Dick Durbin's an ass

I know Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts' "The Plan For Day 101" from last night has you laughing.

Want to know what's scary? A close up of Dick Durbin. True. The fear that he might Tweet you a photo of his bulge -- and the fear that the bulge might be his hefty gut.

Michelle Quinn (Politico) reports that Dick Durbin is expected to put out a bill later this week calling for sales tax on the internet.

Dick Durbin's such a little bitch and a real racist. That little bitch made a Black man, Senator Roland Burris, jump through hoops before he could be seated in the Senate.

Guess Master Dick thought he was riding high on the plantation and that all us Black folk were too scared to speak up.

Dick Durbin's nothing but an ass. His only "Black" relations are with Barack -- who is Dick Durbin's kind of "Black" -- only half.

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

Monday, June 6, 2011. Chaos and violence continue, Tikrit is again slammed with a bombing, 5 US soldiers die in Iraq, the 100 Days end approaches, a feminist calls out Nouri's attack on NGOs, Jay Carney gets asked about Iraq and goes all uh-uh-uh-uh deer in the headlights, and more. The morning began with AP reporting that 5 US soldiers were killed today in Iraq. Five US soldiers. That's 41 US soldiers killed since August 31st when Barack announced the 'end' of 'combat operations' January 22, 2009 -- 2 days after Barack was sworn in -- the US military death toll in Iraq stood at 4229. Sunday it was 4457. (Note, that is the Defense Dept count. The link goes to the official DoD tally which has not yet been updated to note the 5 deaths today.) Add the 5 today for 4462. It's 29 months since Barack was sworn in as President of the United States and US troops remain in Iraq and the US government pushes for an extension of the SOFA to stay beyond 2011 and plans to slide troops under the State Dept umbrella -- and Strategic Framework Agreement -- if the SOFA isn't extended or a new agreement made. July 23, 2007, the Democratic Party had their candidates vying for the party's presidential nomination debate in South Carolina (CNN/YouTube debate). From that debate . . . Senator Barack Obama: We just heard a White House spokesman, Tony Snow, excuse the fact that the Iraqi legislature went on vacation for three weeks because it's hot in Baghdad. Well, let me tell you: It is hot for American troops who are over there with 100 pounds worth of gear. And that kind of irresponsibility is not helpful. So we have to begin a phased withdrawal; have our combat troops out by March 31st of next year; and initiate the kind of diplomatic surge that is necessary in these surrounding regions to make sure that everybody is carrying their weight. And that is what I will do on day one, as president of the United States, if we have not done it in the intervening months. Of course, my favorite Barack lie on the Iraq War was the one he featured in the campaign commericals of states about to have their primaries. "We want to end the war!" Barack would shout to yelling and applause. "And we want to end it now!" I have no idea where "day one" or "now!" went but someone forgot to pack the sense of immediacy since it never made it into the White House as evidenced by the fact that US troops remain in Iraq. And US troops continue to die in Iraq. 233 US troops have died in Iraq since Barack Obama was sworn in as president. 233 US troops have died in Iraq since the man swearing he'd end the Iraq War took his presidential oath. 233 and this passes for 'peace'? 233 -- a figure Elizabeth Flock (Washington Post) should have on her list of numbers. Dropping back to Friday's snapshot: In related news, John R. Parkinson (ABC News) reports that Speaker of the House John Boehner has said Barack Obama needs to "step up and help the American understand why these missions are vital to the nationaal security interest of our country. [. . .] I really do believe that the president needs to speak out, in terms of our mission in Afghanistan, our mission in Iraq, our mission in Libya, and the doubts that our members have frankly reflected they're reflecting what they're heaing from their constituents." And Boehner appears to have had a point judging by the White House today. "In other words, I was right!" Jay Carney laughed at the White House press briefing as he attempted to handle such important issues as whether Angela Merkel's visit was a "state visit" or a "government visit." It was disgusting for a number of reasons including that the long-in-the-tooth Jay is more than a bit too old to be grabbing this position. Setting aside Tony Snow who, as a personal favor, took the job in the Bully Boy Bush administration, I believe you have to drop back to Jerald terHorst to find someone older than Jay. Jerald terHorst was 52-years-old and only served for 30 days. He resigned when Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon, "As your spokesman, I do not know how I could credibly defend that decision in the absence of a like decision to grant absolute pardon to the young men who evaded Vietnam military service as a matter of conscience and the absence of pardons for former aides and associates of Mr. Nixon who have been charged with crimes -- and imprisoned -- stemming from the same Watergate situation." There's something really sick about seeing a 46-year-old man in a position that's really the equivalent of stock boy at the local grocer. But mainly it was disgusting that it was 21 minutes into the briefing before Jay acknowledge the 5 deaths and then only because he had been asked about US forces remaining in Iraq past 2011. And note how he gets uh-uh-uh so nervous when forced to speak of death. Jay Carney: I have nothing new for you on that. First of all, I would like to say that we are obviously aware of the fact that we lost US servicemen today and uh and uh and we express condolences to their uh families once notifications have been made and-and uh and uh it's a stark reminder that those who serve uh in Iraq do so uh-uh in a way that continues to place them at risk despite the enormous progress that has been made there uh and uh on your question, I have nothing new to announce. The process, as you know, is simply that we are abiding by the Status Of Forces Agreement that will have us withdrawing the remainder of our troops by the end of this year. I and others have said that we'll entertain requests by the Iraqi government if uh entertain in terms of discuss possible requests for uh-uh some sort of new Status Of Forces Agreement that would be obviously uh-uh quite different from the one we have now. But as of now we fully intend to fulfill our obligation under that SOFA and withdraw all our remaining forces. The whole day was a big lark until, 21 minutes into the briefing, someone had to bring up Iraq. Uh-uh Carney at having to even address the subject. Many people have no choice but to address it because it's their child or their son or their daughter or their wife or their husband deployed to Iraq. I'd guess the loved ones taking part in the Saturday send-off in St. George, Utah for the 474 members of the state's National Guard who are depolying to Iraq, AP covers it here, don't have the luxury Jay Carney does of acting like Spunky -- the newest Mouskateer. How very fortunate he is to assume the position after Helen Thomas was savaged and expelled, thereby allowing him to ignore the realities of war nearly every work day. This morning on NBC's Today Show, the attack on US soldiers was noted: Meredith Vieira: Details are still coming in about what happened in Iraq. We're going to go right to NBC's Jim Miklaszewski at the Pentagon. Mik, what can you tell us? Jim Miklaszewski: Good morning, Meredith. This is the single worst if not one of the single worst attacks on US military forces in Iraq since the official end of formal 'combat operations' there in Iraq last August. According to US military and Iraqi officials 5 US service members were killed in a rocket attack on US military base -- one of many in or around Baghdad -- this morning. Now the timing of this attack cannot be dismissed because this comes at a time as the US military is in fact preparing to withdraw all combat forces, all US military forces, from Iraq by the end of the year Meredith. Meredith Vieira: So does that now call that into question? Whether or not those troops will be removed by the end of the year? Jim Miklaszewski: Well that's why the timing of this is so important. The Iraqi government itself is struggling with how to ask the US military to stay. There are currently 50,000 US troops there. Again, they're supposed to be out by the end of the year. But it's clear that the Iraqis cannot provide all the kind of defenses that they need and they're preparing to ask the US. So, again, this attack appears aimed at convincing the American people that all American troops should leave Iraq by the end of this year. Rebecca Santanna (AP) reports, "Five American troops serving as advisers to Iraqi security police in eastern Baghdad were killed Monday when rockets slammed into the compound where they lived. The deaths were the largest single-day loss of life for American forces in two years." Al Jazeera pins the date down, "Monday's attack killed the highest number of US service personnel in a single day since May 11, 2009, when a US soldier opened fire on five of his colleagues on a base just outside Baghdad. That soldier was later arrested and charged with the killings." Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reports on today's 5 deaths and notes that "two Iraqi security officials told CNN Monday that the servicemembers were killed during an early morning mortar attack at a U.S. military base in southeastern Baghdad. Five servicemembers also were wounded in the attack, said the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to release the information." Muhanad Mohammed (Reuters) quotes an unnamed "senior Iraqi security official" stating, "This morning, the American base at Loyalty Camp came under rocket attack. There was a lot of smoke inside and the Americans died in that attack in the Baladiyat area." Prashant Rao (AFP) floats, "The latest violence raises key questions over the capabilities of Iraqi security forces ahead of a year-end deadline for Washington to pull out, with US officials pressing their counterparts in Baghdad to decide soon whether or not they want an extended American military presence." Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) explains, "Both Shiite and Sunni extremist groups are eager to target the Americans and claim they defeated the U.S. troops ahead of their departure. Eastern Baghdad is rife with Shiite militia groups -- radical cleric Muqtada Sadr's elite fighting unit, the Promisde Day Brigade, as well as a splinter group called Asab al Haq or the League of Righteous." Last week, Patricia Haslach, US Ambassador Iraq Transition Coordinator, told the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia (link has text and video) that, "The Sadrist trend is taking steps to revive the Jaysh al-Mahdi, which poses a serious threat to Iraq's democratic institutions and future." Jack Healy and Michael S. Schmidt (New York Times) observe, "As Iraqi politicans tiptoe into that highly charged discussion [asking that US troops stay in Iraq beyond 2011], American military officials say that militants are stepping up attacks against bases and convoys, especially in Iraq's south, hitting them with mortars, rockets and improvised roadside bombs. In Baghdad, the number of mortar and rocket attacks against American and Iraqi targets jumped [. . .] to 37 in May from 17 in April." Outside of Baghdad? Sunday Aswat al-Iraq noted Basra rocket attacks set fire to the Zubeir Oil Field and that "The U.S. military airbase Taleel was the target for rocket attacks, the U.S. Army announced today. The media spokesman of the U.S. forces, Lieutenant Harold Havel, told Aswat al-Iraq that three Katyusha rockets fell on Taleel airbase, 18 km south of Nassiriya, on Saturday night." Yesterday Aswat al-Iraq reported, "An Iraqi Army source has said on Saturday that the Iraqi and the U.S. Armies have boosted their security measures in Diwaniya city, with the participation of helicopters, in the background of the escalation of attacks against the U.S. Army in the city recently." KUNA notes, "The attack against the Americans was part of a bloody day across Iraq. A bomb car attack happened in Salahuddin province, leaving several people killed or injured." That Salahuddin Province bombing took place in Tikrit. Deng Shasha (Xinhua) reports that at least 11 Iraqi security forces are dead and nineteen people are injured as a result of a suicide car bombing in Tikrit and "The attack took place in the morning when a suicide bomber drove his explosive-laden car into the checkpoint at the entrance of the presidential compound of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussien, and blew it up, the source said." Al Jazeera notes that "Nuri Sabah al-Mashhadani, a senior military intelligence official, was among those killed". BBC News adds, "There was reported to be widespread damage to buildings in the complex, which has been likened to a local version of Baghdad's heavily fortified Green Zone of government and administrative buildings." Today's Zaman pools reports by AP and Reuters to note, "The blast took place as Iraqi military officers were supervising the handover of checkpoint security from the army to the police." Tim Craig and Aziz Alwan (Washington Post) report, "In Tikrit, Iraqi security officials say the palace bombing occurred as the Iraqi army, under orders from Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's national government, was attempting to take over responsibility for protecting the palace following Friday's explosion." Yes, Friday, Tikrit was also slammed with bombings: Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reports, "Seventeen people were killed and 50 others wounded in a blast from a container full of explosives left outside of the Presidential Palaces Mosque in central Tikrit, Iraq, officials told CNN. That was followed in the evening by another explosion when a suicide bomber wearing an explosives vest enetered a Tikrit hospital treating the wounded, Iraq interior ministry officials told CNN. Six people died and 10 were wounded at the hospital in the second attack." On the mosque bombing, BBC News notes, "Some reports suggest the bomb was hidden inside a fuel canister at the entrance to the mosque." AP explains, "The mosque was inside a government-controlled compound where many officials live, and most in attendance were security or government employees." Muhanned Saif Aldin and Tim Craig (Washington Post) quote MP Jamal Algilani stating of the government out of Baghdad, "The procedures that they are following don't meet the size of the responsibility that they are in charge of." Michael S. Schmidt (New York Times) quotes provincial council member Hussein al-Shatub stating, "I don't know how they were able to put these explosives in such a secure area. I was at the main gate of mosque on my way to pray when the explosion occurred. I started evacuating injured people to the hospital. It was a huge explosion." Al Jazeera adds, "Al Jazeera's Omar al-Saleh, reporting from Baghdad, quoting government sources, said, 'Significantly, the compound houses the governor, police command and several other security directorates'." Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) offers one government response to the bombings, "Friday's explosions came less than 24 hours after four explosions hit another predominantly Sunni Muslim city, Ramadi, on Thursday night, killing five and injuring 27. Residents of Tikrit said that authorities had imposed a curfew until further notice." And that wasn't the end of the violence in Iraq today. Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports on attacks in Baghdad including, "According to an Interior Ministry source who spoke on condition of anonymity, the gunmen attacked two checkpoints manned by members of the Awakeing Council milita, which was formed to assist the Iraqi government with security, and one checkpoint manned by Iraqi soldiers. Three of the Awakening Council members were killed and three others were wounded while one Iraqi soldier was killed and another wounded." Reuters notes a Baghdad car bombing claimed 1 life and left ten people injured, a Baghdad roadside bombing left six injured, a second Baghdad roadside bombing injured four people and a Ramadi home bombing claimed the lives of "a local politician and three members of his family." Dropping back to yesterday, Dar Addustour reported a feminist activist confronted Nouri publicly at a human rights conference in Baghdad and was expelled. Was she expelled or did she leave on her own? The conference was being broadcast live on Iraqi state television but the feed was cut after the woman, Hana Adwar, made her comments. AFP adds, "Footage of the confrontation, broadcast live on Iraqiya state television, continued for several minutes, and showed Adwar holding up a poster and eventually being led away. She was not immediately available for comment." Aswat al-Iraq spoke with Hana who explains that Nouri had yet again been referring to youth activists as terrorists and, "These accusations are not appropriate and acceptable." She noted that an NGO speaker was supposed to be present but wasn't, "so I went to Premier Maliki and handed him the poster of the four activists detained last Friday [May 27, 2011], as well as a letter from Iraqi Human Rights Ministry expressing its concern for the disappearance of Iraqi citizens arrested by security force, though Iraq abided by international accords". She noted she left the conference after doing so and that, while Nouri's government insists the four were to be released today, they'd also said there would be no visits between the four and their families until June 11th making it clear "that their detention will continue to that date." Guess who else was present at the conference? Ad Melkert. The UN notes: A major conference tasked with drafting a national action plan to improve human rights in Iraq offers a critical chance for the country's citizens to ensure that their voices are heard, a senior United Nations official said today. Ad Melkert, the Secretary-General's Special Representative for Iraq, told the opening of the three-day conference in Baghdad that it was the first time where representatives of all sectors of society – including the Government, the judiciary, academia and civil society – had gathered to discuss human rights. He noted that millions of Iraqis have experienced human rights abuses in various forms in recent years. "Loss of life, torture and abuse, loss of access to health care, housing and education, destruction of economic opportunity and the means to earn a livelihood are a few of the harsh realities that the Iraqi people have faced," Mr. Melkert said. The Special Representative said the recent demonstrations in Iraq, like those across North Africa and the Middle East this year, were an indication that all Iraqis seek to have their basic rights respected and protected. But how likely is that with Nouri al-Maliki playing Little Saddam? And with him already declaring there will be no protests Friday in Baghdad's Tahrir Square? It would appear that after a few decades, the US government grew tired of their puppet in Iraq and decided to send many US troops to their deaths in order to take out the puppet and install a new one -- all the while insisting that what was taking place was 'liberation.' Jane Arraf (Al Jazeera and the Christian Science Monitor) observed in a Tweet: janearraf jane arraf In serious case of #Iraq deja vu, Maliki guards stop cameras during activist's outburst at - ironically - UN human rights conference Sunday. 8 hours ago In other activists news, Aswat al-Iraq reports Iraqi youth activists met up in Istanbul Saturday with Ayad Al-Zamili, who heads the conference's organizing committee, stating this "is the first of its kind since the outburst of popular protest in Iraq last February." He further stated that the meet-up was not held in Iraq "due to the security deterioration and governmental arrests for a number of activists during the past period, we had to meet in Turkey. We do not have the intention to establish a party of political organization, but only to unify efforts on a road map for their movement, to be added to that of the Iraqi people, after the end of the 100 Days set by Maliki, that ends on 7 of this month to achieve the promised reforms demanded by the Iraqi people." June 7th ends the 100 Days. Dar Addustour quotes al-Zamili stating the conference is about imporving cooperationg between the groups and the youth activists and the media as well addressing oragnization techniques and messaging. He notes that the security conditions in Baghdad have only worsened and that they are hoping to develop a road map for future actions via the conference. At the meet-up, Aswat al-Iraq also reports, the activists explored "Suing Premier Nouri al-Maliki's government at the International Criminal Court in the Hague for violating human rights, freedom of expression, peaceful demonstrations and the Geneva Convention." David Ali (Al Mada) notes that the activists are considering filing a complaint with the ICC specifically about the arrest of four activists in Baghdad two Fridays ago and calling for their release. The activists state that charges against them (fake i.d.s) are fraudulent and that the activists should be immediately freed. Meanwhile Nouri has issued an order that there will be no protests next Friday in Baghdad's Tahrir Square. This Friday? Why's he worried about this Friday? With the 100 Days coming to an end June 7th, Nouri doesn't want the world to see just what a failure he is and just how unpopular he is. Fortunately, so very much of the foreign press in Iraq (that includes the US) have been happy to ignore the ongoing months of protest in order to assist Nouri -- the US Embassy prevails over a free press apparently. 100 Days was the plan Nouri came up with to try to derail the protests. As protesters gathered to decry the lack of basic services (electricity, potable water, etc.), the lack of jobs, the detainees disappeared into the Iraqi 'justice' system and more, Nouri insisted all would be settled in 100 Days. Moqtada al-Sadr backed him up. Moqtada said people should stop protesting (except for his own staged protests, of course) and wait for the end of the 100 Days. The 100 Days ends June 7th. There's been no improvement. Al Sabaah reports that the government's evaluation process has begun. Going again to a Tweet from Jane Arraf: janearraf jane arraf On Maliki's 100-day deadline, #Iraqi prime ministry responds to questions about ministers being fired by saying there will be surveys first. 8 hours ago And AFP's Prashant Rao Tweets prashantrao Prashant Rao #Iraq PM Maliki calls on service ministers to explain to public what has been accomplished in past 100 days, as deadline closes in (Tues) 5 Jun So the ministers in his Cabinet, ministers he nominated, ministers in the Cabinet he heads, are the ones who have to be accountable to the people? Is the prime minister post -- like the president -- supposed to be strictly ceremonial? Mohamad Ali Harissi (AFP) reports that Nouri "has pulled back from a threat of major changes if ministers did not shape up" and that "Protests have already been planned for Friday, with a group set up on social networking website Facebook called 'Great Iraqi Revolution' drawing 35,000 members and urging supporters to take to the streets." Tim Craig (Washington Post) adds: Mohammed Fenjan, a protest organizer, said in an interview Monday that "nothing has been accomplished" during the past three months so he expects students, "the unemployed and poor people" to swarm to Tahrir Square this Friday to renew their calls for more reform. "It's our place, we will not give up. We will do it out of Tahrir Square," Fenjan said. "We will not stop our protests unless the government responds to our demands, and if they try to prevent us from having the protests or demonstrations there, we will face them." Fakhri Karim (Al Mada) observes that the 100 Days have been a failure and that Nouri's hold on "the security services and devices" has increased to the point that there is fear as people see "the same methods which were practiced under the previous regime: kidnapping, assault, torture and framing people with false charges." Karim notes the four men who were protesting in Baghdad May 27th and were arrested. Karim asks why, if the government is telling the truth about the four faking IDs, there has been no trial and notes that the four are "students, activists in the protest movement against corruption poor conditions and the assault on civil liberties." And, for the record, tomorrow I'm not being nice. Today? I've let this and that report slide as reporters put the 100 Days into their own words. It's one thing for Nouri's spokesperson to lie. It's something else for news outlets to do so. (And not in attributing the claims to Nouri's spokesperson, but presenting the claims as their own rememberance of the 100 Days.) If you get it wrong in a report published after this snapshot goes up, I'm not being nice about it. A lot of you didn't pay attention to