Kat's "
Kat's Korner: Bonnie's got another classic" is a great review of a great album. Please check both out.   
Isaiah's 
The World Today Just Nuts   "
Spring Break Columbia: War On Women Edition" went up last night.

I loved it.  I think it is great that Isaiah made the connection no one wants to make: You set a tone of disrespect for women -- with speechwriters groping cardboard cut-outs of Hillary, by calling her one vile name after another, by attacking her as not being experienced enough, by insisting she was just a 'wife' (sound familiar?) -- when you create that tone it drips all around you.  The Secret Service clearly thought prostitution was a-okay.  Where did they get that (hopefully wrong) idea?
So Tim Mak is becoming an idiot.  
His latest article is about 'left' bloggers and 'liberal' bloggers.  No, they are Democratic bloggers.  I was left when Jill and Footballs were not even born.  I will go to my grave left.  So do not tell me that these little bastards churning out p.r. for the Democratic Party are left. 
They are partisans and whorish ones at that.
And Tim Mak is as well.  This is not the first time he has played this little game.  I think I am done with 
POLITICO and they better get nervous because I am sort of weather vane.  When I have had enough, there are usually others who have as well.
Speaking of sleaze, John Edwards' trial is supposed to begin next Monday.
This is C.I.'s "
Iraq snapshot" for today:
 
        Monday,  April 16, 2012.  Chaos and violence continue, Nouri's latest power-grab  gets a little attention, Moqtada al-Sadr joins the list of people  publicly rebuking Nouri, Bloomberg News warns that what everyone's  watching Nouri do isn't even the half of it, and more. 
  
  
 In a new interview, 
Jane Arraf (Al Jazeera -- link has video and text) has asked  Iraqi President Jalal Talabani about charges that Prime Minister and  thug Nouri al-"Maliki is on the road to becoming a dictator" and  Talabani denied the charge and stated, "There are some shortages -- it  is not only him responsible.  I am also responsible.  I am responsible  for looking after everything to guard the constitution.  I must also  speak, so we are all responsible for the shortages in the government."   Well then Talabani needs to start exercising some responsibility and do  so very quickly.
   
 Yesterday Farah al-Haidari and Karim al-Tamimi were released from jail as was expected -- 
AFP reported Friday that they would "be jailed until Sunday, a fellow commission member told AFP."  As noted in 
Friday's snapshot,  last Tuesday the UN Secretary-General's Special Envoy Martin Kobler was  praising the Independent High Electoral Commission to the United  Nations Security Council and discussing how important it was to the  upcoming provincial elections next year and then the parliamentary  elections scheduled for the year after. So news that Nouri's had two  members of that commission arrested on Thursday, 
as reported in real time by Raheem Salman (ioL news), was startling and alarming. Karim al-Tamimi serves on the commission while Faraj al-Haidari is the head of the commission.  
   
 How outrageous were the arrests?  Saturday, 
Al Mada reported  that Moqtada al-Sadr declared that the arrests were indications that  Nouri al-Maliki might be attempting to delay the elections or call them  off all together. He makes it clear that the the arrest needs to be  based on eveidence and not on some whim of Nouri's and that it shouldn't  be done because Nouri desires to "postpone or call of the election."   
Xinhua reported,  "The government in Iraq's northern semi-autonomous Kurdistan region  said Saturday that it has called on the central government in Baghdad to  release the electoral commission's head and another member arrested on  corruption  charges." The 
Oman Tribune notes  that the KRG issued the following statement on Friday: "The decision of  the authorities in Baghdad to issue a detention order against Faraj Al  Haidari and Karim Al Tamimi amounts to a gross violation and dangerous  infringement of the political process. Such a decision is targeting the  independence of the electoral commission ... We call (on the  authorities) to reconsider the detention order immediately and refrain  from persisting in insulting the democratic operation."  As 
Mohamad Ali Harissi (AFP) observed,  "Key political factions accused the premier of moving towards a  dictatorship with the  arrest of Iraq's electoral commission chief, a  charge the prime minister denied on Saturday."  
W.G. Dunlop (AFP) quoted  Iraqiya MP Haidar al-Mullah stating, "When the head of the independent  electoral commission is being targeted, it means it is a message from  the one who is targeting him that he is above the law and above the  political process. The one who is standing behind this is the head of  the State of Law coalition (Maliki), because he wants to send a message  that either the elections should be fraudulent, or he will use the  authorities to get revenge on the commission. This arrest is an  indication that the judiciary has become an obedient tool in the hands  of Mr Nuri al-Maliki."
   
 Al Rafidayn explained  Nouri al-Maliki released a statement Saturday decrying those who  doubted the arrests were sound. The Baghdad court that Nouri controls  made no attempt to even pretend to be impartial or about justice.  The  Supreme Judicial Council announced yesterday that Faraj al-Haidari had  used UNHCR money to purchase plots of land and that he will face a seven  year prison term for those actions.  
AFP spoke  with al-Haidari after his release and he explained the charges are  related to approved one-time bonuses for five employees of amounts  between $80 and $125 (US equivalent). One-time bonuses to five  employees. And he tells them this case was  previously dismissed by the  court but the State of Law MP bringing the charges filed an appeal. From  the article:
He said that Hanan  al-Fatlawi, an MP from Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's State of Law  coalition, had pursued a large number of complaints against IHEC that  eventually wound up with the Iraqi judiciary."For the last 6 months... the judiciary was sending warrants of investigation every day to the employees," Haidari said.  State of Law is the political slate that Nouri al-Maliki heads.  
Tim Arango (New York Times) points out,  "Mr. Maliki has sought for two years to consolidate control over the  electoral commission, whose independence is viewed as essential in  ensuring that Iraqi elections are free from fraud, vote rigging and  interference from political parties. Mr. Maliki's critics say the effort  is a part of a 
pattern of power grabs  -- his near total takeover of the security forces, a recent attempt to  exert influence over the central bank and politically motivated arrests  under the pretext of thwarting coup plots. And it reinforces a narrative  that Mr. Maliki is emerging as an authoritarian leader in the  wake of  the American military withdrawl." 
   
   
 More  quietly, Maliki's government is pursuing worrisome measures that are  potentially of greater long-term importance, as it crafts rules that  will govern the new Iraq into the distant future. 
 These laws, regulating such things as mass communications and political parties, are necessary. Unfortunately, as detailed in a report by the Canada-based Centre for Law and Democracy,  the versions drafted by Maliki's government for parliamentary approval  would unreasonably hinder freedom of expression, assembly and  association.   The Internet Bill provides for life imprisonment  and heavy fines for offenses such as publishing information about the  manufacture of "any tools or materials used in the planning or execution  of terrorist acts." It sounds reasonable, but the measure could cover  articles about the making of ink, paper, computers, guns, knives, or  just about anything. An individual can be heavily fined or jailed for  life for using a computer or information network to harm the reputation  of Iraq. Similar laws elsewhere -- Turkey's  infamous Article 301, for  example, which made it a crime to "insult  Turkishness" and a successor law that bars insulting the Turkish nation  -- have inevitably led to dubious prosecutions and infringements on  human rights.    
  
 And on to more violence.  
 AFP notes  that an Iraqi man apparently exploded his own Saadiyah home in the  midst of an Iraqi military raid on the house -- in addition to his own  life, the explosion killed 4 members of his family.  In other violence, 
AP reports that 4 Shi'ite famers were shot dead today in Rashidiyah. 
ioL News notes  yesterday saw a Taji home bombing which claimed the life of both  parents and their five-year-old son ("a two-year-old girl survived but  was wounded"), a Kirkuk car bombing claimed 1 life and left  eleven  people injured and a roadside bombing outside Nawafei village claimed  the life of 1 man who was the son of a Sahwa leader. 
Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) notes  other Sunday violence included a Wadi Hajar bombing which claimed the  life of 1 police officer (three people injured), a Baghdad sticking  bombing targeting a dentist claimed his life, 1 Shabak was shot dead in  Mosul, 1 suspected assailant was shot dead by Mosul police, a Tuz  Khormato home invasion claimed the life of 1 Iraqi soldier, 1 former  government official was shot dead in Buhriz, a Gatoun bombing injured a  woman and her daughter, a Tikrit bombing injured a police officer and  "The 
body of the deputy major of  
Suleimaniya was discovered hanged in his jail cell. The family of Zana Hama Saleh 
insisted  that he would not have committed suicide because he said he was  awaiting release. No evidence of forced suicide was found. Saleh was  detained on corruption charges." 
Alsumaria adds that a street cleaner was shot dead outside Tikrit.
   
  
   
  
 Heidi  Boghosian: There's -- There's so many names of individuals in this  condition.  Russell Maroon Shoatz also a former Black Panther who's been  incarcerated I think almost 40 years but half of that has been in  solitary confinement at SCI Greene in Pennsylvania.  The reason they  give there is that they're afraid that, at the age of seventy almost,  that he will be seen as a leader, a political leader who will inspire  other inmates to resist.
  
 Natsu  Taylor Saito:  Yes.  And what we're seeing is back in the 60s and 70s  when they were targeting political activists -- when the federal  government was targeting political activists -- it was clear that they  were identifying people because of their ability to influence others.   Like Fred Hampton, for example.  Killing Fred Hampton was very  significant because he was being effective in mobilizing a true rainbow  coaltion -- not because he was a Black separatist or, you know,  whatever.
  
 Heidi Boghosian:  Right.
  
 Natsu  Taylor Saito: But they were always pretending like that's not what it  was about.  And now they're coming out and being quite blatant, right?   Your ideas, your ability to have what some of us would consider a  positive influence on other inmates or young people who are incarcerated  makes you dangerous and therefore we will impose these conditions.    And that's really sort of the trend I see generally with so much of what  has been happening recently is the taking of these political  suppression techniques that were at least covert in the 60s and 70s and  bringing them out, normalizing them, legitimizing them in their  framework.  You know, making them technically legal and pushing one step  further each time  with the PATRIOT Act, the Defense Authorization Act   this time.  You know, taking these types of COINTELPRO measures of  spying on people and putting in informants and falsely accusing and   arresting people and even assassinating people.  We see that all being  out in the open.  And I find that particularly frightening that there  seems to be acquiescence with that process.
  
  
 Heidi  Boghosian:  We've seen it with the establishment of communications  management units in which individuals such as Daniel McGowan, who was an  animal rights activist, has been basically locked away, kept out of  communication from others and it does seem that even in those movements  that have emerged in the last, you know, 15 or 20  years, those  techniques that you described are now routinely now applied to target  leaders or charasmatic individuals who have a demonstrated track record  that they can work to effect change. 
  
  
 Natsu  Taylor Saito:  Yes, it's like you are not allowed to be an effective  communicator of the so-called wrong ideas.  And even if we look at Lynne  Stewart's case, right?  They tagged her with terrorism offensives for  facilitating a communication that everybody can see had no actual  effect.  But it was a communications restriction on her client that  ended up getting her convicted.
  
 Michael S. Smith: Yeah.  She issued a press release and, for doing that, they put her away for ten years.
  
 Natsu Taylor Saito:  Mmm-hmm.
  
 Michael  S. Smith:  And ironically, the person whom she was representing, his  movement looks like it's coming into substantial power in Egypt.
 
Natsu Taylor Saito:  That is interesting. 
  
 Michael  S. Smith:  I read a very good article that you wrote some years ago  after the US PATRIOT Act was passed and one of the questions you posed,  talking about homeland security, and you said, "Whose homeland and whose  security?"  That was seven years ago.  Can you bring that up to date  and ask that question again?
  
 Natsu  Taylor Saito:  Yes.  I think that really is becoming more and more  clear.  And it sort of ties back to some of the themes of this notion of  American exceptionalism.  You know, who is the American that's supposed  to be so exceptional?  And what is the America that is supposed to be  so exceptional?  I really see that reflected -- sort of frighteningly --  across the political spectrum.  Like, I think in campaign rhetoric of  the Republican primaries right now you see this constant reference to  America being exceptional and we want to bring the country back to what  it was and it's like whose country are they talking about?  And who are  they excluding?  And it's fairly clear that they're not talking about  people of color, they're not talking about poor people -- any of these  other groups though sometimes they claim to be populist.  But we also  see it with the Obama administration authorizing  of assassinations and  indefinite detentions of American citizens.  Well which American  citizens are we talking about?  And are they more secure?  Are any of us  more secure when this all rest on some secretive executive branch  decision?  And even with movements that seem to have, in many ways,  wonderful political potential -- like the Occupy movement -- there is a  sort of homogenizing of who it is we're talking about.  And one example  that will probably make your listeners hate me is in Denver there was an  effort made by folks in the American Indian Movement and the community  here in Denver to get the Occupy folks to acknowledge that -- there has  to be acknowledgment of the fact that this land was taken from American  Indians and that American Indians still have a right to  self-determination -- not to just be lumped into 'we all want a share of  this ill gotten pie,' right? But when that was taken apparently to the  national  movement, it was resoundingly rejected as being divisive.   And, to me, that illustrates this notion that we get to define who's  American and then then we get to propose a course of political action on  their behalf.  But each of these sectors has exclusionary definnitions  of who's an American.  And I find that really troubling. 
  
 Heidi Boghosian: Natsu, going back to your book Meeting the Enemy: American Exceptionalism and International Law, I  think it's been a year since we've had you on to talk about that and  we've been disappointed with President Obama's record: the invasion of  Libya, other military actions, you've referenced some of our policies.   But what's your take on what we're facing in the next year or so?  What  are the repercussions from our ill gained military power?   
 Michael S. Smith: Selectively applying international law.
  
 Heidi Boghosian: Right.
  
 Natsu:  Yes.  I think that that's a really major problem.  And that's a lot of  what I was talking about in there, this sort of selective reliance on  international law.  It's -- One of the misperceptions, I think, is that  the United States doesn't care about international law.  In fact, it  utilizes international law heavily in certain arenas.  For example, for  preventing people in poor countries from getting access to drugs that US  pharmaceutical companies have patents on and they're protected by  certain intellectual property agreements.  But on the other hand being  willing to flaunt international law rather dramatically.  And I think  the invasion of Libya is a good example of that.  Of going into another  country that is in a certain state of political turmoil and essentially  moving in to assassinate its leaders.  I think the assassination of  Osama bin Laden falls in that category.  These are  things that are  being justified based on the personal characteristics of these  individuals which is very dangerous.  It violates long-standing  international law on both state sovereignty but also the way in which  political participation and true democracy is supposed to be working --  which the United States claims to be promoting.  If you can go in and  assassinate those indiviuals that you don't like, that completely throws  out of whack international law in terms of the state relations.  But  also it sets up the precedent that anybody we don't like, we can just  assassinate rather than giving due process of law to.  I find that  setting a very frightening precedent.  And I think the renewal of the  drone strikes in Pakistan is another good example of that. I don't think  international law -- as it exists -- allows those kinds of measures.  I  don't think the United States would begin to argue it was legal if it  was at least half  of the rest of the countries of the world doing it.   And it undermines the entire system in a way that really says "might  makes right."  And that's a dangerous position for everybody right now  -- in the world -- but it's also dangerous for the United States because  there's no assurance that the United States will always be the most  powerful country in the world. 
  
  
 Staying with radio, 
the latest broadcast of Correspondents Report with Elizabeth Jackson (Australia's ABC -- link is audio), finds Stephanie Kennedy in DC  visiting the section of 
Arlington Cemetery where the fallen from the Iraq War and the Afghanistan War are buried. Excerpt.
Stephanie  Kennedy: They died on the battlefields in dusty deserts and on  unforgiving mountains on foreign soil. But their final resting place is  here, in the rolling meadows of Arlington Cemetery. Tucked away in a  pocket of this hallowed ground is what's become known as "The Saddest  Acre in America." Section 60 is in the south-east part of this vast  cemetery. It's the burial ground for more than 800  American soldiers  killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Cemetery officials have very strict  rules about adding decorations on gravestones here but, in this little  corner, they've turned a blind eye. And the manicured grounds are the  same as is the perfect symetry of the headstones. But what's different  here is the personal touches left by the families of the fallen.  Mementos of lives lived adorn many of the graves: laminated photographs  of soldiers in uniform in happier times, with families and wives and  fiancees, there's childrens' drawings, and even a can of tobacco on one  grave, unopened beer bottles and with Easter came chocolate eggs and  balloons. And here's a stuffed bear -- he's actually fallen over so I'll  just prop him back up. It's actually -- It's actually a little Easter  bunny -- or a big Easter bunny. There are cards and letters too. This  one reads: "Beloved son, your smile lit up our world. Life is not nearly  so bright without you. We love and  miss you so much."   
 Finally,  earlier this month, the US Justice Dept announced charges against a  Home Depot in Arizona asserting that they had violated the Uniformed  Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (see "
Home Depot fires people for being deployed?"). The law firm of 
Boyle, Autry & Murphy  have filed suit against the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections over  their treatment of the firm's client Iraq War veteran Bryan Kubic:
  
 
 Master  Sgt. Bryan N. Kubic fought for his country for 23 years, but now is  forced to battle his state government. With the help of Attorney Devon M. Jacob,  Kubic is seeking civil relief after being harassed, criminally charged  and wrongfully terminated from his employment by individuals at the  Pennsylvania Department of Corrections (DOC).  
The  disturbing story began in 2010, when Tammy Ferguson became the DOC's  chief of security. Ferguson continually harassed military personnel -  including Kubic - about current and past requests for military leave. As  a result, Kubic requested a transfer to a prior position he held at the  DOC Training Academy.  
Upon seeing the  request to transfer, Ferguson called Kubic a "coward" and denied his  request. She scolded him, saying that the "U.S. military does not trump  the DOC." Kubic - who was awarded the Combat Infantry Badge while  serving in Iraq - continued following DOC protocol for military leave  requests, and Ferguson escalated her harassment by launching a criminal  investigation into Kubic's military leave use history. Knowing he was in  the right, Kubic waived his Miranda rights and voluntarily submitted to  an interrogation by DOC investigator Stephen Allen.  
Kubic  provided evidence demonstrating that he was either on military duty or  at Veterans Affairs (VA) medical appointments during his times of leave.  Regardless, Allen brought criminal charges against Kubic for theft by  deception and receiving stolen property, and Ferguson suspended Kubic's  employment.  
At a preliminary hearing  on the charges, investigator Allen admitted that he had no evidence to  establish that Kubic was not performing military duty during the times  in question. Both charges were eventually dismissed and this story  should have ended. Sadly, it did not.  
Ferguson  continued an extrajudicial campaign aiming to terminate Kubic's  employment with the DOC. Kubic battled the disciplinary charges,  providing the DOC with evidence convincingly demonstrating his military  service on the dates in question and his compliance with DOC military  leave directives.  
In spite of the  evidence clearly showing Kubic's proper and legal use of military leave,  Ferguson terminated Kubic's employment. Perhaps Ferguson believed she  had won the final battle of her personal power struggle over the DOC  employees' ability to serve in the military. Regardless of Ferguson's  motives, Kubic wants to see justice prevail, so that military personnel  can freely work at the DOC without suffering unlawful discrimination.  
"When you serve your country, you don't expect to be treated differently than anyone else," Kubic told CBS 21 news.  
Kubic has teamed with Attorney Jacob of Boyle, Autry & Murphy  to bring a federal civil rights lawsuit against Ferguson, Allen and one  other DOC employee responsible for the charges unfairly leveled against  him. The case, Kubic v. Allen, et al., is pending in the United States  District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.  
The decorated war veteran - who is not  suing the DOC itself - hopes to see Ferguson terminated for her  abhorrent behavior. Kubic, who suffers from post-traumatic stress  disorder (PTSD) as a result of his military service, is also seeking  financial compensation for the psychological and financial harm caused  by the criminal charges and the unlawful termination of his employment.   
Kubic's disturbing story demonstrates  the importance of the American civil justice system: Without the power  of a civil lawsuit, Ferguson would have dealt the final, damaging blow  to Kubic's reputation and livelihood.  
With  his day in court, Bryan Kubic will have an opportunity to clear his  name and ensure that justice is achieved. Kubic has suffered irreparable  harm to his reputation - something that money can't fix - but he  believes that when he prevails in federal court it will help to  guarantee that military personnel receive the equal treatment and  respect that they deserve.