Monday’s Mini-Report

October 29, 2007

Today’s edition of quick hits.

* Bloodshed in Baghdad: “A suicide bomber rode his bicycle into a crowd of police recruits in Baqouba on Monday, killing at least 29 people in a province that has become a battleground among U.S. forces, al-Qaida militants and Shiite radicals. A group of Shiite and Sunni clerics, meanwhile, were rescued one day after they were kidnapped in the capital after meeting with the government to discuss how to coordinate efforts against al-Qaida in Iraq. In a reflection of the extraordinary complexity of Iraq, the U.S. military blamed a Shiite militant for the kidnapping. The military did not reveal its evidence, but has claimed that so-called rogue Shiite groups are doing everything possible to stop Iraqis from joining U.S. forces — even in the fight against the Sunni al-Qaida in Iraq.”

* Speaking of Iraq, guess who’s back in the administration’s good graces? “Ahmad Chalabi, the controversial, ubiquitous Iraqi politician and one-time Bush administration favorite, has re-emerged as a central figure in the latest U.S. strategy for Iraq. His latest job: To press Iraq’s central government to use early security gains from the surge to deliver better electricity, health, education and local security services to Baghdad neighborhoods. That’s the next phase of the surge plan. Until now, the U.S. military, various militias, insurgents and some U.S. backed groups have provided those services without great success.”

* When it comes to the crisis in Darfur, Bush will occasionally talk a good game. Of course, Bush’s promises don’t meet his policies.

* If you missed Glenn Greenwald’s coverage over the weekend of the email(s) he received from Col. Steven A. Boylan, the Public Affairs Officer and personal spokesman for Gen. David G. Petraeus, do yourself a favor and check this out. I could summarize, but I wouldn’t even begin to do the bizarre story justice.

* And then, when you’re done with that, read today’s follow up. It’s a reminder that far too many right-wing bloggers just aren’t very bright.

* I’m not going to get my hopes up, but a surprising number of senators on the Judiciary Committee are saying encouraging things about Michael Mukasey’s A.G. nomination. Most notably, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said that if Mukasey “does not believe that waterboarding is illegal, then that would really put doubts in my own mind.” We’ll see.

* Turkey, in response to Kurdish attacks, sounds increasingly like Bush did in early March 2003. “The moment an operation is needed, we will take that step,” Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan told a large flag-waving crowd in Izmit. “We don’t need to ask anyone’s permission.”

* Here’s a story with plenty of potential: “Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., is pushing $25 million in earmarked federal funds for a British defense contractor that is under criminal investigation by the U.S. Justice Department and suspected by American diplomats of a ‘longstanding, widespread pattern of bribery allegations.'”

* John Cole articulated a thought today that I’ve had every day for several years: “I am going live with my theory, the only thing I can come up with for the rampant asshattery and thorough idiocy we have witnessed lately from the right-wing blogosphere: They are now working in concert to say as many stupid things as possible so that we are unable to document and mock them all. It is the only thing that makes sense.”

* If you’ve been discouraged at all by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s approach to challenging Bush’s Iraq policy, you’ll be pleased to know that Susan McCue, who held the title of Reid’s chief of staff before leaving to serve as an executive for the ONE Campaign, is returning to consult her former boss. “Rocky had Mick, Reid has McCue,” said Tom Matzzie, Washington director of MoveOn. “This is great news.”

* Why did the Army engage in a selective leak about Scott Thomas Beauchamp to Drudge? The LAT asks some pertinent questions.

* There’s been some talk of late, especially from the Giuliani campaign, about the connection between adoptions and abortions. It’s completely wrong.

* The WaPo did a lengthy story yesterday about Bush being “a generous hugger.” No, I don’t know why the Post published this, either.

* And finally, Jonah Goldberg has been working on a book called “Liberal Fascism” for quite a while, during which time the name of book has changed more than once. But someone hacked the book’s entry on Amazon over the weekend to make an unauthorized change Goldberg probably won’t approve of: “Liberal Fascism: The Totalitarian Temptation from When I Got My Advance Until I Finally Hand in the Manuscript in 2011.” The book’s actual subtitle (pre-hacking), was: “The Secret History of the American Left from Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning.” An earlier subtitle included Hillary Clinton, and still another, Hegel and Whole Foods.