what was going on when it was going on. Some of you may just like being Nouri's water boy or girl. But Nouri made promises and those promises are part of the record. If you're unfamiliar with the public record, you need to refresh your memory before you write about what Nouri said would happen after 100 Days. A lot of you -- A LOT -- need to refresh your memories. (Do I need to? Oh, you don't know me if you have to ask. Even if I'm right, I always suspect, reading someone else assertion, "Gosh, I must be remembering wrong." But I wasn't remembering wrong and I have brushed up on reports from that time period and what Nouri promised.) And to be really clear, I'm not talking about Iraqi journalists. They remember, they don't need brushing up and their reporting has been consistent on what was supposed to be accomplished in the 100 Days. I am talking about journalists for foreign (non-Iraqi) publications. As all this goes on, Mayada Al Askari (Gulf News) interviews Ayad Allawi, head of Iraqiya, who tells some truths about how Nouri got to remain prime minister (Allawi's telling the truth and we've covered what he's saying here in real time as it went down): Gulf News: As sponsors of the political process in Iraq, did the US convince the political blocs to give [Prime Minister] Nouri Al Maliki another chance? What is their opinion today regarding what is happening in Iraq? Eyad Allawi: In my opinion, the US was keen to not give the Al Iraqiya bloc its constitutional rights, despite the fact that their security agreements in Iraq clearly stated that they will protect democracy in the country. However, we did not hear one word from the international community in support of the election results. Instead, everyone was in accord with the Iranian vision and will. I believe Iran is the strongest; however, it has committed miscalculations. Iraqis will never accept interference, although they are keen to set up positive relations with countries around the world that are built upon mutual respect and non-interference in the internal affairs of others. The Al Iraqiya coalition, all national forces, and myself, are opposed to wars waged against countries and peoples, including all neighbouring countries. We call for building and protecting mutual interests. I believe it is in the interest of Iran to re-evaluate its position. As for the US with which we have to maintain our friendship because of our many joint interests, I believe they also have to re-evaluate their stand regarding the Middle East as a whole in a way that will guarantee the people's will, freedom and choice. A section of Friday's snapshot included the following: Now we'll note another hearing this week (I didn't attend this hearing) via press coverage. Jane Cowan reports on PM (Australia's ABC -- link includes text and audio) about the Wednesday House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee hearing. JANE COWAN: In a report to Congress in the middle of last year the Pentagon said Iraq's security forces would continue to rely on US support to meet and maintain minimum standards. In March this year the US Senate heard there would be "loose ends" unless the Iraqis asked America to stay on. This is how the Democratic congressman Gary Ackerman puts it: GARY ACKERMAN: Iraq seems to have been a marriage of convenience. Everybody seems to agree that there should be some kind of a divorce but when? And everybody thought that we were waiting for the final papers to come through and now we seem to have some remorse about that. Maybe we're sticking around for the sake of the children, and now they're all saying we should leave, although they really mean we should stay but we ain't staying unless they ask us it seems like a mess. I don't know how you explain that to the civilian population that's going to be asked to pay for child support. JANE COWAN: The Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki had been saying for months he'll stand by the deal but recently did a turnaround, saying he'd support keeping some troops beyond the deadline if he can get most of the country's politicians to agree. Did you catch what's missing? This link. My apologies. It also included this on All Things Considered (NPR): They also had time for Coward Daniel Schorr (no longer 'with us' and no loss there) to provide a commentary declaring it was time for those European countries who were enjoying "popularity," he insisted, because they were "thumbing their nose at a super power" (the US) needed to "consider the risks and the costs of letting America go it" alone and they just might regret "turning their backs on America." That actually should have had a link (and it will in a second). An angry e-mail informs that Daniel Schorr was "a whistle blower, a testament to bravery and a gift to journalism and men." I wasn't aware of any relations with men Schorr had, but whatever. What I am aware of is that there was no bravery in Daniel Schorr. Ava and I tackled him here. That's the link I should have included. And this is from memory and many, many moons ago, but I believe it was Nora Ephron -- then a media critic for Esquire -- who rightly called out Schorr's attempt to get Lesley Stahl fired by CBS by insisting it must have been her who leaked to the Village Voice (it was Schorr who leaked it -- that's called "lying," not "bravery"). And, again, that's many, many moons ago but I do believe the piece was considered "too hot" for Nora's outlet and she had to publish it in the journalism review MORE. This morning's "5 US soldiers dead in Iraq -- what will the whores focus on instead?" noted how the MSM and the left media were both awash in trivia while ignoring the things that really matter. A number of you wanted portions of that entry included in this. There's not room. But I will note what hit me after that went up this morning. It's not just awash in trivia, it's bitchy. That's what they're trying to be. (How sad to fail at everything else and then also fail at bitchy.) It's not journalism, it's not reporting, it's just bitchy. The point of the entry was to note the silence on Iraq. "So last week while Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch were both issuing important statements on Iraq, while US House Rep Gary Ackerman was speaking in the House about it being time to tell the American people that not only was the Iraq War not over but it would be continuing past 2011, while Nouri al-Maliki continued his crackdown on protesters and declared that this Friday no protests would be allowed in Baghdad's Tahrir Square, while various officials were assassinated (yesterday, the latest became the bodyguard for the Speaker of Parliament), while the 100 Days loomed to a close with no improvements, while all of this and so much more was going on," but instead of getting any of that, we got them playing bitchy with an unimportant remark Sarah Palin made. It was unimportant, it didn't matter one bit, it put food on no worker's table. But they all obsessed over it (and, according to Andrew Malcolm -- Los Angeles Times -- they got it wrong) and wasted everyone's time with their attepts at bitchy while Iraq went unnoticed. This morning, 5 US soldiers dead in Iraq was reported by AP. And what would they do today to avoid reporting or just gas bagging on that or anything to do with Iraq? The entry noted, "Peter Grier (Christian Science Monitor) didn't write about Iraq but did find time to ridicule Palin -- again Malcolm states she's right." You'll be glad to know that Grier returned to the topic this afternoon -- won't you sleep better? Not to do a correction but to do a half-assed maybe-she's-wrong-maybe-I'm-wrong piece. And Iraq? May 27th was when the Christian Science Monitor last ran an article. And The Nation magazine which once boasted -- on their cover no less -- that they wouldn't support any candidate who wasn't for a full and complete withdrawal from Iraq? Not a damn word. Not one word about 5 US soldiers dying in one day in Iraq. Not a word about Iraq period. Like I said, we don't have room. Tomorrow, we'll note Adam Kokesh's Thomas Jefferson Memorial Dance Party success over the weekend. iraq the new york times jack healy michael s. schmidt the associated press rebecca santana cnn mohammed tawfeeq nbc the today show jim miklaszewski aswat al-iraq the los angeles times ned parker afp prashant rao xinhua deng shasha bbc news the washington post tim craiz aziz alwan dar addustour aswat al-iraq xinhua al rafidayn al sabaah al mada fakhri karim

