Ava: We're going to be chock full of dialogue/transcript pieces this edition. My apologies for one more; however, we need to cover Iraq. So we're doing a discussion piece. Here's who is participating: Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man; C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review; Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills); Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz); Trina of Trina's Kitchen; Wally of The Daily Jot; Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends; Mike of Mikey Likes It!; Isaiah of The World Today Just Nuts; Ann of Ann's Mega Dub and me, Ava, of The Third Estate Sunday Review. This is a relative small group and this is a rush transcript. For those who don't know any better, the Iraq War is over. Kat, want to grab that?Kat: Sure. Through yesterday there have been 211 violent deaths this month according to Iraq Body Count. If the war is over, someone forgot to tell Iraqis that fact. In addition, let me quote from C.I.'s June 7th snapshot:
December 6, 2012, the Memorandum of Understanding For Defense Cooperation Between the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Iraq and the Department Defense of the United States of America was signed. We covered it in the December 10th and December 11th snapshots -- lots of luck finding coverage elsewhere including in media outlets -- apparently there was some unstated agreement that everyone would look the other way. It was similar to the silence that greeted Tim Arango's September 25th New York Times report which noted, "Iraq and the United States are negotiating an agreement that could result in the return of small units of American soldiers to Iraq on training missions. At the request of the Iraqi government, according to [US] General [Robert L.] Caslen, a unit of Army Special Operations soldiers was recently deployed to Iraq to advise on counterterrorism and help with intelligence."
Kat (Con't): When the US government is sending US troops back into Iraq and signing MoUs stop claiming the Iraq War is over unless you're a cheap, dirty whore.
Trina: Hello, CODESTINK!
Betty: Amen to that.
Trina: CODESTINK repeatedly lies to the American people and tells them that the Iraq War is over. CODESTINK fails to tell Americans that, just last fall, Barack sent another unit of Special Ops back into Iraq. CODESTINK is not about peace. And I think C.I. nailed that this week with regards to Kim Rivera.
Ava: I agree but talk about that.
Trina: CODESTINK's Jodie Evans appeared on KPFK's Connect the Dots with Lila Garrett Monday. Jodie was using her usual diversionary tactics to protect Barack -- whom Jodie bundled millions for to get him into the White House. She's not a neutral party or anyone concerned with peace. She's really just a cheap whore for the Democratic Party who will whore for war when Democrats are in charge.
Ann: Can I jump in?
Trina: Sure.
Ann: Jodie Evans has a blog post at CODEPINK. I just left the following comment:
Ann (Con't): Let's see if I make it out of moderation and my comment actually hits their blog. If it doesn't, we'll know they're fakes. But maybe they truly are so dumb and so stupid that they have missed this news.
Trina: I think that's a good test. I also think Jodie Evans is full of s**t. Listening to her prattle on about how we have to do this and do that and if we say that Bradley Manning is in front of a Kanagaroo Court we are failing him, failing the movement and, swear to God Jodie said this to Lila last Monday, failing the world.
Ava: Talk about Kim Rivera, Trina.
Trina: Sorry. Kim Rivera is a war resister. Jodie Evans failed Kim and felt no need to speak of how failing Kim would be failing the movement or the world. C.I. noted this Thursday:
Supposedly, Jodie Evans and Medea Benjamin created a group for women opposed to the war. Kim Rivera is a war resister. She and her family went to Canada because she refused to go back to the Iraq War which she found to be criminal. In September of 2012, she was informed she would be deported back to the US. We covered that repeatedly here, check the archives. CODESTINK? They had time to issue, among other nonsense, "Two Women Wrongfully Arrested for Standing on Sidewalk Holding Pink Bras in front of Bank of America." They never issued one damn press release on Kim. April 29th, Kim faced a court-martial. They were too busy with the Bush library and with their idiotic hunger strike (are they dead yet?) to cover Kim.