Anything to add? Consider this an end-of-the-day open thread.

To press Iraq’s central government to use early security gains from the surge to deliver better electricity, health, education and local security services to Baghdad neighborhoods. That’s the next phase of the surge plan. Until now, the U.S. military, various militias, insurgents and some U.S. backed groups have provided those services without great success.

Wow, we defeated Saddam Hussein so warring militias and insurgent groups could provide “electricity, health, education and local security services to Baghdad neighborhoods.” Great job, guys.

  • Shouldn’t Goldberg’s book be called “Liberal Fascination”? If a hack diatribe takes this long to write, it’s more about his obsession than the purported content.

  • Well, here’s an addition. Even if Rumsfeld never serves time, maybe he’ll go down in history as having been found guilty of war crimes in several international courts.

    This is not all of the article but some of the highlights.

    Rumsfeld Charged with Torture in French Court

    NEW YORK, Oct 29 (OneWorld) – Donald Rumsfeld, the former U.S. secretary of defense, is facing criminal charges in France for ordering the torture of prisoners in Iraq and at the military prison at Guantanamo Bay.

    Last week, some of the world’s leading human rights law groups filed a complaint before a French court charging Rumsfeld with authorizing and ordering torture.

    The complaint was registered at the office of the prosecutor of the Court of First Instance in Paris when Rumsfeld was in the city for a talk sponsored by Foreign Policy magazine. . . .

    In filing the complaint against Rumsfeld, Ratner’s group received full support from the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), the French League for Human Rights, and the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH). . . .

    The charges against Rumsfeld were brought under the 1984 Convention against Torture, ratified by both the United States and France, which has been used in France in previous torture cases.

    The criminal complaint states that because of the failure of authorities in the United States and Iraq to launch any independent investigation, it is the legal obligation of states such as France to take up the case.

    Ratner and his colleagues in France’s legal community contend that Rumsfeld and other top U.S. officials are subject to criminal trial because there is sufficient evidence to prove that they had authorized the torture of prisoners held on suspicion of involvement in terrorist acts. . . .

    Arguing that French courts are obligated under the Convention against Torture to prosecute individuals responsible for torture if they are present on French territory, Belhassen said he hoped the fight against impunity will “not be sacrificed in the name of politics.”

    Rumsfeld’s presence on French territory gives French courts jurisdiction to prosecute him for having ordered and authorized torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment of detainees in Guantanamo, the notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, and elsewhere, lawyers who filed complaint said.

    Rumsfeld, who stepped down from his position a year ago, can no longer claim immunity as a high-level statesman or as a former statesman, they added, because international law does not recognize such immunity in the case of international crimes including torture.

    Former U.S. Army Brigadier General Janis Karpinski, who served as commander of Abu Ghraib and other U.S.-run prisons in Iraq, submitted written testimony to the Paris prosecutor for the plaintiffs’ case detailing Rumsfeld’s relationship to the abuse of detainees. . . .

    This is the fifth time Rumsfeld has been charged with direct involvement in torture stemming from his role in the Bush administration’s global response to the September 11 terrorist attacks in New York and other parts of the United States.

    Two previous criminal complaints were filed in Germany under its universal jurisdiction statute, which allows Germany to prosecute serious international crimes regardless of where they occurred or the nationality of the perpetrators or victims.

    The first case was filed in 2004 by CCR, FIDH, and Kaleck, who is an attorney in Berlin. That case was dismissed in February 2005 in response to official pressure from the United States, in particular from the Pentagon, the plaintiffs said.

    The second case was filed last fall by the same groups as well as dozens of national and international human rights groups, Nobel Peace Prize winners, and the former UN special rapporteur on torture.

    The 2006 complaint was presented on behalf of 12 Iraqi citizens who had been held and abused in Abu Ghraib and one Saudi citizen still held at Guantanamo. That case was dismissed in April, though an appeal is expected this week.

    Rumsfeld is also facing similar charges in two other cases filed against him in Argentina and Sweden.

    http://us.oneworld.net/article/view/154604/1/

  • Reading the Greenwald item, I couldn’t help but note the following paragraph in the original email from(?) Boylan:

    I am curious as to when you think the media relations or operations changed here in Iraq. I in fact do know exactly the day and time that it changed and want to see if you are even in the same ballpark as reality. . . .