Melanie Sloane loves John Edwards

If you missed it, Melanie Sloane and her useless gaggle of whores at CREW are upset that aged slut John Edwards is now under federal indictment.

Melanie apparently has a vagina that goes moist when she sees a man posing as a Breck girl. Or maybe she's fallen for all her press? I have no idea.

I just know that the useless whore has embarrassed herself again and who would have thought that was possible?

She's gone from useless hack to all around political whore.

Next up, Melanie goes to the public clinic for a lobbying disease!

She really is sick and there's a reason this community walked away from the faux 'actions' of CREW.



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

Friday, June 3, 2011. Chaos and violence continue, Iraq is slammed by bombings, activists demonstrate in Baghdad's Tahrir Square despite intimidation efforts by security forces, Adam Kokesh gears up for his dance party, and more. Iraq War veteran Adam Kokesh holds the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Dance Party tomorrow at noon. Young Americans for Liberty (a continuation of 2008's Students for Ron Paul) picks Adam Kokesh as their Rebel Of The Week. John McKenna explains, "Dancing, even if you are the worst dancer known to man, is a free act of expression, which I'm pretty sure is protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution. Banning it as a 'dmonstration' is bad enough, but the Gestapo-like reactions of the Park Rangers was beyond unnecessary." What is McKenna talking about? On last night's Adam vs. the Man, Adam spoke with Medea Benjamin and Tighe Barry and, in a column, Medea explains what happened last weekend: It was Memorial Day weekend. My partner Tighe Barry and I were on our way to New York, but we decided to make a quick trip to the Memorial to support the dancers. When we got there, two park policemen were talking to the group. We moved closer to hear what they were saying and overheard someone ask the police how they define dancing. Tighe put his arms around my waist and started swaying, illustrating how hard it is to define what, precisely, is dancing. Suddenly, to our utter amazement, we were set upon by the police. They yanked us apart, handcuffed us and shoved us on the ground. That's when three members of the group put on their headsets and started boogying. The police went wild, bodyslamming, chokeholding, and jumping on top of them. The police cleared out the entire Memorial as if they were protecting the tourists from some kind of terrorist threat, then threw us in a paddywagon and hauled us off to jail. Three hours later, after mug shots and fingerprinting, we were charged with "dancing in a restricted area" and cited to come back to court. Adam got the body slam, the choke hold and the arrest for the 'crime' of rhythmic movement. He is fighting back and there will be a Dance Party at the Jefferson Memorial this Saturday at noon. More information can be found at RT's Adam vs. the Man. Especially refer to Wednesday's broadcast. In addition to Adam's program, you can also find out information at this Facebook page on the event and on solidarity events taking place around the world. May 11th, Senator Patty Murray, Chair of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, held a press conference to explain Hiring Heroes Act of 2011, a Senate bill to assist veterans with employment. Among the things that the bill would do: * Makes participation in the Transition Assistance Program mandatory for separating servicemembers; * Requires that each servicemember receive an individualized assessment of jobs they may qualify for when they participate in the Transition Assistance Program; Transition Assistance Program (TAP) is supposed to help service members transitioning to veteran status with a number of issues that will come up in the civilian world such as how to market skills. "TAP is a program," US House Rep Marlin Stutzman declared yesterday, "that is supposed to help discharging veterans transition from the military into civilian careers. VA also has a portion of TAP where they educate the servicemembers on the multitude of services that are available to them once they become veterans." Stutzman is the Chair of the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity which was holding a hearing on TAP. The first panel was composed of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America's Marco Reininger and AMVETS' Christina Roof. Excerpt. Subcommittee Chair Marlin Stutzman: I do have a couple of questions for both of you. You mentioned the figure of 45% of service members attend TAP. Is that for all branches? Am I wrong in that the Marines do require, it is mandatory for their service members to attend TAP before they are discharged? And do we know if their percentages are any higher than the other branches? Christina Roof: When I spoke with Marine Corps officials last week, I was told it is mandatory that their Marines complete the TAP program. I was also told there were some exceptions, of course, you know, like critical injuries involved and so on. But I was told last week that it is mandatory that all their Marines complete TAP before their service discharge. Subcommittee Chair: Marlin Stutzman: So that's with no exceptions? Every Marine coming out does -- has completed TAP or . . . Christina Roof: Again, I can only go on what they told me which was, it is mandatory which I think is a great idea that should be across the board. I can't speak, again, to each individual case but it seems like they are enforcing it. Subcommittee Chair Marlin Stutzman: So would the 45% number have Marines in that percentage? Or do we not know more of -- the demographics or -- Christina Roof: I'll let my colleague, I think that was his number. Marco Reininger: Sir, if I may, I'm not 100% sure whether or not this number includes the Marine Corps but I believe that making it mandatory DoD wide would be the right solution here. That same survey indicated that many veterans didn't attend the TAP program where TAP courses were offered because it had a reputation of being redundant, not really useful for making a successful transition. And, in some cases even, commanding officers wouldn't let them go. This is what they say, again, this is what the survey indicated. So mandating it DoD wide for all service branches would be the right answer here, sir. And, of course, along with that comes having to overhaul the program so that it actually works and makes sense for people to actually attend. [. . .] Ranking Member Bruce Braley: Let me ask you this basic question. Isn't it true that the Department of Defense could make these programs mandatory, across the board right now without any further action by Congress if they wanted to? [They nod their heads.] That was a "yes" from both of you. Marco Reininger: Yes, sir, absolutely, the executive branch could order this to be mandatory and that would most likely be the end of it as far as I understand the process. At Third last month in "Hiring Heroes Act of 2011," we noted our support for Senator Patty Murray's bill including the mandatory aspect of TAP: We think it has to be mandatory to be successful and we feel that way based on the many stories shared with us and those shared in public about returning service members. How you're gathered in a large group and told there's help available if you have 'emotional' problems, but nobody has 'emotional' problems, right? In other words, the VA's been able to avoid issues like PTSD by demonizing and ridiculing them when they should be providing treatment. We can see something similar happening with the military's job skills training program. Wait. See it happening? It's already happening which is why Murray could state, in the news conference, "Today, nearly one-third of those leaving the Army don't get this training." There are a lot of programs the military offers. There's a real problem getting the word out. In some instances, such as PTSD, it's hard to draw any conclusion either than the military wants to keep the numbers down. Making the program mandatory means it falls back on superiors if veterans aren't getting access to these programs. Making it mandatory does make superiors answerable if TAP isn't attended. Why wasn't it attended? Why didn't you ensure that ___ attended it? Did you not understand