Friday, April 06, 2018

Louisiana Chicken Drumsticks and Tomatoes in the Kitchen


Okay, I’m getting a lot of e-mail requests for diabetic friendly recipes.  No surprise, we have a diabetes crisis – not trend – in the US.  Here’s a site that has some solid recipes for diabetics.  And here’s another one.

Those are both solid but my mother uses the second one.  And her favorite recipe there is Louisiana Chicken Drumsticks and tomatoes:


 


·         Makes: 4 servings


·         Prep 20 mins


·         Cook 30 mins


·         Serving Size: 2 drumsticks, 1/2 cup sauce and 1/2 cup noodles


·         Carb Grams Per Serving: 8





Ingredients


·         Nonstick cooking spray



·         8 chicken drumsticks, skinned



·         1 14 1/2 - ounce can no salt added stewed tomatoes



·         1 cup frozen cut okra



·         1 teaspoon dried thyme, ground



·         1 1/2 tablespoons Louisiana hot sauce, such as Frank's®



·         1/4 teaspoon salt



·         1/4 teaspoon black pepper



·         2 cups hot cooked whole grain noodles



Directions


1.    Lightly coat a large nonstick skillet with cooking spray and place over medium-high heat until hot. Brown chicken on all sides, about 6 minutes, turning occasionally. Top with stewed tomatoes, okra, dried thyme, 1 tablespoon of the hot sauce, the salt and pepper. Bring to a boil over medium-high heat; reduce heat. Cover and simmer 30 minutes or until no longer pink in center.


2.    Place the chicken pieces on a serving platter. Stir the remaining hot sauce into skillet and spoon sauce over all. Serve with noodles. Makes 4 servings (2 drumsticks, 1/2 cup sauce and 1/2 cup noodles).


Nutrition Facts Per Serving:


Servings Per Recipe: 4
PER SERVING: 190 cal., 5 g total fat (1 g sat. fat), 95 mg chol., 500 mg sodium, 8 g carb. (3 g fiber, 5 g sugars), 27 g pro.


 

 

 

 


Andre Damon has a really important article that I hope (pray!) you will make time to read in full but here’s a taste:

Last month, over 3,000 Google employees signed a letter taking a stand against Google’s collusion with the United States’ drone assassination program, which has killed and maimed tens of thousands of people throughout the Middle East and North Africa.


Google employees demanded that the company end its participation in “Project Maven,” a system of mass drone surveillance integrated with the US drone warfare program, declaring, “We believe that Google should not be in the business of war.” It called for the adoption of a policy stating that “neither Google nor its contractors will ever build warfare technology.”


Google’s collusion with the drone assassination program highlights the growing integration of the major technology companies with the US military, which, having declared a new era of “great-power competition” with Russia and China, sees pressing Silicon Valley into its war plans as the only way to regain its military power on the world stage.


Just as ominous is Google’s role in mass domestic surveillance and censorship. In April of 2017, Google announced changes in its search algorithms—implemented through the use of “deep learning” and artificial intelligence technologies—to promote “authoritative content” over “alternative viewpoints.” These changes led to a sharp fall in search referrals to left-wing web sites by as much as 75 percent—with the World Socialist Web Site a central target.


This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for Friday:

Friday, April 6, 2018.  Iraq from above and on the ground.



Starting with NASA:



A stunning work of art or an image of our beautiful planet? The transformative power of water, wind & gravity is on full display in this satellite image of Iraq's Ga'ara Depression. Varied wavelengths identify rock + soil types & detect moisture







NASA notes:


The transformative power of water, wind, and gravity is on full display in Iraq’s Ga’ara Depression. The rim of this large, oval-shaped basin near the Iraq-Syria border rises a few hundred meters along its southern and western edges.

Geologists call the rock at the bottom of the basin the Ga’ara Formation. It is made up of alternating layers of sandstone and soft claystone that formed roughly 300 million years ago, when the area was covered by a shallow sea. Later, types of carbonate rock (dolomite, limestone, and marl) were layered on top of the Ga’ara Formation, and the entire sequence of rock was gradually pushed up into a dome shape by tectonic forces.

The dome achieved its maximum height about 30 million years ago. Erosive forces have since chipped away at this layer-cake of rock. The combined effects of water, wind, and gravity wore through the thin carbonate layers at the top of the dome, and then hollowed out the oval-shaped depression from the soft, crumbly rock of the Ga’ara Formation, leaving behind a rim of tougher carbonates. These steep cliffs along the southern rim have played a key role in widening the basin over time. The regular stream of landslides and rockfalls that tumble down the cliffs have caused the southern rim to continue moving south over the years.



That's Iraq from space.  On the ground?  ALSUMARIA reports an armed attack just outside of Baghdad left three people injured today and, yesterday, security forces killed 7 suicide bombers in Anbar Province before the bombers could detonate, a Diyala sticking bombing left one person injured, and  Nineveh saw the rape of a young girl and the kidnapping of two people.  On yesterday's violence, Margaret Griffis (ANTIWAR.COM) counts "62 killed or found dead."

And to the realm of pimping war.  Tuesday, the United States Institute of Peace held three panels to push further war in Iraq and Syria.  The third panel was moderated by leaker Stephen Hadley and featured Special Envoy Brett McGurk, US Gen Joseph Vogel (CENTCOM commander) and US AID's Mark Green.