    Isn’t that a tacit admission that the military’s press operations have changed and the rest of the world isn’t just halucinating?

  • Chalabi? Wasn’t he found guilty of bank fraud in 1992 in Jordan? And isn’t he the one who laughed when admitting he’d lied to Bush’s special intelligence group when he claimed Saddam Hussein had WMDs? “Well, it worked,” he said essentially. I suppose the WH has had such a short-list of non-felons to draw from, they’re not being particular anymore.

    And Mukasey? Well, the committee noises may not mean much in the end. From the report:

    Reports The New York Times: “Many Democratic lawmakers say privately that he is still likely to be confirmed, given the need for leadership in the Justice Department after months of turmoil.”

    Maybe that’s the reason why only two senators have actually come out to actually oppose Mukasey’s nomination: Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Chris Dodd (D-CT).

  • * If you missed Glenn Greenwald’s coverage over the weekend of the email(s) he received from Col. Steven A. Boylan, the Public Affairs Officer and personal spokesman for Gen. David G. Petraeus, do yourself a favor and check this out. I could summarize, but I wouldn’t even begin to do the bizarre story justice.

    * And then, when you’re done with that, read today’s follow up. It’s a reminder that far too many right-wing bloggers just aren’t very bright.

    May I utter a heresy here? I’m kinda sick of this story. I’m against this war. On the question of Scott Beauchamp’s truthfulness, I don’t give a crap except insofar as any lack of truthfulness on his part is ascribed to all war opponents in a sort of blood guilt. Leaking those documents was, yes, unconscionable. But now we’re discussing a post about a post about an e-mail about a leak about a series of columns about the war. How much more meta are we going to get?

    (Sorry, just grumpy today.)

  • Re: #8,

    I have been glazing over on the Beauchamp leak, myself, I can’t even recollect what it’s about. But the post that CB links to is about some much more serious problems than a single leak, and has virtually nothing to do with the Beauchamp leak.

    First, the right-wing hack commenter tone used by the military PR man is disturbing just by itself. And that only serves to further demonstrate the point that the military is becoming political and politicized, like every other branch of government has become under Bush. Otherwise then, the possibility that someone could be hacking into the military’s computer system to forge emails is still disturbing.

  • “…to further demonstrate the point that the military is becoming political and politicized, like every other branch of government has become under Bush…

    Let’s not forget every regulatory agency, too. That’s a pretty important politicization.

    And thanks to anney for the 411 on the Rumsfeld charges. I have my pom poms already geared up for my visit to The Hague for him, Bush, Cheney, Rice and Powell. Each deserves their 15 minutes (plus) in front of that court!

  • ok, i dont claim to be an expert on hugging (ok, maybe i do. . .) but i saw one of the photos accompanying the WaPo.com story over the weekend of Bush hugging a gentleman who had lost him home in the California fires. it was an arm-around-the-shoulder side hug, and he was ebracing the guy’s shoulder with his wrist, his hand held away from the other person like he might get cooties. he was stiff as a board, and his expression was somewhere between blank and tense as could be.

    go look at photos of Clinton hugging people after tragedies.

    the difference is simple: Clinton felt their pain. Bush feels like he has a political need to appear to feel their pain. He looks no happier to be touching one of the masses than Thompson looks during a full day of campaigning.

  • Open thread:

    I just got a copy of the CD Aenima by the smart metal band, Tool. On it there’s an interesting song called Die Eier von Satan. When you listen to the song, it starts with some evil-sounding, new-school metal guitar with a distortion pedal on it slowly playing. Then, a little into the song, the vocalist starts speaking well-pronounced German.

    The song goes on and on, and the vocalist’s speaking gets more and more fervent-sounding, until it becomes angry. You hear a clip play of a bunch of voices hooting and joyously cheering. It reminds you of Hitler speaking to a German audience, and you wonder if you just heard a bunch of Hitler-imitating, racist and anti-semitic shit– you wonder if Tool are a bunch of closet racists–

    Then, you hear about the song, and discover the German lyrics are nothing more than the recipe for Deviled eggs!

    Here’s how I think they came up with the idea for the song:

    In English, “deviled eggs” just sounds like it means you turned the eggs reddish with bacon and paprika, or even that the vinegar you put into the yolks gave them a tang. It’s just a cute, even funny name, more imagery than anything else, and doesn’t have a scary overtone at all.

    But in German, “die Eier von Satan” is literally “the eggs of Satan.” If there’s no way to really say “deviled’ (which is just a culinary term in English– doesn’t mean cursed or evil or possessed or anything in English) in German, than “the eggs of Satan” sounds a lot more ominous. Think about it if you were a German, had never heard of deviled eggs before, and then for the first time hear of the name deviled eggs. You wonder what they are. If they were called Eggs of Satan in English, that would sound a lot more ominous too. People who had never heard of the dish before might wonder if people were talking about witchcraft or something if they heard a bit of some bystanders’ conversation, just enough to hear them mention “eggs of Satan.”

    I bet one of the guys from Tool got into some situation in which he was discussing Deviled eggs with a German or Austrian friend, and the friend said, “What’s that??? Die Eier von Satan???” It just goes to show that if you don’t know what something is, you can think it’s something really evil just because it sounds or looks scary. But despite the surface impression, it might just be something totally innocuous, like Deviled eggs.

    Same thing with the Tool song. Play a tape of some guy speaking German in an ominous voice for a bunch of Americans, and (partly because German can sound so stern, like Klingon, to us, and partly because of WWII) we’ll wonder, “What the hell is that guy saying??? It’s got to be something diabolical!!”

    I don’t know if it was more of pulling a joke on people or more of making a point about the human experience and how we perceive things (Tool seem like nerds who might think of those things) but it’s a clever song.

  • I agree with Rian Mueller re: the Greenwald email. If read Greg Mitchell’s piece on it,
    http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003664994
    you may conclude, as I have, that Col. Boyland is exhibiting disturbing signs of something unhealthy for a military spokesman. I am not sure if it is stress or zealotry / hero worship (of Petraeus) or excessive politicization, but there is something out of kilter in the examples of his correspondence (and alleged correspondence) that I have read. The bitterness and hostility does not make a good substitute for reasoned refutation of the published items that inspired his responses.

    Re: the photo op Prez: I watched him during his Katrina junkets, and he consistently would sweep people into the “Politician’s Pose” positioning them for the camera like they had paid $25,000 for the priviledge at a fund raiser. It is all “grip and grin” and quite disgusting to watch. It is dead certain that he does not make these trips to actually comfort anyone or accomplish anything. Like everything else this guy is all about image and has nothing to offer in the way of substance. Oh how I pray that the American people will collectively kick this SOB and his Republican fellow travelers to the curb in 2008…

  • PS:
    I mispoke above. Bush thinks that a photo with him will actually comfort someone who has just been made homeless by a natural disaster. He thinks he is the Healer in Chief.

  • Steve M –

    The Greenwald piece is about the growing coziness between the military PR department and the right-wing blogosphere. I think that’s a pretty damn important thing to be tracking. We know that Republican politicians are using the right-wing blogs to spread propaganda (see, for example, McConnell’s office during the S-CHIP insanity) – if the military is doing the same that’s a scary, scary thing. And I’m glad that Glenn is following up on this because someone needs to be looking into it.

  • JKap (@10) said:

    Hug a despot. Yeah, I said it. Reach out and give that fascist dictator a great big hug.

    Around the neck? With a piece of a stout rope? You’re on 🙂

  • Pingback: First Manassas « his vorpal sword

  • Among the main explanations cited in the HHS report for decline in relinquishments since the ’70s are that “the increased social acceptance of single parenthood has led more unmarried women to keep their children”

    …proven, common-sense policies …expand women’s access to high-quality contraceptive counseling and services and to support comprehensive sex education that teaches young people about both delaying sex and using protection when they do become sexually active.

    Ooooo, yeah.
    Bring those to the Iowa caucuses, Rudy.

    “And I believe we need to stop stigmatizing single parenthood because it gives young mothers incentive to abort!”
    BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Hissssssssss! BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
    “We also need to ensure minimal, but adequate food, shelter, and health programs so no new mother needs to worry about being unable to provide a livable home environment for their newborn.”
    *grumble, grumble*

    • Comments are closed.