Trina (Con't): They did nothing for Iraq War resister Kim Rivera, no action, not even a press release. So spare me the pretense that CODEPINK gives a damn.
Ava: We've all heard the Lila Garrett interview. Trina noted Jodie's comments regarding Bradley Manning. For background, and I'm copping C.I.'s summary that she uses in various snapshots, Monday April 5, 2010, WikiLeaks released US military video of a July 12, 2007 assault in Iraq. 12 people were killed in the assault including two Reuters journalists Namie Noor-Eldeen and Saeed Chmagh. Monday June 7, 2010, the US military announced that they had arrested Bradley Manning and he stood accused of being the leaker of the Collateral Damage video. Leila Fadel (Washington Post) reported in August 2010 that Manning had been charged -- "two charges under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The first encompasses four counts of violating Army regulations by transferring classified information to his personal computer between November and May and adding unauthorized software to a classified computer system. The second comprises eight counts of violating federal laws governing the handling of classified information." In March, 2011, David S. Cloud (Los Angeles Times) reported that the military has added 22 additional counts to the charges including one that could be seen as "aiding the enemy" which could result in the death penalty if convicted. The Article 32 hearing took place in December. At the start of this year, there was an Article 32 hearing and, February 3rd, it was announced that the government would be moving forward with a court-martial. Bradley has yet to enter a plea. The court-martial was supposed to begin before the November 2012 election but it was postponed until after the election so that Barack wouldn't have to run on a record of his actual actions. February 28th, Bradley admitted he leaked to WikiLeaks. This month, Bradley's court-martial finally started. Mike, can I grab you for this since you're an attorney?
Mike: Sure. But I really don't have anything to add that C.I. hasn't said. David Coombs is an idiot and a vain glory who's done a lousy job fighting Brad's case in the court of public opinion so I guess it's not a surprise that he's a failure in the courtroom as well. He made the decision to forgo a jury. With a jury deciding, you can make a variety of arguments that appeal to a variety of emotions. But Coombs wanted no jury. That means a military officer is presiding over the court-martial and deciding. Jodie Evans babbled away to Lila Garrett about how great it was that Coombs made this emotional appeal about how Bradley's this little guy and confused and blah blah blah. You do that for a jury. When you skip a jury, when you have a judge deciding, you make the argument about the law. C.I. outlined that in the June 3rd snapshot. She's correct. If you can't make an emotional appeal, as a defendant, your next choice is to make an appeal with regards to the law. Argue that this law is in conflict with another law and invite the judge to enter into that debate, let the judge have a sense of importance, a sense of, "Yes, I must rule because clarity is needed so my great and mighty brain is needed." You're appealing to the judge's sense of vanity and if you've ever argued a case in front of a judge, you know damn well that there is no such thing as overestimating a judge's vanity.
Ava: So, Mike, you're in agreement that it's a kangaroo court?
Mike: It's a lost cause. It's lost because Coombs is an idiot.
Ava: Isaiah, so what's wrong with what Jodie Evans is calling for?
Isaiah: Everything. She's lying to people, for one thing. Pretending like they have the ability to influence a military court. They don't. A jury? Maybe. Judge Denise Lind? Nope. And with the way Coombs is 'arguing,' it's already over. But Evans is arguing that this should be our sole focus for the next 12 weeks, she makes that argument on the show. Outside of the regular events in your daily life, this must be the most pressing issue. It's stupidity. There are many other issues and they are more important.
Ava: Mike, C.I. made a point last week, regarding Evan's claims. C.I. stated that Jodie's lying about the importance of this case. C.I. pointed out that it's a military court and a court-martial in a military court does not become a precedent in a civilian court.
Mike: That's correct. That's also something I miss from C.I. She's overtaxed to the max. But she can pick out stuff like that if you run it past her. I run a lot of my cases past her and she'll find the weak point immediately. But back in, say 2006, at The Common Ills, when there were less demands on her, she would be offering that all the time. I can remember her stuff about the outing of Valerie Plame for instance. A lot of legal talk about that did not stand up. C.I.'s does. She has a very sharp mind. And, yes, she's correct, Bradley can be tossed in a military brig and it's not going to effect Boston versus Joe Blow next week because it will not be precedent setting or important to a civilian court.
Stan: What Evans is doing is arguing for WikiLeaks but pretending to care about Brad. The reality is that Julian Assange appears to have helped in the access or transfer of the leaked documents. That is what the prosecution argued.
Ava: And that would have civilian implications?
Mike: Possible. But not. C.I.?
C.I.: Sure. If Bradley Manning testified that Julian Assange helped him leak the documents -- or helped him access documents he was having trouble accessing -- that's no longer a press issue. Assange's legal team is insisting WikiLeaks is a press outlet. A press outlet has certain protections. They are not, however, able to assist in stealing documents. If Bradley were to testify to that in his court-martial, he would be expected to testify to that in a criminal trial against Assange in civilian courts. If, however, Bradley does not testify to that, the government's got nothing.
Ava: Okay, Brad is an Iraq War veteran. We do support Brad but there's a better use of our time. I agree that we can't afford to go under trying to save someone that we can't save. It's a pity we can't save him but that's the reality of it. If a functioning attorney had been hired, things might be different. It's amazing how Jodie Evans has no concern about the Iraqi people and helping them. Wally, tell us about what's going on in terms of protests.
Wally: Sure. The Iraqi people took to the streets starting December 21st. That was a result to the tensions over many issues including a lack of public services, a lack of jobs, a lack of a responsive governmet, but the spark was two things: Reports that girls and women in Iraqi prisons and detention centers were being tortured and raped and Nouri arresting staff members and bodyguards of Rafi al-Issawi on December 20th.
Kat: Rafi al-Issawi serves as the Minister of Finance, although he has since announced he's resigned but who knows there. He's a Sunni and a member of Iraqiya. Iraqiya beat Nouri al-Maili in the 2010 elections which means one of them should be prime minister right now but Nouri refused to surrender the office of prime minister and Barack backed him on that and had the US negotiate a contract, The Erbil Agreement, that went around the Iraqi Constitution and its requirements for how someone becomes prime minister. The arrest of al-Issawi's staff echoed an arrest the year prior of Tareq al-Hashemi's staff.
Ava: al-Hashemi is the Vice President of Iraq who went to the KRG and then Nouri announced charges against him. Tareq has not returned to Baghdad. He was convicted and sentenced, four or five times, to the death penalty. Protests have been all over Iraq but primarily in Nineveh Province and Anbar.
Wally: And Nouri punished them by declaring that they couldn't vote in the April provincial elections. Supposedly, they're about to vote now but, with Nouri, always wait and see.
Betty: Iraq's supposed to hold parliamentary elections next year. There are calls for early elections this year and that might happen but they're supposed to hold elections next year. I don't know that that does any good. Nouri refused to honor the 2010 elections, why should anyone believe that he'll honor these elections.
Trina: Exactly. I mean, in February 2011, he promised he wouldn't seek a third term and now his attorneys, his Dawa Party and his State of Law political slate are all saying he'll seek a third term. It's like The Erbil Agreement, he signed that to get his second term as prime minister and then refused to honor the promises he made in that document. Why should anyone ever expect him to keep his word at this late date?
Ava: I think we're all pretty much in agreement regarding what Trina just said. Iraq's suffering from a number of crises currently. After the 2010 elections, when Nouri's State of Law lost to Iraqiya, there was a political stalemate that lasted over eight months. Nothing could move forward, Nouri refused to step down. In November 2010, the US-brokered Erbil Agreement allowed things to move forward. As we noted, Nouri used it to get a second term and then stalled saying he'd implement the various provisions later and then he just refused to implement them.
Betty: To this day.
Ava: To this day, yes. Martin Kobler, the UN Special Envoy to Iraq who is now being moved over to the Congo, has -- like the US government -- insisted that Iraqis need to come to an agreement about their future, that Iraqi politicians need to make sacrifices. Ann, what's wrong with that thinking?
Ann: In 2010, Iraqi politicians were told the same thing and they did make sacrifices. That was The Erbil Agreement. It wasn't honored. Nouri got his way and honored none of the sacrifices he put into that contract. So you've got political blocs who have already given and already made sacrifices and now you're asking them to make more sacrifices and to do when Nouri has never to honored his promises in The Erbil Agreement. That's like if Cedric and I had a dispute with a neighbor and ended up making a legal agreement saying that Neighbor Barney gets five additional feet in the backyard and we get three additional feet in the front yard but Barney takes the five while never giving us the three. Now John Kerry and Barack Obama are at my door saying, "Ann, you and Barney need to sit down and work this out and compromise." No, 'we' don't. I kept my part of the bargain, I gave the five feet in the backyard. Until Barney forks over the three in the front, I don't have anything to say. Barack doesn't care that Nouri never implemented Article 140 of the Constitution, as he promised the Kurds he would, they just want the Kurds to give up more and more. That's not fair.
Elaine: Right and that's what C.I. means when she's talking about the re-setting of the clock. That keeps benefiting Nouri. No one else. The other sides compromise and make good faith effort and Nouri never gives anything. That's not fair. I also feel like C.I. with regards to The Erbil Agreement. It was stupid to sign it. Look at the Kurds. What did they want in exchange for agreeing to give Nouri the second term? They wanted Article 140 implemented. They wanted that in The Erbil Agreement. It was put into the agreement. Why? Article 140 is part of the Constitution and it is supposed to be implemented no later than the end of 2007 -- that's in the text of the Iraqi Constitution. If Nouri wasn't going to honor his oath to the Constitution -- and he wasn't, he became prime minister in 2006 and, by 2010, still hadn't implemented it -- if he was going to honor his oath to the Constitution or the Constitution, why the hell did the Kurds think putting it into The Erbil Agreement would really make a difference?
Kat: I agree. Although it's also true that the White House was telling the political blocs that The Erbil Agreement was a legally binding contract and that it would have the full backing of the US government. That was a lie and they've never pressed Nouri to honor his promises.
Elaine: True. But also true, they shouldn't have believed the White House to begin with. State of Law comes in second and instead of arguing for Nouri to step down, the White House default position is Nouri must get a second term? That should have told the Kurds right there and then that the US government wasn't really concerned with fairness.
Kat: Point taken.
Isaiah: Wally, Kat, Ava and C.I. talk to various groups and organizations about the ongoing wars -- including the Iraq War. I'm wondering how that's going?
Wally: In terms of?
Isaiah: I'm thinking of Barack sending US troops back into Iraq, for example.
Wally: That's never been a problem because C.I. can cite from memory, so when anyone had a question, she would say whatever day of the New York Times it was that Tim Arango's article ran and whatever page it was and for them to look it up. But one thing I do now is carry copies of "Iraq: Politics, Governance, and Human Rights" from the Congressional Research Service. I explain that this is Congress' think tank, this is who gives the facts to Congress and if they have a friend who might be doubtful, they can grab one of these copies from me and use it to back up the claims. I usually end up giving out at least five of those every time we speak.
Kat: And he gave out none when he would say, "If you need to back that up, you can refer to this."
Wally: Right. If I sell it as, 'In case your friends doubt you,' they'll grab it.
Isaiah: It's really amazing that you four have to be like Paul Revere, riding through the country, proclaiming, "Barack's sent troops back into Iraq!" and you're having to do that because other people won't do their job. I'm thinking of Phyllis Bennis, for example.
Stan: I would agree with that. And these people present as experts. Does Phyllis grasp how many people stop listening to her on Syria or whatever this week's pet cause is after she lies that all US troops are out of Iraq? I don't think she does. But if she can't get that correct, why would we expect her to get anything else right?
Ava: I want everyone to name one of the most pressing needs facing Iraq right now. You don't have to develop it -- and we don't have time for you to -- but let's do that and, if possible, try to avoid repeating someone else's answer. Betty, you start.
Betty: Alright. I think there needs to be an answer as the treatment of Iraqi girls and women in prisons and detention centers and I think this needs to be a public process to ensure the abuse doesn't happen again.
Ann: Okay, I'll jump in. I would say that Nouri has to answer for the April 23rd massacre in Hawija. And precautions need to be created to prevent any other civilian protests from being targeted.
Mike: I'll go with that but in terms of the Iraqi military needs to get out of the Iraqi cities. It should not and must not be used to penalize the Iraqi people. The longer this takes place, the less chance Iraq has of ever being a democracy.
Elaine: I would say the most pressing issue has to do with Nouri being in charge despite repeatedly being caught running secret prisons where Iraqis are tortured. Nouri needs to step down or be voted out. Even if that means calling early votes.
Trina: I would go for something very basic because I do think the basic things have incredible importance. So, for me, I would argue the most pressing issue is fixing the infrastructure so that Iraqis can have dependable electricity and drinking water and so that heavy rains don't mean water standing up to the knees or higher in areas like Sadr City of Baghdad.
Isaiah: I'm glad Trina grabbed that. It's important and I wouldn't have thought of it. I have a related issue. Stop gutting the ration card system. The US government wanted that done away with but that system provides Iraqis with free flour, tea and a few other items each month. It used to be a lot more but the system's been gutted and gutted and guted.
Stan: I'm going to piggy back on Mike. Niqash has a new article about the votes in Anbar and Nineveh and whether Nouri's standing army occupying those two provinces will influence the vote? So I would call -- as the citizens of those two provinces have been doing -- for the military to get out.
Kat: The protesters have been protesting since December 21st. They count as a victory that Kobler's being removed as the Special Envoy to Iraq. But that's the UN. They've had demands on Nouri and he's refused to do anything. I would say the most pressing issue is that Nouri's government needs to start making concessions to the protesters.
Wally: C.I., Mohammed Tawfeeq works for CNN, right?
C.I.: Yes.
Wally: Okay, I got it up on my laptop. This is Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) from last July, "Shiite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has struggled to forge a lasting power-sharing agreement and has yet to fill key Cabinet positions, including the ministers of defense, interior and national security, while his backers have also shown signs of wobbling support." So I'd argue the most pressing issue is filling those three security positions -- especially at a time when Iraq's seeing its worst violence in five years.
Ava: And now I'm screwing my dear friend over. I was going to let C.I. go last but I'm sure she's got a longer list than I do. All that's left on my list is one thing so I'm jumping in now. The most pressing issue is addressing the vast and dangerous pollution from the war and weapons like White Phosphorus and Depleted Uranium. The birth defects and rates of cancer are out of control. In the immediate future, the World Health Organization needs to release its report on this issue that it's kept under wraps for some time now. Now, C.I., you get that last word.
C.I.: Okay. It emerged, as last week wound down, that Iraqi journalist Zamil Ghanam was assassinated in Baghdad last Sunday and that the government had and was sitting on details about his death. This is a little more blatant than usual but there's been no effort to solve these murders. As Helena Williams (Independent) noted recently, "According to the CPJ," Committee to Protect Journalists, "Iraq continues to have the world's worst record on impunity, with more than 90 unsolved murders over the past decade and no sign that the authorities are working to solve any of them." That includes Hadi al-Mahdi who was assassinated in his Baghdad home September 8, 2011. No effort made to solve that murder. Let one of Nouri's thugs with a gun get killed and Nouri's threatening entire provinces with collective punishment. A journalist dies? He doesn't even pretend to give a damn.
Ava: Thank you. This is a rush transcript. Our e-mail address is thethirdestatesundayreview@yahoo.com.
