Day: June 13, 2006

It’s Always Open Season on Iraqis

Buck Banks

Unfriendly fire: As the truth continues to either come out, unravel or disappear in the wake of the alleged Haditha massacre of Iraqi civilians by U.S. Marines, reports of other killings are starting to surface. According to the Interpress News Agency:

Nabiha Nisaif Jassim, a 35-year-old mother of two, was killed in firing along with her 57-year-old cousin Saliha Mohammed Hassan on May 30 when they were being transported to Samarra General Hospital for Nabiha to give birth.

It is commonly known that the U.S. forces in Iraq typically pay surviving family members $2,500 per kill, er, accidental death caused by a Washington bullet or bomb.

What was not reported, according to an Iraqi human rights investigator who spoke with IPS on condition of anonymity, was that both women were shot in the back of the head by U.S. snipers.

While the U.S. military denies any wrongdoing, eyewitness accounts seem to contradict the denials — sound familiar? Oh, and Jassim’s brother was offered $5,000, not as compensation, but as a sign of friendship, he was told.

It is commonly known that the U.S. forces in Iraq typically pay surviving family members $2,500 per kill, er, accidental death caused by a Washington bullet or bomb. Indeed, a recent Department of Defense report noted that the U.S. military has paid out $19 million to Iraqis over the past year — half of that in al-Anbar Province where some of the fiercest insurgent activity has occurred. While the military insists that it has paid out in only 600 incidents, the math doesn’t compute.

If it were just 600 dead Iraqis, then the payouts would average $31,667 per dead Iraqi. Although that still is not adequate compensation for the death of a loved one, work the math the other way, and the factor is more chilling. At the usual rate of $2,500 per dead Iraqi, $19 million would pay for 7,600 dead Iraqis.

And that’s just the ones who accepted the bribe. There are others, like Redam Jassim, who declined to take the money. Instead, he wants to know why his sister and cousin were murdered in cold blood by American soldiers.

DC Report: Congress Is a Hotbed of Homos

Jon Ponder

So I hadn’t been in Washington, D.C., 24 hours before I learned that a gay friend of a friend of mine worked in the office of a U.S. senator from one of the states of the old Confederacy. In fact, the staff of this doltish Southern senator has had, and may still include, several gay employees.

There have been reports in local D.C. sites like AmericaBlog that gay people are well-represented on the staffs of homophobic GOP (sorry for the redundancy) senators. And if I happened on this bit of intelligence without even trying, then surely the identities of these uber-hypocritical senators must be common knowledge hereabouts.

On one level, I can’t really fault my gay brethren and sistren who need a paycheck. But it is revolting that a senator portrays himself or herself to the rubes way down home in Dixie (or wherever) as one of them — a bona fide homo-hater — in order to get their votes when, in fact, he or she is as comfortable around gay people as is your average Democrat is.

After some soul-searching and a heated conversation, I agreed not to reveal the senator’s name. Working on a congressional staff is a low-paying thankless job (albeit one that can lead to a cushy do-nothing life as a lobbyist). I really don’t want to bring scandal down on working folks. So — even though it is cold comfort indeed — I’m resolved to let history be the judge of the craven behavior of this Republican politico.

So here is a factoid that won’t be of any help identifiying our subject: This senator voted for the constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage. It won’t help because all the Southern senators voted along party lines on that bit of nastiness.

Still, it makes you wonder if things weren’t a bit tense back at the office after that vote was recorded.

Why Does Rove Have a Security Clearance?

Jon Ponder

Media Matters makes an excellent point:

With the news that White House senior adviser Karl Rove apparently will not be indicted in the CIA leak investigation, Media Matters for America urges the media to ask the following question: What about his security clearance?

As Media Matters has previously explained, both Rove’s apparent confirmation of CIA officer Valerie Plame’s identity to syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak and his alleged disclosure of her identity to Time magazine correspondent Matthew Cooper should trigger the loss of his security clearance under the Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement.

President Bush treats the government security clearance like it is meaningless.

Behind the Scenes of Bush’s Iraq Travel Decision

Trish

In what can only be a tiresome attempt to spin, spin, spin Bush is working harder to rehabilitate his image than he ever has at being president. Here’s the scenario:

  • Airstrike takes out al-Zarqawi, who is then elevated to the status of The Entire Problem. Now The Problem is solved.
  • Bush summons the usual suspects plus the cabinet for a pow wow to discuss what to do next.
  • Someone comes up with the brilliant idea to — wait, wait, I know this is crazy but just follow me here — ask critics of the administration what they think. Bush can look less thin-skinned and isolated and more statesman-like.
  • O.K., but we also need to seem like we’re really involved in what’s going on in Iraq, instead of just sitting through the three-minute briefings every day. What about a video conference with al-Maliki, or whatever that guy’s name is that we installed as prime minister?
  • Whoa, hold on there, Georgie. I know you prefer to video conference whenever possible but it might bring back images of that whole Katrina deal, especially with a tropical storm hitting Florida again.
  • Hmmmm…what to do?
  • Well hell, boys, let’s just go on over there. We’ll take a grin-and-grip with al-Maliki, visit some troops, walk around the Green Zone to show how safe it is, declare the world is better off without Saddem Hussein — I mean al-Zarqawi — and be back before dinner. We’re bound to get at least a five point bump out of this, don’t cha think?

Rove Won’t Be Charged – Fitzmas Canceled Forever

Jon Ponder

Apparently, revealing the name of a secret agent who was specializing in tracking the black market for weapons of mass destruction is not a crime:

The decision by the prosecutor, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, announced in a letter to Mr. Rove’s lawyer, Robert D. Luskin, lifted a pall that had hung over Mr. Rove who testified on five occasions to a federal grand jury about his involvement in the disclosure of an intelligence officer’s identity.

In a statement, Mr. Luskin said, “On June 12, 2006, Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald formally advised us that he does not anticipate seeking charges against Karl Rove.”