Let's note this segment and, as you read along, grasp the question asked and then Green's response which starts out on a different topic completely and then, mid-way, begins offering nonsense that is little more than definition and has nothing to do with any actual work being done.

Stephen Hadley: [. . .] one gentleman said to us, you know, we've won three wars in Iraq.  One against Saddam Hussein, one against al Qaeda and we're on the threshold of winning one against ISIS but we haven't had an enduring peace.  It was to emphasize -- as you [Mark Green] did and as Gen Votel did -- the importance of the stabilization piece.  Part of that, of course, a mission near and dear to the heart of USIP, is the reconciliation mission, bringing groups -- sectarian groups that are divided by grievances, by history, threats of retaliatory violence -- bringing them together both at the national level and the local level.  Can you talk about what-what the United States and its coalition allies are doing on the reconciliation front in terms of Iraq?


Mark Green: Uh, sure.  Uh, in Iraq, one thing we're doing is help to restore the cultural diversity that has been a hallmark of Iraq.  So in northern Iraq, uh, we're working, again, to help Yazidis and Christian minorities to be able to return home -- to feel secure enough to be able to return home and-and sort of re-establish their communities.  So that's one thing that we're doing in particular.  And, in fact, I know that USIP was at our broad agency co-creation conference when we were working with, uh, a wide range of-of civil society groups -- Iraqi, American, but also from other parts of the world to try to look at this element of, uh, of reconciliation.  On top of that, what we're also doing is strengthening civil society and working with civil society groups. So in addition to having responsive governments and capable governments -- and governments that are capable of delivering services in an equitable way so that groups aren't disenfranchised.  It's also important to strengthen the capability and the role of civil society so that the needs and desires of citizens can be organized and marshalled in their dealings with government.  So, uh, to have effective governance, you have to have an effective government that can deliver.  You also need the cultural ethic and, uh, and community constructs that allow those desires and needs to be organized and pushed forward to the government.  That's part of the work that we're doing there.


Reconciliation?

It refers to one of the benchmarks that was supposed to be tied to continued US financial and military support for Iraq near the end of Bully Boy Bush's second term.  No progress was ever made and soon it was forgotten.  But reconciliation refers to the Sunnis and the Shi'ites.  Specifically, it refers to overturning Paul Bremer's de-Ba'athification.  That policy stripped most Sunnis of the ability to serve in government.  That policy stripped them of many jobs.  It is thought by many -- including every -- that's every! -- witness who appeared before the UK's Iraq Inquiry -- civilian and military witness -- that Bremer's de-Ba'athification was a disaster which destroyed Iraq.

The benchmarks included reconciliation but nothing was done on it -- even to this day.

Another election will be held May 12th and yet again the Justice and Accountability Commission is screening candidates despite the fact that most people were shocked in 2010 that the commission was still around because it had outlived its mandate.

Asked about reconciliation, Mark Green offered nonsense about Christians and Yazidis.  Asked about reconciliation, Green spoke definitions of governance, he did not provide one single example of reconciliation and he knew that as he spoke, it was all over his face.  The others averted their eyes.

June 14, 2014, then-US President Barack Obama insisted that there needed to be a diplomatic push but, though he soon began bombing Iraq daily, there never was a diplomatic effort.  In the time Donald Trump's been president -- about 15 months -- there had been no real diplomatic effort.

Though reconciliation is the best thing for Iraq, it clearly is not the best thing for the occupation of Iraq.  A reconciled Iraq could work together and could expel the foreigners in Iraq including the US occupiers.  As the US government and the UK government have now spent years admitting that Iraq needs a national reconciliation process but have also spent years refusing to help facilitate that, it is very obvious that the governments do not want a reconciled Iraq -- an Iraq that might take charge of its own destiny.

We've previously noted the US Institute of Peace's Tuesday events in  Wednesday's "Iraq snapshot" and in yesterday's snapshot.

While we're noting Brett, let's offer a note to Gina Chon, Rukmini is the new Judith Miller, yes, but she's also got quite a relationship going with your husband.  Considering that you left your husband for Brett when you were both in Iraq and he left his wife for you, you might want to wall Rukmini off from your husband.


May 12th, Iraq is set to hold parliamentary elections and no one's been bothered by the fact that Ramadan takes place from May 15th to June 14th.   Past elections in Iraq have resulted in many delays -- in the case of the 2010 parliamentary elections, many months -- to settle.  If the post-election process goes even 1/4 as poorly as it did in 2010, Ramadan will only compound that.  Holding the election three days before Ramadan was very poor planning.

Hayder al-Abadi staked his future on the premature claim that he vanquished ISIS in Iraq.  That, of course, hasn't proven to be the case.   ISIS was supposed to be Hayder's big claim to fame.

Nouri al-Maliki was ousted by Barack Obama in 2014 because ISIS had seized Mosul and other spots.  Otherwise, the US would have kept installing Nouri every four years as Bully Boy Bush and Barack had already done.  It's that 'stability' that Cordesman is arguing for.  Forget that Nouri was running secret prisons and torture sites, forget that this had been exposed in the press, forget that he was disappearing people, forget that he was having the military use tanks to circle the homes of members of Parliament that he didn't like, none of that mattered.  Nor did his attacks on journalism and journalists.  His forces kidnapped reporters who covered the protests.  Even after both NPR and THE WASHINGTON POST reported that, Nouri was still given a pass by Barack.


