She built that image

Reader Lisa e-mailed asking if I would please note this from Newsbusters:

On Wednesday night, the “big three” of ABC, CBS, and NBC all neglected to cover the latest problem facing likely Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton as a report from the Department of Homeland Security’s Inspector General (IG) found that a senior DHS official assisted Clinton’s brother Tony Rodham and Democratic Governor Terry McAuliffe (Va.) in obtaining visas for their foreign business associates.
According to the report, Deputy Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas gave “an appearance of favoritism and special access” while he led U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and “communicated with” those seeking the approval of visas “outside of the normal adjudicatory process and intervened with the career USCIS staff in ways that benefitted the stakeholders.”


Hillary's scandals never end.

I am so not in the mood for this.

The woman needs to announce she will not be running to put us all out of the misery.

I know Bob Somerby likes to pretend Hillary is the victim and a saint but that is just not true.

She has a bad image these days because she has worked so very hard to earn it.

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

 

Wednesday, March 25, 2015.  Chaos and violence continue, the US government authorizes airstrikes on Tikrit, which means the US is now working with a designated terrorist (designated such by the US government), fears emerge that Iranian forces in Iraq may attack US forces, and much more.


The biggest news out of Iraq today?


Dana Ford (CNN) announces, "Airstrikes started Wednesday in Tikrit, where Iraqi and coalition forces are battling to wrest control from ISIS."  Robert Burns (AP) explains, " The U.S. initially did not provide air support in Tikrit because Baghdad pointedly chose instead to partner with Iran in a battle it predicted would yield a quick victory."  Nasdaq spins, "The U.S. intervention is a blow to Iran, which has played a major role in commanding the Shiite militias and has also supplied weapons."

Also spinning was US State Dept spokesperson Jen Psaki who appeared to believe that she could bomb reality with excessive wordage:

These strikes were designed to destroy ISIL strongholds with precision -- protecting innocent Iraqis by minimizing damage to infrastructure, and enabling Iraqi forces under Iraqi command to continue offensive operations against ISIL in the vicinity of Tikrit. All strikes were coordinated with the Government of Iraq and Iraqi Security Forces through our Joint Operation Center in Baghdad.

Before today, the Coalition has conducted 2,967 airstrikes against ISIL terrorists, 1,678 in Iraq and 1,289 in Syria.  These airstrikes have had a significant impact on ISIL -- taking out thousands of fighters, numerous commanders, nearly 1,500 vehicles and tanks, over 100 artillery and mortar positions, and nearly 3,400 fighting positions, training camps, and bunkers in Iraq and Syria.  Airstrikes have also damaged close to 200 oil and gas facilities -- infrastructure that in part funds ISIL’s terror.  In addition, Coalition trainers have begun training Iraqi Army brigades at four sites in Iraq, and Coalition advisors have helped enable more than two dozen ground operations against ISIL strongholds across Iraq.

The cumulative effect of these actions has been enormous.  ISIL can no longer operate freely in roughly 25 percent of populated areas of Iraqi territory where they once could.  Its momentum has been blunted, its ability to mass and maneuver forces degraded, its leadership cells eliminated or pressured, and its supply lines severed.  ISIL is now on the defensive in Iraq and the lives of innocent Iraqis of all faiths and ethnicity have been saved.  As Iraqi forces increasingly mount offensive operations, they must do so under Iraqi command, with concerted efforts to protect local populations, and secure the human rights of all Iraqi citizens as mandated under the Iraqi constitution and as Prime Minister Abadi and other Iraq leaders have pledged.

 The United States and the Iraqi Government will continue to work together on our shared goal of defeating ISIL and training a professional national security force that can protect all the Iraqi people against extremist threats.

Of course, for a number of Iraqis, the "extremist threats" include Shi'ite militias who terrorize and kill Sunni civilians.  This reality was noted on Tuesday's Democracy Now! (link is text, video and audio):

AARON MATÉ: So, Erin, thank you for joining us. As we talk about your report on the rise of militias in Iraq, we’re joined by Erin Evers, Iraq researcher for Human Rights Watch. She co-wrote the new report, "After Liberation Came Destruction: Iraqi Militias and the Aftermath of Amerli," on the ground in Iraq with HRW since September 2012. Also joined by Matt Aikins, award-winning foreign correspondent. His latest piece for Rolling Stone is "Inside Baghdad’s Brutal Battle Against ISIS." He joins us by video stream from Karachi, Pakistan.

Erin Evers, thank you for joining us, as I said. Talk about what you found in Iraq.

ERIN EVERS: Well, we essentially documented that after U.S. coalition strikes in the town of Amerli, in Salahuddin province, routed ISIS from the town of Amerli, along with—along with militias and security forces fighting on the ground—

AMY GOODMAN: And describe where Amerli is.

ERIN EVERS: Amerli is in Salahuddin, which is north of Baghdad. It’s the same province that Tikrit is in. And the town itself is kind of the northeast of the province. So, ISIS had been laying siege to this town for two months. The ground forces alone were unable to route ISIS from the town, but then, after the U.S. airstrikes on August 31st, they cleared ISIS from the town, then proceeded to spread out throughout Salahuddin province and neighboring Kirkuk province, and attacked the Sunni villages in those provinces. So they essentially laid siege to all of the Sunni villages in a pretty broad area, set homes on fire, looted them, in some cases destroyed them with explosives and earth-moving equipment.

We used satellite imagery. We were on the ground, obviously, and saw some of the destruction with our own eyes, spoke to about 30 persons who were displaced as a result of—as a result of this clearing operation. And then we used satellite imagery in order to determine that the damage that we saw was in fact caused by militias and not in the course of fighting or by ISIS. So we had determined the timeline, essentially, of when what we saw happened, so that we could be clear that those areas were under the control of militias and not under the control of ISIS or not, you know—not engaging in battle at the time.

AMY GOODMAN: Why are the militias doing this? And what is their relationship to the Iraqi army?

ERIN EVERS: So, the militias are not under any formal chain of command. They are leading the fight against ISIS, and they are responsible, essentially, to themselves.

Why they’re doing this, I think, is really anybody’s guess. But from statements that—you know, statements that we’ve heard from militia leaders and from what people on the ground have told us that militia—you know, militia fighters were saying to them when they were on the ground, it seems like they were essentially trying to clear the area of Sunnis.

And after this campaign, several months afterwards, in January, the same militias went through Diyala province, which is a province neighboring Iran, and essentially carried out the same kinds of operations, except at an even more extreme kind of level. So, whereas in this report we documented militias kidnapping people and torturing people, in Diyala we documented the same militias carrying out summary executions of Sunni civilians and even a large massacre of 72 civilians in one town in Diyala in the course of their fighting.

AARON MATÉ: Is there any evidence they’ve been doing this with U.S. weapons?

ERIN EVERS: We’ve seen them with U.S. weapons. We don’t know exactly how they’ve gotten their hands on these weapons, you know, so there’s a lot of speculation as to how they’re getting the weapons. Some people say that they’re getting them through the Iraqi army, which is the official recipient of the weapons. And other people—you know, other people are saying that they’re getting them from ISIS, which obviously is also getting the weapons in the course of their fight on the ground.

AMY GOODMAN: I want to read to you a quote from the former CIA director, David Petraeus, former—he’s also a general. He told The Washington Post, quote, "I would argue that the foremost threat to Iraq’s long-term stability and the broader regional equilibrium is not the Islamic State; rather, it is Shiite militias, many backed by—and some guided by—Iran," Petraeus said. He went on to say, quote, "Longer term, Iranian-backed Shia militia could emerge as the preeminent power in the country, one that is outside the control of the government and instead answerable to Tehran." Your response to this, Erin?

ERIN EVERS: I think, unfortunately, that that’s a correct evaluation of where Iraq is headed.

But don't expect those realities from the US government.  And don't expect spokespeople like Jen Psaki to be forthcoming when asked direct questions.  For example, at the State Dept press briefing today, she was far less of a Chatty Cathy than she had been in her written statement.


QUESTION: We heard different, like, responses from Pentagon and then yesterday, I think, from the Iraqi President Masum, he said that the U.S. will help Iraqi Government in the operations – Iraqi army, of course – around Tikrit. What is the latest update on that?


MS. PSAKI: Well, the latest – and I can confirm – is that the Government of Iraq has formally requested, as I think many of you have seen, ISR support for their operations in Tikrit, and the U.S. is now providing ISR support. On airstrikes, as you know, the coalition has continued to provide air support in the fight against ISIL with multiple airstrikes on ISIL targets in various locations. I would note multiple airstrikes in the last several days, but I’m not going to speak more specifically to tactical or strategic operational decisions or actions beyond that.


QUESTION: There are airstrike support for the Iraqi army in Tikrit. That’s what you are --


MS. PSAKI: I’m referring to around Iraq. I can confirm the ISR support. I’m not going to predict additional action.


QUESTION: But I think that so far it hasn’t been done, any, like, effort – airstrikes around Tikrit, so --



MS. PSAKI: Well again, I’m not going to predict, and I think the Department of Defense would be the appropriate agency to speak to that.


The Defense Dept issued their own statement:

Combined Joint Task Force - Operation Inherent Resolve

7 hrs · Edited ·

March 25, 2015
Release # 20150325.2
At the request of Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi,
Coalition Operations commence in Tikrit
SOUTHWEST ASIA – CJTF-OIR operations to support Iraqi Security Forces in Tikrit have commenced after a request from the Iraqi Prime Minister, Haider al-Abadi. The Coalition is now providing direct support to Iraqi Security Forces conducting operations to expel ISIL from the city. CJTF-OIR is providing air strikes, airborne intelligence capabilities, and Advise and Assist support to Iraqi Security Force headquarters elements in order to enhance their ability to defeat ISIL.
"These strikes are intended to destroy ISIL strongholds with precision, thereby saving innocent Iraqi lives while minimizing collateral damage to infrastructure,” said Lt. Gen. James L. Terry, CJTF-OIR commanding general. “This will further enable Iraqi forces under Iraqi command to maneuver and defeat ISIL in the vicinity of Tikrit."
Iraqi Security Forces have ISIL in Tikrit encircled. Renewed efforts on the ground, supported by the Coalition are aimed at dislodging ISIL fighting elements from Tikrit and once again placing the town under the Government of Iraq’s control. The CJTF-OIR Coalition will continue to support the Iraqi Security Forces and the GoI to degrade and defeat ISIL.
-30-
For additional information contact:
CJTF-OIRmedia@mail.mil
COM: U.S. 1-803-885-8265 or in Southwest Asia
COM: 00-965-2221-6340, then dial 430-6419# or 430-5129#
https://twitter.com/CJTFOIR
https://www.facebook.com/CJTFOIR

So Iraq's Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi requested it.  And Haider spoke in Iraq today . . . but 'forgot' -- when speaking of Tikrit -- to note the new US involvement.


Loveday Morris, Karen DeYoung and Missy Ryan (Washington Post) ignore Haider's US admission but do note his public remarks:

Abadi announced the new push for Tikrit in a televised address Wednesday night, saying that the city’s “hour of salvation” had come. He did not specifically mention coalition airstrikes, but he said, “We will liberate each inch of Iraq. The victory of Iraq is being achieved by Iraqis, hero Iraqis . . . with support from friendly countries and the international coalition.”

1. 
   

1. Zaid Benjamin ‏@zaidbenjamin 8h8 hours ago

   #Iraq | Prime Minister Haider Al-Abadi in televised speech on US Airstrikes in #Tikrit "Hour of victory has arrived"

   

   

   

   

   • Retweets 77
   • Favorites 17
   • 

   1:46 PM - 25 Mar 2015 · Details

   Hide photo

While ignoring the issue of US airstrikes in his public remarks, Haider did address the issue with the Shi'ite forces.  Salahuddin Province council member Jassem Atiya tells Mark Seibel (McClatchy Newspapers) about how that went:



In a phone interview, Atiya said Abadi told the militias that he was authorizing the American participation “because the Tikrit battle needed to be completed so that security forces could move on to Anbar and Mosul,” two other Islamic State strongholds.
The operation to take Tikrit was announced with great fanfare March 2, with an estimated 20,000 Shiite militia fighters advised by Iranian military commanders taking the lead in the fighting. But after initial success in capturing towns outside Tikrit, the effort stalled 10 days ago, hindered by heavy government casualties and a disagreement over what tactics to follow.

Read more here: http://www.macon.com/2015/03/25/3660237_us-jets-strike-tikrit-to-help.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy

The battle has underscored how weak Tehran is militarily with the few hundred estimated Islamic State fighters being able to outstrategize Tehran and Baghdad.


 Michael Hess (UK Blasting News) puts it this way:

The US military is providing aerial intelligence to Iranian forces working against Islamic State (IS) in Tikrit, Iraq in a bid to break the hold on the besieged city. Tikrit was overrun by IS which on June 14th, 2014 committed atrocities, including the massacre of at least 800, on Iraqi Air Force trainees at the former U.S. base Speicher, converted into an air force training college. Tikrit was the site of Saddam Hussein's tomb but it has since been destroyed in the fighting.  


The Tehran alliance was supposed to provide Baghdad with a decisive victory which could be used to rally the military.  That's why Tikrit was chosen in the first place.  It was to be the red flag waved before the charging bull.  But the 'bull' lumbered towards the city for days and, when it finally got outside the city, the bull took a long, long nap.

Nancy A. Youssef (Daily Beast) offers, "The Tikrit campaign was launched with a patchwork force of 20,000 Shiite militiamen, 3,000 Iraqi troops, and a bevy of Iranian troops, tanks, weapons and missile strikes. And in the early days of the campaign, Gen. Qassem Suleiman, leader of the Iranian Quds force, was on the ground in Tikrit."

Pete D'Amato (Daily Mail) offers:

Iran has provided artillery and other weaponry for the Tikrit battle, and senior Iranian advisers have helped Iraq coordinate the offensive. 

Iraq pointedly did not request US air support when it launched the offensive in early March and recently, the offensive has lost momentum. 

Col Steve Warren, a Pentagon spokesman, said Wednesday the Iraqi forces have encircled Tikrit but not yet made significant inroads into the heavily defended city limits.

'They are stalled,' he said.

Before today's announcement was made, Michael B. Kelley (Business Insider) noted:

"There's just no way that the US military can actively support an offensive led by Suleimani," Christopher Harmer, a former aviator in the United States Navy in the Persian Gulf who is now an analyst with the Institute for the Study of War, told Helene Cooper of The New York Times recently. "He's a more stately version of Osama bin Laden."

Suleimani's Iraqi allies — such as the powerful Badr militia — are known for allegedly burning down Sunni villages and using power drills on enemies.

"It's a little hard for us to be allied on the battlefield with groups of individuals who are unrepentantly covered in American blood," Ryan Crocker, a career diplomat who served as the US ambassador to Iraq from 2007 to 2009, told US News.

In addition, Michael Crowley (POLITICO) explains US officials are nervous about two potential scenarios in Iraq which, "[i]n either case, U.S. officials fear, Iran could direct the Iraqi Shiite militias under its control to attack U.S. troops aiding the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant."

That fear may make Barack Obama's decision even more controversial.  But the decision to drop bombs and assist the  Baghdad-Tehran alliance -- led by Iranian general Qassem Soleimani (identified by the US government as a terrorist) -- was already controversial and questionable due to Soleimani's presence.

Spencer Ackerman (Guardian) reports:

Deep consternation exists in Washington, among both political parties, over the appearance of US warplanes providing close air support for Shia militias and their Iranian sponsors. Some US-trained Iraqi military units and Shia militias are under investigation for committing atrocities, similar to those of Isis. The Iranian general Qassem Suleimani is believed to be playing a leadership role in what has devolved into a grinding fight to recapture Saddam Hussein’s birthplace from Isis.
“There’s going to be some tightrope-walking in saying this is an Iraqi security forces offensive and not an Iranian militia offensive,” said Christopher Harmer, a retired US navy officer and analyst with the Institute for the Study of War, who said he was “astonished” at the development.

Since 2001, the US government has identified Suleimani as a terrorist.

Brookings Institution's Mike Doran Tweets it this way:

1. 
   

1. Mike Doran ‏@Doranimated 7h7 hours ago

   It's official. The US is now the air force of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Allahu Akbar! | http://bigstory.ap.org/article/424d6c32b9ca4d8dab8f3343a5ed2023/us-has-discussed-possible-tikrit-airstrikes-iraq# …

Michael Weiss Tweets:

1. 
   

1. Michael Weiss ‏@michaeldweiss 7h7 hours ago

   The U.S. is the Quds Force's Air Force: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/25/us-mideast-crisis-iraq-confirmation-idUSKBN0ML27Q20150325 …

Some are trying to spin the move as a plus.  Greg Jaffe (Washington Post) offers:



The U.S. airstrikes, if successful in breaking the bloody stalemate, would make clear to Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi and his commanders that they need U.S. military power to defeat Sunni extremists. “We can use the Iraqis’ failure in Tikrit to show what happens if you stiff-arm the U.S. in favor of Iran,” said Stephen Biddle, a frequent adviser to the Pentagon and a professor at George Washington University. “The message is that if you really want a better partner, stick with us and not the Iranians.”





Finally, Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) counts 109 violent deaths across Iraq today.

iraq
the guardian
spencer ackerman cnn dana ford
the associated press
robert burns
mcclatchy newspapers
mark seiberl
nasdaq
human rights watch
iraq
iraq

Art

Tired, so Elaine and I are both noting this from Great Britain's Socialist Worker:

Goya: the Witches and Old Women Album—facing the horror of reaction restored

by Noel Halifax

Published Tue 17 Mar 2015

Issue No. 2445

A detail from Nightmare, circa. 1816-20 (Pic: The Morgan Library & Museum)

As the Spanish royal court’s painter, Francisco Goya was at the heart of its sickening conservative trappings and its rituals.

He painted grand romantic portraits of the king and his courtiers in the tradition of the late romantic movement, which Europe’s crowned heads so beloved.

Goya made his living this way from the 1780s until 1824. He worked through the French invasion in the 1800s and the Spanish monarchy’s restoration after Napoleon Bonaparte’s nephew’s short reign. 

But he seemed to have led a untroubled life in such turbulent times. His art reflects the new times  after the overthrow of reaction. It moved from studio portraits to scenes of the Peninsular War and experimental images of national and peasant wars. 

But the new times stalled when reaction was restored in 1814 with the help of the British.

Goya survived and continued his courtly work under the restored monarchy. He seemed the perfect survivor, trimming his art to suit the client.

However, when he died an even more remarkable series of work known as the “black paintings” was discovered. No one, perhaps only a few close friends, were aware of it. 

Monsters

Private rooms were found in his house, which were painted all black with scenes of monsters, nightmares, war and destruction,

Eight albums of similar drawings were also found, which were later sold and dispersed. This exhibition brings together one of these eight books, the Witches and Old Women album of 23 drawings. 

They are remarkable and astonishing drawings, which show Goya as an amazing draftsman of the imagination but also an impassioned critic of the old order.

While his pictures of the war are full of anguish, they retain hope for a new world. There isn’t just bitterness, but a dark wit with musings on life in an imploding society. 

The drawings dance and whirl and sum up the emotion of Goya’s plight—to live in a society where an aborted revolution has collapsed in on itself.

What can one do then, but wryly comment on the dark side’s triumph with black humour and wit.
These paintings haunt, taunt, intrigue on the irony and horror of it all—and leer at the coming face of death.

Goya—the witches and old women album. Courtauld Gallery, London WC2R 0RN. Until 25 May. Adults £8.50, unwaged £4, 18s and under free. courtauld.ac.uk

Payments © Socialist Worker (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original

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


 

Tuesday, March 24, 2015.  Chaos and violence continue, the US shares intel with Iraq (and Iran), this sharing includes a man designated as a terrorist by the US government, Atheel al-Nujaifi contacts Congress, the Tikrit assault remains stalled, and much more.



Starting with the day's big news, Dion Nissenbaum and Julian E. Barnes (Wall St. Journal) report:


The U.S. has started providing Iraq with aerial intelligence in the stalled battle to oust Islamic State from Tikrit, drawing the American military into closer coordination with Iranian-backed militias spearheading the offensive.

Military officials said they aren’t working directly with Iran. But the intelligence will be used to help some 20,000 Iranian-backed Shiite militia fighters who make up the bulk of the force that has been struggling for weeks to retake the strategic city. 



Al Quds' Said Arikat asked US State Dept spokesperson Jen Psaki about this topic at today's press briefing.


QUESTION: Can I ask a question on Iraq?


MS. PSAKI: On Iraq? Sure.


QUESTION: Very quickly. It says that the American forces are going to be aiding the Iraqi forces in Tikrit. Do you know anything about this?



MS. PSAKI: Well, Said, the coalition, as you know, has continued to provide air support in the fight against ISIL with multiple airstrikes on ISIL targets in various locations. Twenty, I think, is the number we’ve talked about in terms of areas we’re assisting in. With numerous strikes occurring in the last couple of days, we’ve made clear that we stand ready to support Iraqi-led operations. I’m not going to go farther than that, though, in speaking to tactical or operational decisions or actions, and obviously, DOD would naturally have the lead on any military steps.



Jen Psaki was spinning for many reasons, most obviously because the US government is not yet ready to announce the policy shift.  Jack Moore (Newsday) offers:

It appears that U.S. reservations over cooperation with Iran, while both conduct crucial nuclear negotiations over Tehran’s nuclear programme, have resided after the offensive to recapture the city stalled, says Max Abrahms, professor of political science at Northeastern University and member at the Council on Foreign Relations.

”There seems to be an inverse relationship between the roles of Iran versus the U.S. in terms of taking the lead in the fight against the Islamic State,” he noted. “In Tikrit, the Iranians and the Shiite militias are playing a central role and Washington had been saying that it was standing on the sidelines so as not to collaborate with this questionable ally. Now, we see no such reservation.”

AFP reminds, "The Iraqi military had lobbied for US-led coalition air strikes while paramilitary forces opposed such a move. One militia leader, Hadi Al Amiri, boasted three weeks ago that his men had been making advances for months without relying on US air power."


Why now?  Among other reasons, the Tehran-Baghdad alliance attacking Tikrit has been a failure.  Over three weeks after the mission to retake the city of Tikrit began, it's still not finished and the fighters still haven't made it into the center of Tikrit.  What has been described as a few hundred Islamic State fighters have managed to hold off thousands of forces under the command of Tehran and Baghdad.

Vivian Salama and Qassim Abdul-Zahra (AP) point out that "the offensive has stalled in recent weeks, with Iraqi officials saying they will not rush a final assault."   That is what the Iraqi officials say.  I'm unconvinced that AP is required to offer that spin.  Last Friday, Mitchell Prothero (McClatchy Newspapers) reported:


The much ballyhooed Iraqi government operation to capture the central city of Tikrit from the Islamic State has stalled three weeks after it began, amid widespread reports that Shiite Muslim militias and the government are badly divided over tactics and roiled by claims that the militias have engaged in war crimes against the local Sunni Muslim population.
It's a failure.

The assault is a failure.  And with MP Shakhawan Abdullah telling Rudaw reports, "At least 30,000 soldiers and military experts from the Islamic Republic of Iran are fighting ISIS militants in Iraq"?

It really doesn't make Iran look very powerful or able to carry out a ground war.

And what does it say about thug Hadi al-Ameri?

Thug?

He commands the Badr militia.

But the Shi'ites also an MP and Minister of Transportation.

Which is confusing because to run for office, political entities in Iraq were supposed to give up their militias.

But the Badr brigade is run by al-Ameri who somehow (illegally) serves in the Iraqi government.

Days ago, Ammar Karim (AFP) quoted Ameri on the topic of US air strikes, "Some of the weaklings in the army... say we need the Americans, while we say we do not need the Americans."

The loquacious Hadi al-Ameri also told AFP that Iranian Qassem Soleimani (identified by the US government as a terrorist) who is there, in Iraq, "whenever we need him,"   Jim Michaels (USA Today) notes, "The Tikrit offensive has placed the United States in an awkward position. The battle is waged largely by Shiite militias with backing from Iran. The commander of Iran's elite al-Quds Force, Gen. Qassem Soleimani, has played an active role in Iraq, CIA Director John Brennan told Fox News recently."

Hmmm.

2001?  US Treasury Department noted Executive Order 13224 by "publishing the names of five individuals whose property and interests in property are blocked."  Let's note some of it:

On September 23, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13224 (the “Order”) pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. 1701-1706, and the United Nations Participation Act of 1945, 22 U.S.C. 287c. In the Order, the President declared a national emergency to address grave acts of terrorism and threats of terrorism committed by foreign terrorists, including the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in New York, Pennsylvania, and at the Pentagon. The Order imposes economic sanctions on persons who have committed, pose a significant risk of committing, or support acts of terrorism. The President identified in the Annex to the Order, as amended by Executive Order 13268 of July 2, 2002, 13 individuals and 16 entities as subject to the economic sanctions. The Order was further amended by Executive Order 13284 of January 23, 2003, to reflect the creation of the Department of Homeland Security.

Section 1 of the Order blocks, with certain exceptions, all property and interests in property that are in or hereafter come within the United States or the possession or control of United States persons, of: (1) Foreign persons listed in the Annex to the Order; (2) foreign persons determined by the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and the Attorney General, to have committed, or to pose a significant risk of committing, acts of terrorism that threaten the security of U.S. nationals or the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States; (3) persons determined by the Director of OFAC, in consultation with the Departments of State, Homeland Security and Justice, to be owned or controlled by, or to act for or on behalf of those persons listed in the Annex to the Order or those persons determined to be subject to subsection 1(b), 1(c), or 1(d)(i) of the Order; and (4) except as provided in section 5 of the Order and after such consultation, if any, with foreign authorities as the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and the Attorney General, deems appropriate in the exercise of his discretion, persons determined by the Director of OFAC, in consultation with the Departments of State, Homeland Security and Justice, to assist in, sponsor, or provide financial, material, or technological support for, or financial or other services to or in support of, such acts of terrorism or those persons listed in the Annex to the Order or determined to be subject to the Order or to be otherwise associated with those persons listed in the Annex to the Order or those persons determined to be subject to subsection 1(b), 1(c), or 1(d)(i) of the Order.

On October 11, 2011, the Director of OFAC, in consultation with the Departments of State, Homeland Security, Justice and other relevant agencies, designated, pursuant to one or more of the criteria set forth in subsections 1(b), 1(c) or 1(d) of the Order, five individuals whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to Executive Order 13224.

The listings for the five individuals on OFAC's list of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons appear as follows:

Individuals ↑

ABDOLLAHI, Hamed (a.k.a. ABDULLAHI, Mustafa); DOB 11 Aug 1960; citizen Iran; Passport D9004878 (individual) [SDGT] [IRGC].

ARBABSIAR, Manssor (a.k.a. ARBABSIAR, Mansour), 805 Cisco Valley CV, Round Rock, TX 78664; 5403 Everhardt Road, Corpus Christi, TX 78411; DOB 15 Mar 1955; alt. DOB 6 Mar 1955; POB Iran; citizen United States; Driver's License No. 07442833 (United States) expires 15 Mar 2016; Passport C2002515 (Iran); alt. Passport 477845448 (United States); Driver's License is issued by the State of Texas (individual) [SDGT] [IRGC].

SHAHLAI, Abdul Reza (a.k.a. SHAHLAEE, Abdul-Reza; a.k.a. SHAHLAI, Abdol Reza; a.k.a. SHAHLA'I, Abdolreza; a.k.a. SHAHLAI, 'Abdorreza; a.k.a. SHALAI, 'Abd-al Reza; a.k.a. SHALA'I, Abdul Reza; a.k.a. “ABU-AL-KARKH', 'Yusuf”; a.k.a. “YASIR, Hajji”; a.k.a. “YUSEF, Hajj”; a.k.a. “YUSIF, Haji”; a.k.a. “YUSIF, Hajji”), Kermanshah, Iran; Mehran Military Base, Ilam Province, Iran; DOB circa 1957 (individual) [SDGT] [IRAQ3] [IRGC].

SHAKURI, Gholam, Tehran, Iran; DOB 1964; alt. DOB 1965; alt. DOB 1966 (individual) [SDGT] [IRGC].

SOLEIMANI, Qasem (a.k.a. SALIMANI, Qasem; a.k.a. SOLAIMANI, Qasem; a.k.a. SOLEMANI, Qasem; a.k.a. SOLEYMANI, Ghasem; a.k.a. SOLEYMANI, Qasem; a.k.a. SULAIMANI, Qasem; a.k.a. SULAYMAN, Qasim; a.k.a. SULEMANI, Qasem); DOB 11 Mar 1957; POB Qom, Iran; citizen Iran; nationality Iran; Diplomatic Passport 008827 (Iran) issued 1999 (individual) [SDGT] [SYRIA] [NPWMD] [IRGC].

Dated: October 11, 2011. Adam J. Szubin,

Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control.

Did you catch the last one?




SOLEIMANI, Qasem (a.k.a. SALIMANI, Qasem; a.k.a. SOLAIMANI, Qasem; a.k.a. SOLEMANI, Qasem; a.k.a. SOLEYMANI, Ghasem; a.k.a. SOLEYMANI, Qasem; a.k.a. SULAIMANI, Qasem; a.k.a. SULAYMAN, Qasim; a.k.a. SULEMANI, Qasem); DOB 11 Mar 1957; POB Qom, Iran; citizen Iran; nationality Iran; Diplomatic Passport 008827 (Iran) issued 1999 (individual) [SDGT] [SYRIA] [NPWMD] [IRGC].





The US government labels him as a terrorist.

But US President Barack Obama is now going to let him have access to US intelligence and will apparently be announcing air strikes in support of the terrorist.


Samia Nakhoul (Dawn) reports:

Iran may be serious about a nuclear deal that ends its pariah status and the crippling sanctions. But it has been maximising its strength across the Middle East and, because Iranian forces and allied militias are spearheading the fight against IS in Iraq and Syria, Sunni Arab leaders believe the United States will do nothing to stop this.
This month, US Secretary of State John Kerry assured Saudi leaders there would be no “grand bargain” with Tehran attached to any deal. Yet in a news conference at which Kerry acknowledged that Soleimani was involved in Tikrit, his host, Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal, almost exploded.
“The situation in Tikrit is a prime example of what we’re worried about,” said Prince Saud. “Iran is taking over Iraq.” That is why, regional analysts say, it is not so much the prospective nuclear deal that is panicking the Gulf and its Sunni allies such as Egypt, but what a US-Iran rapprochement may bring.
Sultan al-Qassemi, a commentator in the United Arab Emirates, says: “The Iranian deal is a game-changer for the region and I think it is going to encourage Iran to pursue an even more assertive foreign policy.
“This deal is the grand bargain Kerry is denying it is. It is giving Iran carte blanche in exchange for empty promises. Iran is on the ascendant. Iran has the winning hand in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.” Riad Kahwaji, head of the Dubai-based INEGMA think tank, warned of “all-out sectarian war” between Sunnis and Shias.

Are you confused?  Maybe you're remembering that John Kerry testified before a Senate Committee on March 11th.  Maybe you're remembering Ava's report on the hearing:



"I have nothing but respect for the Committee's prerogatives," he insisted at the hearing.
He insisted at the hearing where he snarled at Senator Mark Rubio that he was flat out wrong.
Rubio wasn't flat out wrong.
Regional leaders in the Middle East are nervous about a possible treaty between the US and Iran.  That's not news.  Or it's not new news.  But Kerry wanted to lie and snarl at Rubio to get his facts.  Kerry's the one who needs to get his facts.
Sunni leaders in the region have seen the persecution of Sunnis in Iraq.  They are concerned about what deal Shi'ite Iran could work out with the US.
Are they opposed to any and all deals?
I doubt it.
But Rubio didn't claim they were.
He only noted they were concerned.
And Kerry snarled at him that he was flat out wrong.


Who's flat out wrong today?

Because it looks like John Kerry is flat out wrong.

It looks like Senator Mark Rubio did know what he was talking about.


And while Kerry spins and lies, others grow ever concerned about Iran's presence in Iraq.

Eli Lake (Bloomberg News) reports:

On Sunday, Nujaifi sent a letter to U.S. leaders warning that his country was at a tipping point with regard to Iranian influence. As U.S. forces wait on the sidelines in an Iranian-led campaign to liberate Tikrit, