Back in 1919, there had been a flu epidemic in New Orleans (and elsewhere but this is set in New Orleans).  To be with vampire Marcel, Rebecca had gotten a witch to do a spell, one that would bring Michael (Rebecca, Klaus and Elijah's father) to town.

She knew it would drive Klaus out.

She wanted that because she and Marcel were being stopped by Klaus from being together.

The witches had Klaus strapped to a chair in the abandoned hospital while a hallucinating Rebecca roamed the halls of it.  They gave Klaus some of Rebecca's blood to drink.

This would allow him to see the visions she was seeing, of the past.

He was convinced that nothing they showed him would change how he felt about his sister.

When they showed him her plotting with Marcel to be together?

He knew, they'd been doing it for a thousand years, he said.

But then came the revelation of Michael.

He couldn't believe Rebecca had betrayed him like that.

They -- Rebecca, Klaus and Elijah -- used to run the whole town until Michael showed  up and they were driven out of the city.

We see, but Klaus didn't, Rebecca's realization that she couldn't go through with it.  She asks the witch to cancel the spell.  It's too late.  And the witch is mad that Rebecca tricked her so she's going to rat Rebecca out to Klaus.

Rebecca grabs infected rags (with the flu) and smears them on the witch.  This is when Celeste walks in and witnesses it.  So Rebecca does the same to Celeste.

The two die in quarantine.

As Celeste tells Rebecca in modern time, she killed her but, unlike the other witch, Celeste came back.

Elijah and Marcel are attempting to find Klaus and Rebecca.

They arrive near the end of the episode.  The witch working with Eli knocks Celeste out from behind.

Marcel makes it to where Klaus is about to destroy Rebecca (he's going to harm her, but he can't kill her because she won't die).  Klaus is glad Marcel is there so that he can destroy Marcel as well (Marcel is a vampire but not an Original so he can die).  Then Elijah comes in, grabs the magical knife and stabs at Klaus while telling Rebecca dn Marcel to run -- and run as far as they can.

That's really the end of the episode.  Klaus is weakened but not dead.  And he's angry.

It was a great episode.




Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

 
Tuesday, February 25, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, the assault on Anbar Province continues, Nouri continues to attempt to coerce the Kurds, the rumored weapons deal between Iraq and Iran continues to bother the US government, the US Congress hears about veterans issues, and much more.



Chair Jeff Miller:  It's truly an honor for me to be here this afternoon with so many DAV members and I think you all for coming to the Hill once again.  Due to the hard work and dedication of DAV's 1.4 million members -- especially DAV Service Officers -- veterans are provided with professional benefit counseling and claims assistance and transportation to and from VA health care facilities. DAV also assists with transition assistance services and on-site care at military treatment centers, at VA medical centers and clinics, and at home.  That's just to name a few of the many programs you, DAV, provides every day.


DAV is Disabled Veterans of America. Joseph Johnston is DAV's National Commander.


Joseph Johnston: We believe Congress should expand the advance appropriations umbrella to protect VA's remaining accounts. For example, although VA medical appropriations may provide assurance that a new outpatient clinic can open without delays, the fact that VA's information technology (IT) funding is still provided through the stymied regular appropriations process means that computers or other IT systems (such as radiology and laboratory equipment) on which health care crucially relies, might not be provided until Congress completes work on the regular appropriations acts, delaying the clinic opening by weeks or even months. Similarly, funding for VA's Medical and Prosthetic Research program directly contributes to excellent clinical care of veterans, and supports VA's affiliation relationships with more than 100 schools of medicine and other health professions, but it is funded apart from advance appropriations and subject to the same paralysis affecting VA's other regular appropriations. VA was on the verge of halting thousands of ongoing research projects when the shutdown ended. Moreover, the funding for VA construction accounts, providing VA capital infrastructure and large investments in facilities improvements, would also be more efficient and cost effective if it were provided through advance appropriations. Stopping construction projects because of an unrelated budget crisis only leads to more delay and higher costs for VA. Finally, the Veterans Benefits Administration's ability to address the backlog of pending claims and transform itself into a modern 21st century organization is being hindered by now-predictable annual budget stalemates and seemingly endless continuing resolutions. Given the universally recognized success of advance appropriations in VA health care, Congress should determine whether some or all of the other VA appropriations accounts should be managed through advance appropriations so that veterans and their families and survivors are not forced to sacrifice yet again, and needlessly. Members of these Committees, during last year's Veterans Day activities, I attended a ceremony commemorating the Traveling Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall, a national tribute to Vietnam veterans who gave the ultimate sacrifice in that unpopular war, a war in which I and many members beside and behind me, in this historic room, served. When the ceremony ended and the crowd was dispersing, a woman from the audience approached me to say how grateful she and her husband were to DAV for our strong advocacy and unflagging efforts in helping to end the government shutdown mere days before VA ran out of funds to support the payment of disability compensation. She explained to me that she and her husband's only income due to his disability and her personal care giving of him is his monthly VA compensation. As the shutdown lingered day after day, she told me, with tears in her eyes, they had worried terribly that without that VA payment on November 1, they wouldn't be able to buy food, gas, or pay their rent. As National Commander of this tremendous organization, I was grateful to her for her kind words about DAV's effective advocacy, but it concerned me greatly that she and her husband were forced to go through such a terrible ordeal, given the sacrifice they had already made for this country. We should never again put a disabled veteran or his or her family in such a situation. This is why DAV's Operation: Keep the Promise intends to make advance appropriations for all VA funding accounts, including its mandatory disability payments to veterans, our highest legislative priority in 2014. Thousands of DAV members and supporters from all over this nation are sending social networking, email, and telephonic messages today to your offices and those of every Senator and House Member. Today, when you pick up and browse your Roll Call, POLITICO, National Journal Daily, or The Hill, you'll see our Operation: Keep the Promise message prominently displayed. DAV launched this one-day intense campaign because we are serious and dedicated to this goal, and I assure you this testimony will not be the last time you hear about this urgent need. This is not a partisan issue; not a Democratic or Republican issue; it’s a veteran issue, and as National Commander of DAV, I want all of you to join me and everyone else in this room, and our 1.4 million DAV and Auxiliary members, in making it your highest priority as well. If solving this particular problem for wounded, injured, and ill veterans is not a high priority for your Committees, Congress in general, and the Administration in this New Year, please tell me what is. Bills to make this a reality are pending in both Congressional chambers; DAV urges you to pass the Putting Veterans Funding First Act as a top priority for 2014.