Hayder hasn't been very effective eliminating corruption either.  MEM reported two weeks ago, "Iraqi Prime Minister Haidar Al-Abadi yesterday ordered an immediate investigation into allegations that fake jobs in the public sector were being offered to citizens by political parties in order to win votes in the country’s upcoming general elections.ALSUMARIA reported today that the Badr Organization's Hadi al-Amiri stated they would eliminate corruption.  He stated that they would create needed jobs and punish those who had stolen Iraq's wealth.  Hadi is a militia thug and he's also one of the corrupt -- most infamously, he ordered a plane  to remain on the runway and wait for his spoiled son Mahdi to make the flight but the plane left Lebanon without Mahdi on board so al-Amiri, then-Minister of Transportation in Iraq, refused to allow the plane to land.  It caused quite an uproar -- as CNN noted in real time.


Geneiva Abdo (THE NATIONAL) offers:


As Iraqi Prime Minister Haider Al Abadi was deciding on coalition partners for his re-election this May, the two operatives in the room were Qassem Suleimani, the notorious commander of the powerful Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, and Hadi Al Ameri, one of the most important commanders of the Shia militias in Iraq under Mr Suleimani’s command.

Mr Suleimani pressured the Iraqi prime minister into partnering with Shia militia commanders such as Mr Al Ameri, whom Iran funds and controls. Mr Al Abadi, who is Shia, initially caved under pressure, but reversed his decision two days later and is now in a coalition that includes Sunni Muslim parties in an attempt to show cross-sectarian unity.

That meeting speaks volumes about the state of Iraq’s elections – the first since the defeat of ISIL last year – and the country’s political future. At first glance, Iran appears to still wield enormous influence over Iraqi politics. Indeed, Tehran has been entrenched militarily in Iraq since the United States-led invasion of the country in 2003. It also exercises considerable soft power, in the form of running religious schools and educational programmes. However, there are several changes in the political landscape that make it difficult for Iran to maintain the significant power it has built up. And the Iranian regime appears to be worried.

Other election issues?  Predicting the outcome:



MERI predictions/speculations on Iraq elections:
Total Shiite= 169 +/- 11
Total Kurds= 56 +/- 6
Abadi: 46
Hashd: 41
Maliki: 32
Sadir: 29
Hakim: 21
Allawi: 30
KDP: 25
Barham: 10
Gorran: 8
PUK: 7
Kurdistan Islamists: 6
Read full report & political map





Voter cards need to be presented in order to vote and not everyone has received them.



1.7 million people in Nineveh Province have not yet received their electoral voter cards that allows them to vote in the upcoming Iraqi elections in May. So far 531,684 people got their voter cards.







Turning to other problematic areas in the US: Tammy Duckworth.  She's the manliest of the troops in Congress, or thinks she is.




I will not be lectured about what our military needs by a five-deferment draft-dodger.
—Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D, IL), an Iraq War veteran and Purple Heart recipient who lost both her legs in a combat mission






Yes, you will be lectured.   Donald Trump is the president of the United States.  The people and the system have spoken.  As the president, he is over the US military in his role of commander in chief.  You're insults towards him go far beyond disrespect and attest to your own ethical vacancy.  Your insults of people who got deferments go to the fact that you were not raised with manners.  Your parents failings reflect in your behavior.  You're a member of Congress, try conducting yourself as such.  It's raw meat for the knuckle draggers like Bill Morris, but for a lot of others, your insults have crossed a line and go to your own lack of manners and possible derangement.

Considering the lawsuit brought against you for attempting to gag whistle blowers at the VA -- a lawsuit that was settled out of court, not in your favor -- maybe you should learn to seek a lower profile.  It's not surprising that someone as disgusting and vile as you would try to hide abuse of veterans at the VA but it is surprising that after this was known you would still try to play Super Solider and Last Voice of Veterans.  Well, maybe not surprising.  Those raised without manners often were also raised without the ability to feel shame.

The following community sites -- plus PACIFICA EVENING NEWS and Jody Watley -- updated:




















  • Thursday, April 05, 2018

    Open season on hunting Americans

    The Supreme Court is repeatedly a disappointment.  Trevon Austin (WSWS) reports:

    The US Supreme Court established an interpretation of qualified immunity this week that effectively grants police legal impunity to use lethal force at will. The court ruled 7 to 2 on Monday that an Arizona police officer who shot a woman outside her own home from the other side of a fence could not be sued on claims that he used excessive force.
    The case, Kisela v. Hughes, goes beyond previous cases of its kind. The court’s decision was unsigned and issued without a full briefing or oral argument, indicating the majority found the decision easy to come to.
    In a strongly worded dissent, Associate Justice Sotomayor, joined only by Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, said that the court “routinely displays an unflinching willingness to summarily reverse courts for denying officers qualified immunity,” but rarely intervenes where courts wrongly grant officers immunity in such cases.
    “Such a one-sided approach to qualified immunity transforms the doctrine into an absolute shield for law enforcement officers, gutting the deterrent effect of the Fourth Amendment,” she said.
    In its opinion, the court’s majority found that the officer was entitled to qualified immunity, a legal doctrine that states officers are immune from lawsuits over violations of constitutional rights as long as they don’t “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”


    This was a hideous decision.  Betty commented on it Tuesday with "The Supreme Court doesn't protect the people."  Thing is, it will probably get very little attention.  The real gun violence of the last years have not been guns in the hands of kids or guns in the hands of non-law enforcement.  But the Court just gave the police the sign that it's open season on hunting American citizens.

    This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for Thursday:


    Thursday, April 5, 2018.  The reselling of the Iraq War is in full swing.


    "We had to get the Iraqi government ready to fight back," explained Brett McGurk at Tuesday's US Institute of Peace event.  He was explaining how the US re-started the military mission in Iraq and speaking from his position as Special Envoy to Iraq.

    And speaking with all the hubris you can imagine, serving up all the patronizing We-know-best you can expect.  And all to resell the Iraq War (and the war on Syria).


    The government had to be taught to fight back.

    Think about that for a moment.  The government had to be taught to fight back.  Why?  Maybe because it wasn't a real government.  It certainly didn't spring up on its own.  Puppet governments never do.  The US created the Iraqi government.  It doesn't represent the people of Iraq so why would it fight for them?  That is what the world saw.

    In June of 2014, ISIS seized control of the city of Mosul.  The city was 'liberated' when?  July 2017.  Three years and one month later.  Supposedly, 3,000 ISIS fighters held the city at one point.  And the Iraqi government had to be taught to fight back?

    And look at that great 'teaching.'  The US government started 'teaching' Iraq in the summer of 2014.  October of 2016, the operation to 'liberate' Mosul finally began.  Over two years after the city had been seized, the operation to 'liberate' the city finally began.

    That's not a real government.

    That's a puppet government installed by foreigners.  It's a government that doesn't represent the people.  It fears the people.  That's why the leaders are hunkered down in the Green Zone still -- all these years later.  The heavily fortified Green Zone.  And Mosul could be in ruins and controlled by ISIS but the puppet government never worried until they thought Baghdad might be seized.

    The US installed the government.  That needs to be grasped.  The people of Iraq didn't.  The US installed a bunch of exiles, people who fled Iraq decades ago and only returned after the US invaded in 2003.  From Vivienne Walt's TIME profile of the current prime minister Hayder al-Abadi published last month:

    An electrical engineer raised in Baghdad, al-Abadi spent more than 20 years in exile in London during Saddam’s regime. He flew home in 2003, just as the U.S. invasion began.


    What instills pride and a strong bond better than turning the leadership of a country over to . . . cowards who fled decades before and only returned after foreigners invaded?

    But that's how it's been.  One exile after another made prime minister -- all made prime minister by the US government.

    Are you surprised they have to be taught "to fight back"?  What do they do when not hiding out behind the fortified walls of the Green Zone?

    The Iraq War is being resold.  That's the point of the US Institute of Peace's Tuesday event -- noted in yesterday's "Iraq snapshot" -- and a sub-thread of Friday's CSIS event -- see Tuesday's "Iraq snapshot" and Monday's "Iraq snapshot."  Fresh from moderating the CSIS event, Anthony Cordesman shows up at THE HILL with "Don't take the wrong steps in Syria, Iraq and the fight against terrorism" to argue to continue the US occupation of Iraq as well as for an editor to proof his copy:


    As for costs, we need strategic patience, and it is fundamentally wrong to talk about costs of $7 trillion. Anything like this total must include the total cost of the Afghan and Iraq conflicts, massive estimates about additional opportunity costs, and large amounts of regular defense spending that were concealed in the wartime overseas contingency accounts.
    In any case, the U.S. military has vastly reduced the cost of our presence in Syrian and Iraq by relying on airpower and limited numbers of train and assist forces to support host country ground forces. This eliminates the need to deploy U.S. ground combat units, and massively reduces our costs as well as casualties. If one looks at the president’s fiscal 2019 budget request, the cost of training and equipping Syrian opposition forces drops from $500 million in fiscal 2018 to $300 million. No estimates are provided of the cost of airpower, but these too are likely to be far smaller.
    The costs of staying Iraq are also dropping from $1.27 billion in fiscal 2018 to $850 million in fiscal 2019. We should have learned from rushing out of Iraq, and trying to rush out of Afghanistan, that doing so before host country forces are ready could waste the money we plan to spend on making Iraq secure, allow it to truly defeat ISIS, and give it the strength to deal with Iran.


    The costs of staying in Iraq, maybe?  "In"?  Pull the string on the 12 inch Anthony doll and he says, "Prepositions is hard."  So is common sense which explains why he writes that "it is fundamentally wrong to talk about costs of $7 trillion."


    There's not much effort going into ending the Iraq War but there's sure a lot of work going on to keep it going.   RUDAW reports:

    The KRG’s representative to the United States has called on the US administration to stay the course in Iraq, despite the fact that many Americans are "sick and tired" of their country’s intervention in Iraq. 

    Bayan Sami Abdul Rahman, who heads the KRG’s office in Washington, said she understands the US wants to pull out from the likes of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria, but the facts on the ground require their active involvement going forward.

    "I do believe the United States has a critical role to play in this," she said during a panel discussion at the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) in Washington on Tuesday. The discussion was part of USIP’s conference titled ‘Iraq and Syria: Views from the US Administration, Military Leaders and the Region.’ 