it was mandatory and your role in this was to ensure that it happened? Back to the Subcommittee hearing. The second panel was composed of VA's Thomas Pamperin, Ruth A. Fanning, Dept of Labor's Ramond Jefferson and DoD's Philip A. Burdette and Brig Gen Robert Hedelund. Staying with the topic of TAP, we'll note this exchange. Subcommittee Chair Marlin Stutzman: General Hedelund, my question is with the Marine Corps policy that requires TAP, have you seen any negative effects? And how does the Corps enforce mandatory attendance? Brig Gen Robert Hedelund: Yes, sir. Thank you for that question. First, no. No operational impacts by requiring Marines to go to mandatory TAP. As I mentioned in my opening statement, our goal is to make this mandatory requirement almost OBE because people will figure out this is something they need and want. That said, some of the discussion earlier from the first panel is relevant in that it is a bit of a leadership issue. Let's not forget that this event does not happen in a vacuum. And that's part of the issue right now with TAP is that it's a one-shot deal. And where it falls on a Marine's timeline to get out of the Marine Corps sometimes is convenient, sometimes not so much. Now we'll note another hearing this week (I didn't attend this hearing) via press coverage. Jane Cowan reports on PM (Australia's ABC -- link includes text and audio) about the Wednesday House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee hearing. JANE COWAN: In a report to Congress in the middle of last year the Pentagon said Iraq's security forces would continue to rely on US support to meet and maintain minimum standards. In March this year the US Senate heard there would be "loose ends" unless the Iraqis asked America to stay on. This is how the Democratic congressman Gary Ackerman puts it: GARY ACKERMAN: Iraq seems to have been a marriage of convenience. Everybody seems to agree that there should be some kind of a divorce but when? And everybody thought that we were waiting for the final papers to come through and now we seem to have some remorse about that. Maybe we're sticking around for the sake of the children, and now they're all saying we should leave, although they really mean we should stay but we ain't staying unless they ask us it seems like a mess. I don't know how you explain that to the civilian population that's going to be asked to pay for child support. JANE COWAN: The Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki had been saying for months he'll stand by the deal but recently did a turnaround, saying he'd support keeping some troops beyond the deadline if he can get most of the country's politicians to agree. Sophie Quinton (National Journal) adds, "Testifying experts stressed that the United States is expected to continue to influence Iraq by civilian means. The State Department is scheduled to take the lead role in supporting Iraq's security, political, and economic development in October 2011, and the U.S. Agency for International Development will continue its capacity-building efforts." Quinton quotes the State Dept's Patricia Haslach (Iraq Transition Coordinator) telling the Subcommittee, "We're not done. We have no intention of leaving Iraq." John T. Bennett (The Hill) emphasizes US House Rep Gary Ackerman's remarks: "Most Americans believe we're done in Iraq," said Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-N.Y.), ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Middle East and South Asia subcommittee. "That is at odds with the reality in Iraq. "The American people thought they had already bought this and paid for this," Ackerman said. "That appears to not be the case." So, too, did members of Congress. That means the White House soon will have to start "selling a lot of members," Ackerman said, predicting that the "collision" of reality and lawmakers' desires "will not be pretty." The Great Iraqi Revolution notes, "Informed sources in PM Maliki's Office: confirm news that the press has been buzzing with : Maliki has formed a secret committee with his direct oversight to complete the secret discussions with the Americans about the second security agreement." In related news, John R. Parkinson (ABC News) reports that Speaker of the House John Boehner has siad Barack Obama needs to "step up and help the American understand why these missions are vital to the nationaal security interest of our country. [. . .] I really do believe that the president needs to speak out, in terms of our mission in Afghanistan, our mission in Iraq, our mission in Libya, and the doubts that our members have frankly reflected they're reflecting what they're heaing from their constituents." Iraq was slammed with bombings today. Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reports, "Seventeen people were killed and 50 others wounded in a blast from a container full of explosives left outside of the Presidential Palaces Mosque in central Tikrit, Iraq, officials told CNN. That was followed in the evening by another explosion when a suicide bomber wearing an explosives vest enetered a Tikrit hospital treating the wounded, Iraq interior ministry officials told CNN. Six people died and 10 were wounded at the hospital in the second attack." On the mosque bombing, BBC News notes, "Some reports suggest the bomb was hidden inside a fuel canister at the entrance to the mosque." AP explains, "The mosque was inside a government-controlled compound where many officials live, and most in attendance were security or government employees." Muhanned Saif Aldin and Tim Craig (Washington Post) quote MP Jamal Algilani stating of the government out of Baghdad, "The procedures that they are following don't meet the size of the responsibility that they are in charge of." Michael S. Schmidt (New York Times) quotes provincial counil member Hussein al-Shatub stating, "I don't know how they were able to put these explosives in such a secure area. I was at the main gate of mosque on my way to pray when the explosion occurred. I started evacuating injured people to the hospital. It was a huge explosion." Al Jazeera adds, "Al Jazeera's Omar al-Saleh, reporting from Baghdad, quoting government sources, said, 'Significantly, the compound houses the governor, police command and several other security directorates'." Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) offers one government response to the bombings, "Friday's explosions came less than 24 hours after four explosions hit another predominantly Sunni Muslim city, Ramadi, on Thursday night, killing five and injuring 27. Residents of Tikrit said that authorities had imposed a curfew until further notice." Today was truly a violent day in Iraq and not the day for the US State Dept to issue a release promoting business in Iraq that opens with one bad lie after another until it sinks under its own spin: Iraq today is emerging from years of civil conflict and economic isolation, and has the potential to again become what it was not so long ago: a prosperous country with a thriving middle class. Iraq is a market with tremendous potential. By many estimates, Iraq has the world's third-largest oil reserves, and plans to explore for additional reserves. Iraq's population is estimated at around 30 million, among the largest in the region, and is projected to grow more than two percent annually over the next five years. According to the Iraqi government's National Development Plan, the government has plans to spend $100 billion of its own money on thousands of reconstruction and development projects over the next four years. In recent years, there are a number of tangible signs that Iraq's economy is stabilizing and expanding: Iraq's economy averaged an estimated 4.5 percent real growth over the past four years; Oil production has increased an estimated 22 percent since 2005, and oil exports have increased an estimated 58 percent over the same period; Consumer prices have stabilized, with single-digit inflation over the past three years after more than 50 percent inflation in 2006; The Iraqi government has spent more than US $20 billion on reconstruction and investment projects each of the last two years. The economic sectors in Iraq with the greatest investment potential include: energy, including both hydrocarbons and the electrical power sector; infrastructure such as architecture, construction, and engineering and transportation; information and communications technology; health such as medical technology, pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, and health care services; and agribusiness. We'll come back to the State Dept's embarrassing days but you'll notice the release ignores the issue of unemployment. That issue, the lack of jobs, has been among the reasons Iraqis have been protesting. Youth activists and others (including The Great Iraqi Revolution community) gathered in Baghdad's Tahrir Square to honor the detainees lost in the so-called 'justice' system in Iraq. People whose families have no idea where they are or if they are still alive. And, specifically, to show solidarity with the four arrested last Friday. Last Friday was "False Promises Friday." The Great Iraqi Revolution noted the four arrested: "THE 4 YOUNG ACTIVISTS WHO WERE ARRESTED TODAY BY QASSIM ATTA AND TAKEN TO A PLACE UNKNOWN - 27.5.2011 - THEIR NAMES ARE: JIHAD JALEEL, ALI ABDUL KHALIQ, MOUAYED AL TAYEB AND AHMED AL BAGHDADI. We pray God to have them released very soon." They also noted of last Friday's Baghdad protest -- or in response to it, a smear campaign is being launched on TV, "In the serial of attempting to bad mouth and blacken the Tahrir Square protestors and demonstrators, Qassim Atta and the Iraqiya air photos of one of the detained activists in the Protests and accuse him of several crimes, they then proceed to air a film of a crime whose perpetrators are known to all and sundry, and in the same film some hooded men are heard to accuse that the activist is the person who committed the crime!" And the assault on protesters continued Saturday. Aswat al-Iraq reported: An eye witness said that a military force raided an NGO, known as Where is My Right, and arrested 11 persons, including its secretary general, in suspicion for their relationship with the organizers of Tahreer Square demonstrations. "Four Hummer military vehicles and two 4-wheel drive cars surrounded the organization premises in Maidan Square, in the center of Baghdad, where they searched it and destroyed its computers," the source told Aswat al-Iraq. On the other hand, an activist said on the Facebook page for the Tahreer Square demonstrations, that the organization is an NGO that participated in organizing the demonstrations. The arrested persons were meeting to discuss how to release the four activists who were arrested last Friday. Yesterday Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch both issued statements decrying the government crackdown on protest and free speech in Iraq. Today The Great Iraqi Revolution offers audio of a song and notes, "Today, all of Iraq is a Revolution Battlefield." On the four arrrested last Friday, Raheem Salman and Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) speak with the families of the activists and one of the fathers tells the reporters, "I know about Ahmed that he loves his country, he loves freedom. I don't know where to go, whom to ask. Are our sons really criminals? .... Even if they have fake identities, why can't we see them? This is not a threat to the state's security." Meanwhile Jack Healy and Michael S. Schmidt (New York Times) note, "Rights groups said the people detained had been denied access to lawyers and visits with their families, and criticized the arrests as a ploy to stifle any dissent in the streets, even if it was peaceful and relatively low-key." The Great Iraqi Revolution reports, "Our Correspondent in Baghdad: Government Intelligence officers in plain clothes seriously assaulted members of the press on FALSE PROMISE FRIDAY and particularly Russia Today Channel crew, Diyar Channel and Al Ain, attacking them with knives resulting in the very serious injury of the Diyar correspondent and the theft of 4 cameras as well as the smashing up of the Rasheed Channel camera." and "Our Correspondent in Baghdad: Very heavy deployment of government security forces in Baghdad and heavy deployment of SWAT on Mohammed Al Qassim Highway." Alsumaria TV also notes that "Iraqi security forces massed up." Turning to the political scene where everything's fallen apart over Nouri al-Maliki's refusal to keep his word and honor the Erbil Agreement (that agreement allowed the stalemate regarding selecting a prime minister and Parliament holding sessions to end by having the various political blocs agree on key issues and positions). Earlier this week, Iraqiya walked out on the process (Iraqiya was the political slate that won the most votes and the most seats in Parliament). UPI notes, "Iraqiya announced it was standing on the sidelines until Maliki's State of Law coalition met a series of demands. Iraqiya in its demands called for an end to 'security violations' in the country, partnerships in security and human rights and the approval of the Sunni-backed slate's list for top defense positions, the Voices of Iraq new agency reports." Aswat al-Iraq notes that Iraq's Sunni Vice President and Iraqiya member Tariq al-Hashimi issued a statement declaring Nouri "has no solution to the present crisis except fleeing from political forces by his weak promises. Maliki will not be able to achieve the national partnership, because he is eager for the (necessity leader) idea." al-Hashimi is calling for new elections. And Alsumaria TV reports, ""Head of the Islamic Supreme Council Sayyed Ammar Al Hakim believes that blaming the current downfalls in Iraq on national partnership is wrong, a source told Alsumaria. The present situation relies on partnership between the weak not between the strong and competent, Al Hakim argued." And as that debate continues, back to a US government embarrassment. Eli Lake (Washington Times) reports on an emerging scandal involving the US State Dept and your right to know: The State Department is blocking inspectors from the U.S. government's independent auditor for Iraqi reconstruction from conducting an assessment of the department's multibillion-dollar effort to train Iraq's police. Stuart Bowen, the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, discussed the standoff with the State Department in an interview this week. "We have a long history of auditing the police training in Iraq," Mr. Bowen said. "It is simply a misapprehension to conclude that our jurisdiction only applies to bricks-and-mortar reconstruction. To the contrary, Congress has charged us with overseeing the expenditure of funds in Iraq." Moving to the US, one of the perks of being friends with a strangely influential person in the antiwar movement is apparently that you don't get called out. So a CIA/former CIA/something gets to brag how groovy Robert Gates is an Robert Gates gets years and years of cover. Donald Rumsfeld didn't. But Robert Gates has managed to be the Secretary of Defense under two different administrations. Yet somehow, he doesn't get called out. As Mike recently pointed out, when CIA Ray McGovern wanted attention and attempted to disrupt Hillary Clinton's speech, he insisted it was just like what he'd done with Rumsfeld. No, it wasn't. Rumsfeld was Secretary of Defense. Over the war. But a special, loving friendship appeared to prevent McGovern from protesting Gates. And surprisingly, Gates hasn't been held accountable by the left for anything throughout his tenure -- despite his Iran-Contra history. Gates is on his never-ending Love Me tour. The War Hawk has paired up twice this week with War Pimp Robert Siegel. The day (Feb. 5, 2003) Colin Powell, then-US Secretary of State, went to the United Nations to lie (what Collie calls the "blot" on his record), Robert Siegel hailed it on All Things Considered as "the most extenisve, most documented and mosturgent presentation." Siegel was happy, in that segment, to present Collie's accusations -- just not to question them or note the embarrassing realities of the lies. Strangely, while Siegel couldn't question any of the assertions, Democracy Now! (link has audio and video) -- covering the same segment with Phyllis Bennis, James Paul and As'ad Abu Khalil -- was able to and to note that how "much of Powell's presentation is impossible to verify." In fairness, the All Things Considered segment did not "a bunch of determined liars" -- however, that was the 'peace' voice (Jessica Tuchman Mathews) speaking of Iraqis. Please note that JTM was their idea of 'peace' because she (a) hated Iraqis on air and (b) wasn't opposed to the idea of going to war with Iraq and just concerned herself with whether Colin Powell was really groovy or he-makes-her-panties-wet groovy. They also had time for Coward Daniel Schorr (no longer 'with us' and no loss there) to provide a commentary declaring it was time for those European countries who were enjoying "popularity," he insisted, because they were "thumbing their nose at a super power" (the US) needed to "consider the risks and the costs of letting America go it" alone and they just might regret "turning their backs on America." The first part of the interview (which aired Wednesday) was embarrassing but Iraq didn't really factor in. The second part aired yesterday. In the interview, Gates explains he was always for the surge (and that he plans to write about what really took place on the Iraq Study Group he served on before becoming Secretary of Defense "and I will write about this later, but I was not the only one"). Siegel wanted to talk about the defense industry advertising on TV and in print in the DC area and Gates chuckled about how he believed the costs of that would show up "in one of our contracts" causing Siegel to laugh, "You'll end up paying for that ad is what you see.." That's not funny nor is it accurate. Gates doesn't "pay." The American tax payers pay. It's the American people's money. And instead of asking about the 'surge,' why the hell wasn't Siegel asking about the realities of Iraq or does Siegel not pay attention to what actually happens in Iraq? Siegel -- and All Things Considered -- bungled things (at best) in real time when they should have been investigating and informing the American people that there was no case for war on Iraq. Eight years later, he wants to chuckle and laugh with Gates and present the notion that Iraq is somehow stable and things are groovy. That this passes for journalism is the strongest argument for defunding NPR. All Things Considered isn't the only pro-war outlet to be promoting the Iraq War these days. There's also The New Republic which has been around since 1914 and has a long and embarrassing history that would make for an epic mini-series. Following 9-11, the center-left magazine became ever more War Hawkish. And, as it did so, it lost more and more readers. Thomas E. Ricks 'young thang' Spencer Ackerman worked for The New Republic back then (he was later fired) and Ackerman was among the staff pimping the Iraq War. Among the staff? Howard Kurtz (then at the Washington Post) reported June 19, 2004: Ever since the New Republic broke with liberal orthodoxy by strongly supporting President Bush's war with Iraq, the magazine has been getting a steady stream of e-mails from readers demanding an apology. Now the left-leaning weekly has admitted that it was wrong to have backed the war based on the administration's claims that Saddam Hussein was hiding weapons of mass destruction. "We feel regret, but no shame. . . . Our strategic rationale for war has collapsed," says an editorial hammered out after a contentious, 3 1/2-hour editors' meeting. "I wanted the editorial to be honest not just about the war and other people's mistakes but our mistakes," Editor Peter Beinart says. "We felt we had a responsibility to look in the mirror." Pretty words from Petey but if they were at all truthful and represented the way the editors actually felt, T.A. Frank's hit piece would never have been published in 2005. From Dave Zirin's article decrying Frank's attacks on the peace movement: Author Tom Frank -- clearly from the Glass School of Journalism the New Republic has made famous -- described sitting in on an anti-war panel sponsored by the International Socialist Organization, the Washington Peace Center, the DC Anti-War Network and other groups. After having heard the 100 plus attendees cheer sentiments like "Money for Jobs and Education Not For War and Occupation," Frank became so riled up, he unloaded a deranged harangue about the suffering he would like to rain upon people daring to organize against this war. After Stan Goff, a former Delta Forces soldier and current organizer for Military Families Speak Out, expressed sentiments like "We ain't never resolved nothing through an election," Frank's jag began. Clearly too doughy to do it himself, Frank started to fantasize about a Teutonic strongman who could shut Goff up. Frank writes, "What I needed was a Republican like Arnold [Schwarzenegger] who would walk up to [Goff] and punch him in the face." As the panel continued, every cheer and standing ovation seemed to set Frank deeper down a path of psychosis. After International Socialist Review editorial board member Sherry Wolf asserted that Iraqis had a "right" to rebel against occupation, Frank upped the ante in his efforts to intimidate anyone considering entry into the anti-war movement. Were the editors serious -- and not just trying to revive their failing magazine -- in the spring of 2004, the start of 2005 would have been a lot different. And some publications -- The Progressive or The Nation, for example -- may feel superior to The New Republic today. They have no reason to. Kat, Wally, Ava and I are speaking about the Iraq War to various groups probably 44 or more weeks a year. And people sometimes ask why that is? 'Isn't the Iraq War over?' No, it's not. 'But Americans turned against the war.' At one point they had. And it's doubtful there will be a signifcant change in the next five or so years. But the revisionary tactics by War Hawks following Vietnam weren't interested in changing everyon's mind by 1980, they were laying the groundwork for the real revisionary techniques that would follow in the 80s. And a truth that pollsters never like to admit, any poll with a strong response (oppose or support)? It's not really accurate. Let's say 63% of Americans felt the Iraq War was a mistake in 2007. As much as 10% of that may not be a feeling. As much as 10% of the respondents are not really following the issue. What they're basing it on (true in any poll with strong support or strong opposition) is the cues, the cues in public, the cues from the media, the herd mentality. In that environment, you can't be silent. Unless you're trying to hand a victory to the War Hawks. While The Nation and The Progressive are silent about an ongoing war, The New Republic is always working it into columns. Fouad Ajami's latest (published at midnight) is entitled "Robert Gates Is Right About Iraq We've made progress -- and we shouldn't remove all U.S. troops." And maybe the first question should be: Why is The New Republic publishing a member of the right-wing Hoover Institution? The man's a moron and like most of the morons who were Academic War Hawks, he's with Johns Hopkins. No where in the article is there any indication that Ajami has been repeatedly wrong on the Iraq War since it started. And for a 21-year-old today, you're really expecting a lot if you think she or he is going to know who helped lie the US into war eight years ago. In addition, there are people who are just desperate for the Iraq War to be acknowledged in any way or form. By being silent you're helping to create the vacuum that the War Hawks will not shy from filling. Meanwhile Emily Bourke (The World Today, Australia's ABC -- link has audio and transcript) notes a new study: EMILY BOURKE: As Australia buries yet another one of its soldiers killed in the war in Afghanistan, a new survey has found most Australians and Americans think the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have not been worth it. The research by the US Studies Centre in the University of Sydney has revealed that almost a decade after the September 11 terrorist attacks the subsequent military campaigns are not helping to win the war on terror. The data shows the majority of Americans and Australians are suffering war on terror fatigue and they're questioning the cost in blood and treasure. iraq adam kokesh adam vs. the man thomas jefferson memorial dance party medea benjamin the great iraqi revolution human rights watch amnesty international the los angeles times ned parker raham salman the new york times jack healy michael s. schmidt the washington times eli lake cnn mohammed tawfeeq the washington post tim craig mcclatchy newspapers laith hammoudi al jazeera npr all things considered