Putting Veterans Funding First Act?  Here for S. 932 and here for HR 813.

Ranking Member Mike Michaud:  I want to thank you for your work of advocating in the passage and enactment of HR 813, the Putting Veterans Funding First Act.  We have seen how well advanced appropriation has worked for VA's medical care.  It is time that the rest of VA's discretionary budget  be treated the same way.  We owe it to America's veterans to provide certain and stable VA budget funding.




This afternoon the US House Veterans Affairs Committee and the US Senate Veterans Affairs Committee held a joint hearing where they received testimony from Disabled American Veterans.  Appearing before the two committees were the DAV's National Commander  Johnston with National Service Director Jim Marszalek, National Legislative Director Joseph A. Violante, the Washington Headquarters Executive Director Garry J. Augustine, the National Headquarters Executive Director Barry A. Jesinoski, the National Adjutant J. Marc Burgess, the National Director of Voluntary Service Ron B. Minter and the DAV Auxilliary's National Commander Susan K. Miller.

US House Rep Jeff Miller is the Chair of the House Veterans Affairs Committee, US House Rep Mike Michaud is the Ranking Member.  Senator Bernie Sanders is the Chair of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee but Senator Richard Blumenthal was acting Chair for the hearing.

Acting Senate Chair Richard Blumenthal:  He [Senator Bernie Sanders] could not be here today because, indeed, he is helping to  manage the bill, the comprehensive bill that's under consideration this week before the United States Senate and indeed, I may have to leave early, I will have to leave early to assist him in that effort. 

What bill is he talking about?

Senator Patty Murray's office issued a press statement today which includes the following:


WASHINGTON, D.C. – TODAY, U.S. Senator Patty Murray delivered a speech on the floor of the Senate to highlight some of her priorities included in a comprehensive veterans bill that will improve the lives of our nation’s servicemembers, veterans, and their survivors. “The Comprehensive Veterans Health and Benefits and Military Retirement Pay Restoration Act of 2014” is a top priority for veterans and nearly every veterans service organization. Sen. Murray discussed provisions to reauthorize and expand her “VOW to Hire Heroes Act” as well as efforts to improve delivery of care for victims of military sexual assault. Sen. Murray also highlighted her provision in the legislation to provide reproductive services, such as in vitro fertilization (IVF), to veterans and their families who have suffered catastrophic wounds of war that prevent them from starting families. This provision was the first piece of legislation Senator Murray introduced in the 113th Congress. Currently, VA is specifically barred from providing these services. While the legislation being considered this week focuses on the newest generation of veterans, it also includes many provisions that aim to help veterans of previous conflicts.
 

Excerpts:
 


“This comprehensive legislation before us today is really the test for many members of Congress. Can we put politics aside for the good of our nation’s veterans? Can we show these heroes that - despite our differences - we will work as diligently toward getting them the benefits and care they’ve earned as they have worked for our nation? I hope we can.”

“Our nation’s heroes should not have to spend tens of thousands of dollars in the private sector to get the advanced reproductive treatments they need to start a family. They should not have to watch their marriages dissolve because the stress of infertility, in combination with the stresses of readjusting to life after severe injury, driving their relationship to a breaking point. Any servicemember who sustains this type of serious injury deserves so much more.”


“Our veterans don’t ask for a lot. And they shouldn’t have to. They have done everything that has been asked of them. They have been separated from their families through repeat deployments. They have sacrificed life and limb in combat. And they have done all of this selflessly and with honor to our country. We can’t allow our commitment to them to lapse or to get caught up in unrelated amendments or political grandstanding.”



We'll note the press release in full at the end of the snapshot.


Just as the hearing had an Acting Chair on the Senate side, it also had an Acting Ranking Member.  Senator Richard Burr is the Ranking Member.  For the hearing, Senator Dean Heller was Acting Ranking Member.

Ranking Member Dean Heller:  I think we can all agree there's a lot that needs to be improved upon when it comes to and for caring of our American veterans which is why the work that the DAV does as an advocacy group and resource for our veterans is so important.  This is the second year I've had the privilege to sit on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee.  While that may not be a long period of time for some of the other members here, it's clear that one issue continues to be a primary focus and that's the disability claims backlog at the VA.  The VA promised veterans that their claims would be completed in less than 125 days yet more than 4300 veterans in Las Vegas, Reno and across Nevada have waited much longer than that.  In fact, Nevada has the longest waiting time in the nation.  That is why I've made it a top priority on this Committee to work to address this issue in a bipartisan manner.  The claims backlog is the greatest challenge facing the VA today.  But this issue has been plaguing the VA for over two decades and the reality is we must update the process.  It is a 1945 system for a 21st century veteran.  The VA needs a claims process that is proactive rather than reactive, one that can anticipate the needs of veterans to keep a backlog from happening.  Some may want to point fingers, place blame, but at the end of the day, Congress,  the VSOs [Veterans Service Organizations] and the VA all have a part to play.  For the past year, I worked with Senator [Bob] Casey through a bi-partisan VA backlog working group to learn more about why the backlog exists and what can be done to fix it.  I'm also pleased that Senators Moran and Tester have joined us in this effort.  It has taken significant time and resources to dig into this issue and, shortly, I look forward to rolling out suggestions that we have developed with the DAV.



DAV's Johnston delivered a statement that lasted over 20 minutes.  We've already noted one section.  We'll note another section.

Joseph Johnston: Finally, VA is proposing to amend its adjudication regulations and the appeals regulations and rules of practice of  VBA to require all claims to be filed electronically on standardized forms prescribed by the Secretary, regardless of the type of claim concerned; and to require that VA only accept an expression of dissatisfaction or disagreement with an adjudicative determination by the agency of original jurisdiction as a Notice of Disagreement (NOD) only if it is submitted on a prescribed form. DAV understands the stated intent of VA's proposed amendments as an effort to improve the quality and timeliness of processing claims and appeals. The purpose of the regulatory change is to promote submission of claims and appeals in standard formats in order to capture data for a paperless claims and appeals system. Nonetheless, we are concerned about the proposed rule making and the consequential adverse effect upon veterans, especially those who do not have the capability or ability to file their claim or NOD electronically. First, requiring a veteran to submit a claim on a standardized form is not a new concept. In fact, a claim for disability benefits is defined under title 38, Code of Federal Regulations, section 3.151(a), as "a specific claim in the form prescribed by the Secretary must be filed in order for benefits to be paid." So requiring a veteran to file a claim on a standardized form is the current practice; the real question is how the new proposal would impact the effective date of a claim received. Unfortunately, this proposal goes much further than simply requiring a standardized form to be used; it effectively removes the preservation of the date of claim by eliminating the informal claim from the process. Under this proposed rule, if a veteran did not submit a claim in the prescribed standard format, VA would provide the veteran a correct form as a response; however, if that same veteran did not return the completed forms until seven months later, that new date would be the effective date of the claim -- not the actual date on which the veteran submitted his or her unaccepted claim, thereby losing entitlement to seven months of benefits. DAV takes no issue with veterans being required to submit their claims on standardized forms. This proposed rule, however, would cause many veterans, who may have needed those seven months due to illness or other reasons, to lose the benefit of the informal claims process. This new requirement may be intended to entice veterans to file their claims electronically, but clearly its practice will cause veterans to lose rightful benefits. Congress must further examine this matter, because it will have a major adverse impact on veterans and the benefits they need and have earned. The proposed rule also seeks to require veterans to submit their NOD on a standard form. As we have stated, DAV does not take issue with requiring veterans to use a standard form; however, this proposal will cause many veterans to lose their appeal rights. Quite simply, under this proposal if a veteran does not use the standard form and complete it exactly as directed, no additional time period will be provided to the veteran for correction. The appeal period will simply end. Messrs. Chairmen, a distinction is being created between those who possess the resources and capabilities to meet electronic claims filing requirements and those who are not able to do so. VA serves veterans and other claimants of diverse backgrounds, with varying capabilities, education, and financial resources. Some claimants, particularly those of limited financial means and those with severe mental or physical impairment, will be penalized by VA not retaining some measure of accommodation for allowing an effective date for entitlement to benefits based upon the receipt of a communication expressing such intention. Because of this disparity, and its effect on a claimant population that may require extra assistance, we recommend that an incomplete electronic or non-electronic claim, be considered a request for an application of benefits under the proposed provisions of title 38, Code of Federal Regulations, section 3.155(c), and established as the effective date of entitlement if an appropriate completed application is received within one year of the date the Secretary notifies the claimant and the claimant’s representative, if any, of the information necessary to complete the application, as currently stated in regulation.

Note: "a distinction is being created between those who possess the resources and capabilities to meet electronic claims filing requirements and those who are not able to do so."

Acting Senate Ranking Member Dean Heller: Let me, if I can ask a follow up question, I know that the DAV works hard to encourage veterans you serve to file a complete claim -- as complete a claim as possible.  But I also recognize that veterans need to have the opportunity to file anyway they want -- whether that is on that form or a paper napkin.  Is that accurate and can you explain to this committee why it's important that veterans still have the option to file a claim anyway they want?


Joseph Johnston: I'll refer that to the staff.

Jim Marszalek:  Yes, thank you.  I think it's important that veterans still have the opportunity to file a claim -- whether it's on paper, whether it's on the standard 526-EZ or if they do it on a regular form.  Currently, they could take that regular piece of paper or, as many people refer to it, that napkin and send it to the VA regional office and the VA has the duty to send the claimant the correct form to be completed and then they return it.  But that napkin starts the date that they received that claim.  And VA's proposal?  They're recommending that you have to file that 526-EZ in order for them to start the date.  And that's what we don't agree with.  So it's very important that veterans still have the opportunities because not everyone has easy access to those forms and not everyone can do it electronically either.  VA's still in the early stages of the transformation plan on filing claims electronically.  So we feel that it's important that we continue to allow them to submit claims on paper to protect their effective dates. 

I'd like for us to come back to the hearing in tomorrow's snapshot.  Hopefully, there will be time and space for that.  And this was the best joint hearing that the two Committees have done.  If we're able to come back to this tomorrow, I'll explain why that was.


For now let's move over to Iraq. Tasnim News Agency reported today that Hoshyar Zebari, Foreign Minister of Iraq, was due in Tehran today for the start of a two-day visit.

Of course he was.

Why?

The most likely reason is because Iraq has no Minister of Defense.  Dropping back to February 21st:

To be fair, the blood lusting White House isn't the only one supplying weapons.  Al-Manar reports that Iraq's Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari met yesterday with Russian officials and the Russian government has "agreed to speed up the delivery of Russian arms to the oil-rich Arab country."
In the US, there would be some objection if Zebari's US counterpart Secretary of State John Kerry was sticking his nose into what would clearly be Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel's area; however, Iraq has no Minister of Defense.  Nor do they have a Minister of Interior or a Minister of National Security.



YesterdayAhmed Rasheed (Reuters) reported, "Iran has signed a deal to sell Iraq arms and ammunition worth $195 million, according to documents seen by Reuters - a move that would break a U.N. embargo on weapons sales by Tehran."  Today, Heba Qudsi (Asharq Al-Awsat) notes, "Diplomats in the Iran sanctions committee at the UN, speaking anonymously, expressed concern about the deal but refused to make further comment."  But one Iranian diplomat, outside of Iran, did comment.  Tasnim News Agency reports, "Iran's Ambassador to Baghdad Hassan Danaeifar on Tuesday denied reports claiming that Iraq has signed a contract to purchase arms from the Islamic Republic."  Mary Casey and Cortni Kerr (Foreign Policy) add that "Maliki would neither confirm nor deny the reports."  So what happened?

Reuters saw the documents, it's silly for the governments of either Iran or Iraq to deny the deal.  Ahmed Rasheed, Patricia Zengerle, Matt Spetalnick, Ned Parker and Mark Heinrich (Reuters) report today:

Hasan Suneid, a senior lawmaker from Maliki's Dawa Party who heads parliament's security and defence committee, said Iraq had bought weapons from Iran and insisted this was within its right and violated no international sanctions.
"The U.S. government is not the Iraqi government's guardian," Suneid told reporters at the national parliament.
"We have the right to buy arms from any state that is friendly and cooperates with Iraq. The arms we purchased from Iran are nothing more than light weapons and ammunition.

"We have the right to select different sources for weapons. Iran is a friendly, neighboring state just like Kuwait, Jordan, Turkey and Saudi Arabia," he said.


World Bulletin quotes Nouri's spokesperson Ali Musawi declaring, "Nothing prevents us from buying arms and ammunition from any party."

The issue was raised today when State Dept spokesperson Jen Psaki was giving the daily briefing:


QUESTION: Okay. So my three very brief ones. You were asked, I believe, yesterday about this alleged arms deal between Iraq and Iran.

MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: Did – have you gotten any more clarity on that?

MS. PSAKI: Sure. Well, as I mentioned yesterday, we raise our concerns at the highest levels with the Government of Iraq and reiterated that any transfer of arms from Iran is in direct violation of UN Security Council resolutions. The Government of Iraq assured us that it would look into this matter. Today, we have seen the press release issued by the Iraqi Ministry of Defense denying that any contracts for military equipment were signed with Iran. And we will continue to follow up with the Government of Iraq on this issue.

QUESTION: You take them at their word? You believe their denial?

MS. PSAKI: Well, suffice it to say, we will continue to discuss the issue with the Government of Iraq, and we’ve of course seen their statement.

QUESTION: The issue in general of buying things from Iran or the issue specifically as related to this report that came out about this big – alleged big sale?

MS. PSAKI: Both.

QUESTION: So you’re not necessarily convinced that their denial is bona-fide?

MS. PSAKI: I’m not. I’m just conveying that, obviously, we’ll continue the discussion and these reports remain a concern of ours. But of course, we’ve seen the statement that they put out.

QUESTION: Well, are you heartened by the denial? I mean, or do you – that they say it’s not true? Is that a good thing?

MS. PSAKI: They did say that. We’ve seen that. They assured us they’d look into it, and this was a follow-up to that.

QUESTION: Second one is, I’m --

QUESTION: (Inaudible) Iraq.

MS. PSAKI: Hold on one moment, Said. One moment, one moment.

QUESTION: On Iraq.

QUESTION: Well, no. I’ve got a --

MS. PSAKI: Oh, on Iraq? Okay.

QUESTION: No, I got a --

QUESTION: I just want to ask you on this very issue --

MS. PSAKI: Okay.

QUESTION: There was a breakdown of lists. I mean, buying $35 million worth of, let’s say, mortars, or the equipment for tanks or whatever. I mean, it was really a very thorough and specific breakdown, which shows that the laundry list --

MS. PSAKI: I think I went through a thorough list with you yesterday.

QUESTION: I understand.

MS. PSAKI: Okay.

QUESTION: I’m saying that there was today – there was a laundry list published of the exact specific equipment and so on that the Iraqis allegedly signed back in November immediately after the return of Nuri al-Maliki from his visit to Washington. So I’m saying that your – the veracity of their denial – is it something that you believe, as Matt said, or despite the fact that it was really that specific?

MS. PSAKI: I think I’ve already answered the question. I don’t have anything more to add.

QUESTION: And what if it proves that they actually did contract the Iranians? What would you do?


MS. PSAKI: Well, as I said yesterday, that would raise serious concerns, given it would be a violation of UN Security Council resolutions.



The developments come as Global Security Newswire is reporting the US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel  is considering ending the US government's business relationship with Michelin over the company's business relationship with Iran (see Josh Rogin's report for The Daily Beast).

Patricia Zengerle (Reuters) notes that US Senator John McCain is calling for answers and stating this could jeopardize the US government's plan to allow Iraq to purchase 24 Apache attack helicopters.  Geoff Holtzman (Talk Radio News) quotes White House spokesperson Jay Carney declaring today, "Any transfer or sale of arms from Iran is in direct violation of the United Nations Security Council Resolution."  Yes, it is a point that State Dept spokesperson Jen Psaki made on Monday.


In other Iraq and Iran news, Fars News Agency reports that the Iranian Ambassador to Iraq, Hassan Danayee-Far, denied today that the Embassy in Baghdad was under fire.  Shots were heard.  But National Iraqi News Agency reports police says "a member of the force charged with protecting the Iranian embassy in central Baghdad, committed suicide by shooting himself."


Nouri's assault on Anbar Province continues.  NINA reports 5 civilians were left injured by the military's bombing of Falljua's residential neighborhoods of Jubail Nazal and al-Sinaei while the military's bombing of western Falluja left 1 woman dead and three members of her family injured in Albu Alwan Village.

As was the case yesterday, the US government doesn't care about the civilians being harmed but a deal with Iran may nix Iraq's future weapons delivery from the US (or a lot of big talk and posing from the US government wants to pretend it might).  NINA reports:

Motahedoon Coalition / United for Reform / demanded on Tuesday hosting the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces Nouri al-Maliki and Acting Defense Minister Saadoun al-Dulaimi, in the House of Representatives , to discuss the crisis in al- Anbar and stand on the truth of what is going on there.The Coalition said in a press statement that nearly two months have passed and the crisis in Anbar is increasing complexity on all levels, and especially the humanitarian and security ones, in the absence of accurate information on what is going on except what we hear by the media.
He added that the data that we see on the ground is half a million were displaced from Anbar, cities under siege, artillery and air bombardment , martyrs and wounded of innocent citizens and the sons of our armed forces.

Through yesterday, Iraq Body Count counts 787 violent deaths in Iraq so far this month.

And the violence goes on.


National Iraqi News Agency reports a Ramadi car bombing left 3 Iraqi soldiers dead and four more injured, a southern Mosul roadside bombing left 1 police officer and three members of Nouri's federal police dead, 1 civilian was shot dead in eastern Baghdad (Jamilah), 1 police member was shot dead in eastern Baghdad (Baladiat), Joint Operations Command announced they killed 1 suspect in Salahuddin, a southern Baghdad (Awiridj) roadside bombing left two children injured, the Iraqi military boasts they killed 3 suspects in Ramadi, 1 civilian was shot dead in al-Miqdadiya, an Ajeel Village roadside bombing left eight people injured, a Hamrin car bombing targeted a market killing 2 people and leaving eight more injured, Diyala Police Command insist that they killed 1 Da'ash leader, a Karrada car bombing claimed 5 lives and left forty-one more people injured,  1 corpse was discovered southeast of Baghdad, and 2 corpses were discovered dumped in the streets of Mosul.  Kareem Raheem (Reuters) counts 26 violent deaths today.



In other news, Rudaw reports:

 The Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) is appealing to Iraqi religious leaders, the international community and powerful institutions like the United Nations to pressure Baghdad into lifting an economic siege of the autonomous Kurdish enclave.
 Baghdad and Erbil are locked in a complex political feud. The Kurds insist that their autonomy gives them constitutional rights to exploit and export their own vast oil and gas resources, and have signed a comprehensive oil and gas deal with energy-hungry Turkey next door. They already have piped Kurdish oil, which is ready for sale at the Turkish port of Ceyhan.


This blackmail on the part of Nouri has left many in the KRG without salaries.  World Bulletin quotes Kurdistan Regional Government President Massoud Barzani declaring, "By not paying government employees their wages, the Iraqi central government has put Kurdistan under a blockade" and that this is a "declaration of war against the people of Kurdistan."  All Iraq News notes that the KRG's Finance Ministry is going to start payment for KRG government employees on Sunday and do this by stopping payment of the KRG presidency and Parliament employees.  Rudaw notes that Iraq needs water and the KRG is the one that controls the irrigation for a good part of Iraq.



We quoted from Senator Patty Murray's press release earlier in the snapshot.  We'll close now with it in full:





FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                  CONTACT: Murray Press Office
Tuesday, February 25, 2014                                                             (202) 224-2834
 


Sen. Murray Addresses Landmark Veterans Legislation Focused on Those Returning from Iraq and Afghanistan
 
Bill is one of the most inclusive pieces of veterans legislation to come before Senate in decades
 
Murray continues push for IVF coverage at VA; shares inspirational story about quadriplegic veteran and wife’s struggle to start a family
 


WATCH video.


 
WASHINGTON, D.C.TODAY, U.S. Senator Patty Murray delivered a speech on the floor of the Senate to highlight some of her priorities included in a comprehensive veterans bill that will improve the lives of our nation’s servicemembers, veterans, and their survivors. “The Comprehensive Veterans Health and Benefits and Military Retirement Pay Restoration Act of 2014” is a top priority for veterans and nearly every veterans service organization. Sen. Murray discussed provisions to reauthorize and expand her “VOW to Hire Heroes Act” as well as efforts to improve delivery of care for victims of military sexual assault. Sen. Murray also highlighted her provision in the legislation to provide reproductive services, such as in vitro fertilization (IVF), to veterans and their families who have suffered catastrophic wounds of war that prevent them from starting families. This provision was the first piece of legislation Senator Murray introduced in the 113th Congress. Currently, VA is specifically barred from providing these services. While the legislation being considered this week focuses on the newest generation of veterans, it also includes many provisions that aim to help veterans of previous conflicts.
 

Excerpts:
 


“This comprehensive legislation before us today is really the test for many members of Congress. Can we put politics aside for the good of our nation’s veterans? Can we show these heroes that - despite our differences - we will work as diligently toward getting them the benefits and care they’ve earned as they have worked for our nation? I hope we can.”
“Our nation’s heroes should not have to spend tens of thousands of dollars in the private sector to get the advanced reproductive treatments they need to start a family. They should not have to watch their marriages dissolve because the stress of infertility, in combination with the stresses of readjusting to life after severe injury, driving their relationship to a breaking point. Any servicemember who sustains this type of serious injury deserves so much more.”
“Our veterans don’t ask for a lot. And they shouldn’t have to. They have done everything that has been asked of them. They have been separated from their families through repeat deployments. They have sacrificed life and limb in combat. And they have done all of this selflessly and with honor to our country. We can’t allow our commitment to them to lapse or to get caught up in unrelated amendments or political grandstanding.”



Full remarks:
 


“It’s no secret that here in our nation’s capital we are sharply divided on any number of economic and political issues facing average Americans right now. But I’ve come to the floor today to discuss one issue we are rarely divided on. And that is our duty to keep the promise we’ve made to provide not only care - but opportunity - to all those who’ve honorably served in our nation’s Armed Forces. It unites even the most unlikely partners because we realize that: We have all made a promise to those who have signed up to serve. And we all need to keep it because there’s so much on the line. When our brave men and women volunteered to protect our nation, we promised them that we would take care of them and their families when they return home.
 

“We need to ask ourselves, are we doing enough for our nation’s veterans?
 

“This comprehensive legislation before us today is really the test for many members of Congress. Can we put politics aside for the good of our nation’s veterans? Can we show these heroes that - despite our differences - we will work as diligently toward getting them the benefits and care they’ve earned as they have worked for our nation? I hope we can.
 

“And I say that because the investments in this bill are a lot more than numbers on a page. They are life changing programs for veterans who are looking to take the skills they’ve learned from the battlefield to the boardroom. It’s support for the countless victims of military sexual assault, desperate to come out of the shadows. It’s providing the dream of having a family to those suffering from some of the most devastating wounds of war. It’s timely investments - in the very biggest priorities of our nation’s heroes. 
 

“ I’d like to use the remainder of my time to highlight just a few of the investments included in this bill and how they translate into the lives of our veterans and their families. For those who have worn our nation’s uniform - and particularly for those young veterans who have spent the last decade being shuttled back and forth to war zones half a world away: The road home isn’t always smooth, the red tape is often long, and the transition from the battlefield to the work place is never easy. We know this shouldn’t be the case. We shouldn’t let the skills and training our nation’s veterans have attained go to waste. We can’t afford to have our nation’s heroes unable to find a job to support their families, without an income that provides stability, or without work that provides the pride and sense of purpose that is so critical to the transition home.
 

“And that’s why I’m proud the legislation we’re considering today reauthorizes and builds on many of the provisions that were part of my ‘VOW to Hire Heroes Act,’ which was signed into law by President Obama in 2011. Double-digit unemployment rates for veterans used to be the norm – but since VOW became law, the unemployment rate for post-9/11 veterans is on par with non-veterans.  And while recent data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics prove that these programs work, there’s much more to be done.
 

“I also believe the great strength of our military is in the character and dedication of our men and women who wear the uniform. It is the courage of these Americans, to volunteer to serve, that is the Pentagon’s greatest asset. Our servicemembers volunteer to face danger, to put their lives on the line, to protect the country and all its people. It’s no longer a secret that sexual assault continues to plague the ranks of our military services – which is another issue this comprehensive legislation seeks to address. I think we all agree that it is absolutely unconscionable that a fellow servicemember, the person you rely on to have your back and to be there for you, would commit such a terrible crime. Even worse is the prevalence of these crimes. It is simply appalling they could commit such a personal violation of their brother or sister in uniform. The National Defense Authorization Act we passed last year took historic action to help servicemembers access to the resources they need to seek justice without fear. Including a provision I authored to create a new category of legal advocates, called Special Victims’ Counsels, who would be responsible for advocating on behalf of the interests of the victim.

 
“But we still have a long road ahead before we put an end to these shameful acts and provide all the necessary resources to those who have unfortunately been impacted. Thankfully the Chairman’s legislation aims to do just that with provisions to improve the delivery of care and benefits to veterans who experienced sexual trauma while serving in the military. Because when our best and our brightest put on a uniform and join the United States Armed Forces, they do so with the understanding they will sacrifice much in the name of defending our country and its people. But that sacrifice should not have to come in the form of unwanted sexual contact from within the ranks.

 
“And finally, I’d like to talk about a provision that has been one of my top priorities in the Senate for a while now – It’s a provision that builds upon our efforts to improve VA’s services for women veterans and veterans with families. As you all know, with the changing nature of our conflicts overseas, we have been seeing the brutal impact of improvised explosive devices (IEDs). Which means we are now seeing more and more servicemembers – male and female -- increasingly susceptible to reproductive, spinal and traumatic brain injuries due to these weapons of war. Now, thanks to modern medicine, many of these servicemembers are being kept alive and were returning home. And like so many of our veterans, these men and women come home looking to return to their lives, to find employment, and so often to start a family. Yet what they find when they go to the VA is that the fertility services available don’t meet their complex needs. In fact, veterans suffering from these injuries find that the VA is specifically barred from providing more advanced assisted reproduction techniques such as IVF. They are told that despite the fact they have made such an extreme sacrifice for our nation we cannot provide them with the medical services they need to start a family.

 
“Veterans like Staff Sergeant Matt Keil and his wife Tracy. Staff Sergeant Keil was shot in the neck while on patrol in Iraq in 2007, just 6 weeks after he married the love of his life – Tracy.  The bullet went through the right side of his neck, hit a major artery, went through his spinal cord, and exited through his left shoulder blade. Staff Sergeant Keil instantly became a quadriplegic. Doctors informed Tracy her husband would be on a ventilator for the rest of his life, and would never move his arms or legs. But Staff Sergeant Keil eventually defied the odds and found himself off the ventilator and beginning the long journey of physical rehabilitation. In fact, Tracy and her husband even started exploring the possibilities of starting a family together. Having children was all they could talk about, once they adjusted to their new normal.

 
“So, with Staff Sergeant Keil’s injuries preventing him from having children naturally, Tracy turned to the VA and began to explore her options for fertility treatments. But because of the VA ban, she was turned away. And Tracy and Staff Sergeant Keil decided instead to pursue IVF through the private sector. Out of options, the Keil’s decided this was important enough to them that they were willing to pay out-of-pocket – to the tune of almost $32,000 per round of treatment. Thankfully, on November 9, 2010, just after their first round of IVF, Staff Sergeant Keil and Tracy welcomed their twins Matthew and Faith into the world.
 

“Tracy told me, ‘The day we had our children something changed in both of us. This is exactly what we had always wanted, our dreams had arrived. The VA, Congress and the American People have said countless times that they want to do everything they can to support my husband or make him feel whole again and this is your chance. Having a family is exactly what we needed to feel whole again. Please help us make these changes so that other families can share in this experience.’

“Tracy and Matt are not alone. There are many men and women out there who share this common thread of a desperate desire to fulfill their dream of starting a family only to find the catastrophic wounds they sustained while defending our country are now preventing them from seeing that dream through. As you all know, it should not be this way. Our nation’s heroes should not have to spend tens of thousands of dollars in the private sector to get the advanced reproductive treatments they need to start a family. They should not have to watch their marriages dissolve because the stress of infertility, in combination with the stresses of readjusting to life after severe injury, driving their relationship to a breaking point. Any servicemember who sustains this type of serious injury deserves so much more. Because we came VERY close to making this bill a reality last Congress.
 

“In fact, with Tracy Keil watching form the gallery – like so many of our heroes who have joined us here today – With Tracy watching, the Senate unanimously passed this legislation. But unfortunately Republicans in the House of Representatives refused to take up and pass this bill. This meant the time ran out and we were unable to get it to the President’s desk. But this effort is far from over. This provision was the very first piece of legislation I introduced in the new Congress. And there has been excellent momentum to get it done. Because this is about giving veterans who have sacrificed everything -- every option we have to help them fulfill the simple dream of starting a family. It says that we are not turning our back on the catastrophic reproductive wounds that have become a signature of these wars. It says to all those brave men and women that didn’t ask questions when they were put in harm’s way, that we won’t let politics get in the way of our commitment to you.
                                                                                                                                              

“This provision will reverse this troubling barrier to care and will bring the VA in line with the military which provides these services under Tricare. Our women veterans deserve this, our male veterans deserve this, and our military families deserve this.

 
“So, I’m here today to urge my colleagues to support the Comprehensive Veterans Health and Benefits and Military Retirement Pay Restoration Act of 2014. Our veterans don’t ask for a lot. And they shouldn’t have to. They have done everything that has been asked of them. They have been separated from their families through repeat deployments. They have sacrificed life and limb in combat. And they have done all of this selflessly and with honor to our country. We can’t allow our commitment to them to lapse or to get caught up in unrelated amendments or political grandstanding. I’d like to thank the Senator from Vermont and his staff for their tireless work to work to bring this legislation here to the floor.
 

“I hope our colleagues do right by our nation’s heroes and keep their promise by supporting this critical bill.”

###
---
Meghan Roh
Press Secretary | New Media Director
Office of U.S. Senator Patty Murray
Mobile: (202) 365-1235
Office: (202) 224-2834




 
 
 
RSS Feed for Senator Murray's office