    In other news, IRAQI NEWS reports:

     Iraq’s President has stressed that his country would not allow Turkey to make any military incursions at the northern region, but voiced concern about a possible reproduction of the Turkish operation against Kurdish factions in Syria.
    Speaking in an interview with London-based al-Hayat, Fuad Masum stressed that “after the withdrawal of the party (Kurdistan Workers Party- PKK), no foreign force can come and occupy any part of Iraq.
    Masum, however, asked about the possibility of Turkey copying its operations against Kurdish factions in Syria’s Afrin to Iraq, said “We hope they do not take that step”.
    Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said in a speech last month that his country would, at any time, launch operations in Iraq’s northern Sinjar region against PKK, a group designated by Ankara as a terrorist group for engaging in decades of armed confrontations with it.  He said in a more recent speech that Turkey would not ask for permission to start the operations.



    May 12th, Iraq is set to hold parliamentary elections and no one's been bothered by the fact that Ramadan takes place from May 15th to June 14th.   Past elections in Iraq have resulted in many delays -- in the case of the 2010 parliamentary elections, many months -- to settle.  If the post-election process goes even 1/4 as poorly as it did in 2010, Ramadan will only compound that.  Holding the election three days before Ramadan was very poor planning.

    Hayder al-Abadi staked his future on the premature claim that he vanquished ISIS in Iraq.  That, of course, hasn't proven to be the case.   ISIS was supposed to be Hayder's big claim to fame.

    Nouri al-Maliki was ousted by Barack Obama in 2014 because ISIS had seized Mosul and other spots.  Otherwise, the US would have kept installing Nouri every four years as Bully Boy Bush and Barack had already done.  It's that 'stability' that Cordesman is arguing for.  Forget that Nouri was running secret prisons and torture sites, forget that this had been exposed in the press, forget that he was disappearing people, forget that he was having the military use tanks to circle the homes of members of Parliament that he didn't like, none of that mattered.  Nor did his attacks on journalism and journalists.  His forces kidnapped reporters who covered the protests.  Even after both NPR and THE WASHINGTON POST reported that, Nouri was still given a pass by Barack.

    The passes would have continued were it not for the rise of ISIS.

    Hayder was installed by Barack to to get rid of ISIS.

    He hasn't.

    Hayder hasn't been very effective eliminating corruption either.  MEM reported two weeks ago, "Iraqi Prime Minister Haidar Al-Abadi yesterday ordered an immediate investigation into allegations that fake jobs in the public sector were being offered to citizens by political parties in order to win votes in the country’s upcoming general elections.ALSUMARIA reported today that the Badr Organization's Hadi al-Amiri stated they would eliminate corruption.  He stated that they would create needed jobs and punish those who had stolen Iraq's wealth.  Hadi is a militia thug and he's also one of the corrupt -- most infamously, he ordered a plane  to remain on the runway and wait for his spoiled son Mahdi to make the flight but the plane left Lebanon without Mahdi on board so al-Amiri, then-Minister of Transportation in Iraq, refused to allow the plane to land.  It caused quite an uproar -- as CNN noted in real time.
     
    The election will require a get-out the vote program.  The United Nations Development Program's David Aasen recently spoke with Nawal Hussein Khaled who heads Iraq's Electoral Commission's Electoral Media and Public Outreach Department.


    UNDP: What does Electoral Media do?

    NH: This Section establishes and implements the electoral media plans—for the National Office and for each of the Governorate Electoral Offices (GEOs). We oversee the production of TV/radio spots based on the key messages we provide, and coordinate with the Graphics Unit to design and print the materials.
    These are the booklets, posters, banners distributed in the meetings with voters and displayed nationwide during each phase of the campaigns. The Electoral Commission has just completed the Voter Registration Update stage of the Governorate Council Elections. The next phase will focus on the concept of ‘get out the vote’, which is part of the polling phase. We also organize the production of promotional materials and place official notices of procedures, like registration of candidates, in the press.

    UNDP: How have electoral media campaigns changed since the first elections of the political transition?

    NH: In the first elections, the UN was responsible for the whole media campaign. We have been trained by the UN and now we’re doing the job. The campaign is being carried out by Iraqi hands.
    We learn from our mistakes in each campaign and take measures to avoid them in the future. Some activities can be a challenge but we adapt to meet the needs of the GEOs. We can call on the UN for advice. They help us to accelerate certain actions; like UNDP placing banners on Yahoo! sites for this campaign. (The website banners, illustrated by ‘Abu Mutar’ (Father of Rain), a popular cartoon character created by the Electoral Commission artists, appear in Yahoo! mail accounts in Iraq. Abu Mutar’s captions clarify electoral information.)
      

    Prime Minister Abadi has announced his plan to lead a coalition of mostly Shia parties and independent Sunni figures under the framework of his Victory (Nasr) Alliance. In launching his own coalition, Abadi is competing with Vice President and former prime minister Nouri al Maliki, who, like Abadi, is a leading member of the Dawa Party. Maliki’s State of Law alliance has been critical of Abadi’s leadership, and some State of Law members are vocal opponents of Iraq’s security partnership with the United States. Several former leaders of the Popular Mobilization Force (PMF) militias organized to help fight the Islamic State are participating in the elections as candidates under the rubric of the Fatah Alliance (see textbox below).
    Other prominent Iraqi figures have organized coalitions and lists to contest the election, including a largely Sunni list led by Vice President Osama al Nujayfi and the National Alliance jointly led by Vice President Iyad Allawi, COR Speaker Salim al Juburi, and former deputy Prime Minister Salih al Mutlaq. Among Shia leaders, Ammar al Hakim’s Wisdom (Hikma) movement has formally withdrawn from the Prime Minister’s coalition, but Hakim reportedly intends to coordinate with Abadi during government formation negotiations after the election. Shia cleric Muqtada al Sadr is directing his followers to support the multiparty, anti-corruption oriented Sa’irun coalition. Sadr has criticized the participation of PMF leaders in the election and is campaigning on a populist reform and anti-corruption platform.


    The 2005 election was decided by the US government (Bully Boy Bush installed Nouri al-Maliki as prime minister in May of 2006).  The March 2010 election was decided by the US government (President Barack Obama had The Erbil Agreement negotiated to give Nouri a second term after he lost the election).  The 2014 election was decided by the US government (Barack, now tired of Nouri, installed Hayder al-Abadi).
    This time around Iraqis will get to decide?

    Former prime minister and forever thug Nouri wants to be prime minister again despite his flunkies repeatedly insisting that is not the case.  ALSUMARIA reported last week that Nouri has insisted Iraq is passing through a serious, make-it-or-break-it period.  Naturally, Nouri believes he's the one who can save the country -- despite nearly destroying it in 2014..  Last week, ALSUMARIA noted that he's saying Iraq needs someone who can lead the country in construction and progress.  Others who would like to become prime minister include Shi'ite cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr who has teamed up with five other groups -- including the Iraqi Communist Party -- for this election cycle.  Two others who'd like to become prime minister, Ammar al-Hakim and Ayad Allawi, have done joint photo-ops.  
     Ayad Allawi should have been prime minister per the 2010 elections.  But Nouri refused to step down for eight months and brought the country to a stalemate.  Let's review, Barack Obama, then president, refused to back the winner of the election and instead brokered The Erbil Agreement which, in November of 2010, gave Nouri a second term as prime minister -- in effect, nullifying the election results and overturning the will of the Iraqi people.


    March 7, 2010, Iraq concluded Parliamentary elections. The Guardian's editorial board noted in August 2010, "These elections were hailed prematurely by Mr Obama as a success, but everything that has happened since has surely doused that optimism in a cold shower of reality." 

    November 10, 2010, The Erbil Agreement is signed.  November 11, 2010, the Iraqi Parliament has their first real session in over eight months and finally declares a president, a Speaker of Parliament and Nouri as prime minister-designate -- all the things that were supposed to happen in April of 2010 but didn't.  Again, it wasn't smart to schedule elections right before Ramadan.


    We'll close with this from Emma Skye's new essay for FOREIGN AFFAIRS:

    On May 12, Iraqis will head to the polls for parliamentary elections. These elections are coming at a pivotal moment. Since the Iraqi military announced the defeat of the Islamic State (or ISIS) in December 2017, millions of refugees and displaced people have returned to their homes. In Mosul, students are now back in school and the library that ISIS destroyed is open again. Baghdad feels safer than it has at any point since 2003—shopping malls are doing good business, new coffeehouses are opening, and parks are once again full of families.                                                           
    Iraq has been at a similar crossroads before. In 2010, after the defeat of al Qaeda in Iraq, the sectarian war appeared to be over and both Iraqis and Americans were hopeful that elections would put the country on the path to sustainable peace. But then it all unraveled. Although the incumbent prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, who led the State of Law Coalition, did not win the most seats, the Obama administration threw its support behind him. The administration was convinced that Maliki was pro-American and would allow a small contingent of U.S. forces to remain in Iraq when the status of forces agreement between the two countries expired in 2011. They also calculated that maintaining the status quo was the quickest way to ensure that an Iraqi government would be in place ahead of U.S. midterm elections. In practice, however, this decision failed to help Iraq move beyond sectarianism and undermined the notion that change could come about through politics rather than violence.


    Emma Skye is the author of  THE UNRAVELING: HIGH HOPES AND MISSED OPPORTUNITIES IN IRAQ.



    The following community sites updated:









  • Wednesday, April 04, 2018

    Jobs, jobs, jobs

    USA Today offers:

    Did U.S. hiring surge for a third consecutive month?
    Payroll processor ADP said Wednesday businesses added 241,000 jobs in March, signaling the government may announce another month of strong gains in its closely watched employment survey this week.
    Economists expected ADP to tally 210,000 private-sector job gains. The Labor Department on Friday is forecast to announce 185,000 additional jobs in the public and private sectors.

    If we're really moving forward, that's great, that's wonderful.  Too many people have needed jobs for too long.  The economy has been awful.

    So I would love for the above to be true.  But I know there are a lot of people who lost jobs -- many of whom gave up looking due to years of nothing out there.  I don't know what happens there.

    I have another concern on that, by the way.

    Social Security.

    I have a friend who worked for municipal government for 20 years and they had a pension.  When she lost her job, she ended up having to cash out her pension because she had two kids and couldn't find another job for over a year.  Okay, we'll there's Social Security, right?

    She got a statement in 2013, right before she lost her city job, stating that she'd have to pay into SS for ten more years to get full benefits at the age of 67.

    All that time she was working for the city, they didn't pay into SS.

    So now she's going to need to work ten more years.

    She's not happy about it but she can do it, she's healthy enough.

    What about people like her who aren't healthy or who were older than her?

    Anyway.

    African-American workers were hit very badly by the recession.  They were less likely to be helped when homes were going under (pay attention to the Bank of America story brewing on that) and any job creation has assisted them least of all.  Steven Pitts (Labor Notes) reports:

    On February 1, 1968, Echol Cole and Robert Walker left their homes for their jobs as Memphis sanitation workers. They never returned alive. They were crushed by a malfunctioning garbage truck. Their deaths sparked a strike by their 1,300 union brothers.
    The strike was victorious only after months of protests, strong community support, the intervention of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, and the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King.
    While history remembers the strike as the last campaign of Dr. King, a more accurate reading presents it as one of several episodes of Black worker activism that occurred in the late 1960s and the 1970s.
    Hospital workers struck in Baltimore and Charleston, South Carolina. Black workers formed caucuses in many unions, notably the Steelworkers and Auto Workers. Black labor leaders started the Coalition of Black Trade Unionists in response to the conservatism of the AFL-CIO leadership. And Black workers were active in strike waves and organizing drives in the public and private sectors.
    What has happened to Black workers in the 50 years since the Memphis strike, after the upsurge of Black worker activism, the assault on labor by economic elites, the rise of income inequality, and the surge of right-wing authoritarianism?
    Some job conditions for Black workers have improved, but not nearly enough to catch up with white workers—and that is partly due to the fact that conditions for all workers have been under attack.
    Part of the context for racial inequality since the mid-1970s is captured by the stark gap between the growth of labor productivity and the growth of wages (see the graph). Since 1979, labor productivity has risen by 64.2 percent but wages have risen only 10.1 percent.
    This gap reflects the aggressive attack by economic elites on all workers. It means that while Black workers today earn 82 cents for every dollar earned by white workers—an improvement since 1968—neither group has fared well: wages for Blacks rose by 0.6% per year; wages for whites by 0.2% per year.




    This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for Wednesday:


    Wednesday, April 4, 2018.  Alissa J. Rubin reports on checkpoints in Iraq, Brett McGurk reveals the real reason Barack Obama started moving US troops back into Iraq in 2014 (it wasn't the Yazidis), and much more.


    Oh, the stupidity. We were going to go with Peter Baker but there was a bigger fool on Iraq today.


    People treating Laura Ingraham like some sort of free speech martyr didn't seem to mind so much when Phil Donahue lost his show for the crime of being right about the Iraq war.










    People are objecting to a cry baby White boy who shoved his way to the front of the photo op to tear center stage away from students of color only to then throw a tantrum because Larua Ingraham said he was "whining."  Grow the hell up.  And since he can't, broadcasters are being irresponsible by booking David Hogg.  He does not have the maturity to be in public.

    Ingraham said he was whining.  For that, her advertisers were astroturffed by Hogg and his followers who don't hold jobs and have all the time in the world to create sock puppets.  Ingraham has done some appalling things.  Saying someone was "whining" is not one of them.  She doesn't deserve to be targeted for this nonsense.

    But, more to the point, Schooley, you don't know what the hell you're talking about.  Phil Donahue did not lose his show because he was right about the Iraq War.  The Iraq War had not started.  MSNBC pulled his show because they felt his questioning during war time would come off as unpatriotic.  Should he have lost his show?  No.  And it was a hit show.  But let's not alter reality because you're too lazy to learn what happened, Schooley.

    Moving over to THE NEW YORK TIMES, they have re-launched their blog AT WAR and one of the pieces there is by Alissa J. Rubin who returned to Iraq in January and who will have a piece on Iraq in an upcoming NEW YORK TIMES SUNDAY MAGAZINE.  This is from her blog about a three hour trip in Iraq previously was now a nine hour trip due to all the checkpoints:






    After the last Kurdish position, everything changed. We were diverted onto a minor road that twisted through the desert scrub of the Nineveh plains. We emerged at a large Iraqi Army checkpoint with cars and trucks parked haphazardly on either side.

    A soldier asked if I was a foreigner. Yes, we said.

    We were not allowed to pass. At a dilapidated concrete building surrounded by mud and pickup trucks, we were told we could plead our case.

    The one dubious comfort was that there seemed to be others waylaid.

    We entered a room with scuffed walls. Soiled, sunken couches lay along two sides of the room. There was a large battered desk along the third wall. On the fourth wall was an army cot. The only light came through windows so dirty it was hard to see out. A soldier smoked a hookah pipe.

    A man wearing jeans and a leather jacket restlessly paced. He appeared to be in charge. “Papers,” he snapped.

    We produced press cards. Looking around, I saw other idled travelers with forms bearing official-looking stamps. The soldier reviewed each form carefully.

    He seemed decent enough. He said he would call his supervisor, and if we had permission, we could cross.

    We called our bureau in Baghdad. We did have government approval. We asked our office manager to try to get someone with authority to call the checkpoint on our behalf.

    We waited. We waited some more. Other travelers came and went. Our office in Baghdad recommended we call local army commanders. We texted, we called, then we pleaded some more with the checkpoint chief. Nothing happened.

    I looked at my watch. It had been an hour and five minutes. I turned to Kamil: “What can we do?”

    “You know Jabouri, right?” he said.



    No, I answered.

    Kamil was referring to Gen. Najim Abed al-Jabouri, the Iraqi Army commander in charge of Mosul and the surrounding territory, who had a reputation for being reasonable.

    “Even if you don’t know him, why don’t you call him?” Kamil said.

    More calls to Baghdad. Jabouri’s number was sent to me. As I typed him a text message, the checkpoint soldier dialed a number on his phone, muttering in Arabic.

    Kamil had been watching. He spoke softly to me. “The guy just made a phone call and said, ‘Now they are calling Jabouri, I’m going to let them go.’ ”

    An hour and 15 minutes after arriving, we were free. We rushed to our car before anyone of them could change their minds.



    Checkpoints are often associated with borders so let's move to that topic.  Yesterday the US Institute of Peace held several talks on Iraq.  The third and final one included a group composed of Brett McGurk (lead US diplomat on Iraq under Barack Obama, also a diplomat on Iraq under Bully Boy Bush and a diplomat on Iraq under Donald Trump who is ending Brett's current position), US Gen Joseph Votel, USAID's Mark Green and noted leaker Stephen J. Hadley.  Votel was the one who stressed the issue of borders and how this involves the US troops.

    Because, please note, US troops remain in Iraq.  While you are being distracted, US troops remain in Iraq.   It's amazing that the US press appears to be ignoring the events at the US Institute of Peace because this group is funded by Congress and has a direct pipeline to Congress.  As most participants noted, Congress will be making determinations shortly.  And what the so-called peace event was pimping?  Continued US military presence in Iraq.  This came from USAID's Mark Green.  It came from all of the participants.  But Green, someone who has nothing to do with the military, couldn't stop praising the new civilian and military mixture teams -- who, he insisted, were not duplicating one another's work.  The event was all about selling the war, continuing the war.  Why wasn't the American press interested in covering this DC event?


    US Gen Joseph Votel:  We'll-we'll  see a heavy focus on the development of Iraqi border forces. Uh, this will be very, very important. They-they do not want to have a repeat of what happened before. Obviously, ISIS is an organization that operates without regard to borders or boundaries or any, uh, any recognized norm of that sort and so being able to protect their own borders, is, I think is a -- is a key aspect of this. And, along the way, we'll see the coalition forces with the United States continue to provide the support that the government of Iraq has asked of them. And this has been something we've been talking about with them for some time here, so that we do remain in a position where we can continue to help them professionalize, continue to help them develop into the -- into the security force that the Iraqi people need and want to protect them in the future. So uh, in-in Iraq, I think we're in a pretty good place right now security wise. It is -- there still is the presence of ISIS, uh, there's no doubt about that, but I think with the coalition's support, I think the Iraqi security forces are in a pretty good position to begin to address that.


    He was not the only one noting (advocating for) the continued US military presence in Iraq at the Institute of Peace.  SPUTNIK notes Iraq's Ambassador to the US, Fareed Yasseen, who declared, "They played a really critical role.  We will continue to need their support and their expertise to fight ISIS in the comping phases where you will have to move from terrain tactics warfare to intelligence, fusion cells, counter-terrorism, things like that."  ALMASDAR NEWS adds, "Moreover, Yasseen said that Iraq would also need the support of the United States to secure its border with Syria."

    Again, no matter who spoke, they all joined the chorus of "Keep US Boots On The Ground."

    Some sang it a little louder, but they all sang it.

    Some did a solo turn or two.  Chief among them?  Brett McGurk.

    Why did US troops start going back into Iraq in heavier numbers after the second half of 2014?  To help the Yazidis!

    No.

    That has been the lie.

    The conference cleared that up.  Don't think Brett realized he was doing that, but he did.  He wanted to talk about how they arrived at this recent point in history and he wanted to start with 2014.  He revealed that Baghdad was seriously concerned the Islamic State would seize the city (which everyone already knew) and that, at this time, the US government was seriously exploring evacuating the US Embassy in Baghdad (a detail not previously discussed in the US press), "that's how serious it was."

    Not everyone's selling the notion of US troops remaining in Iraq.  The idea is especially unpopular in Iraq.  Shi'ite cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr continues to call for US troops to leave the country.  Baxtiyar Goran (KURDISTAN 24) reports:


    Influential Iraqi Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr on Sunday expressed his rejection to the presence of foreign troops in Iraq, vowing resistance against them.
    In a hand-written letter released to the media by his office, Sadr, the leader of the Sadrist Movement in Iraq, warned against the presence of the US or any other foreign military in the country.
    “Our position regarding the presence of the invading US forces, under the pretext of military advisers, and with the endorsement and knowledge of Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi is clear,” he wrote. “Everyone knows our position, we reject and resist” the presence of the US troops in Iraq.




    Violence continues in Iraq.  UNAMI released their undercount of violence for the month of March:





    UN Casualty Figures for for the Month of March 2018
    A total of 104 Iraqi civilians were killed and another 177 injured in acts of terrorism, violence and armed conflict in Iraq in March 2018*, according to casualty figures recorded by UNAMI.












    The following community sites -- plus PACIFICA EVENING NEWS and NPR -- updated: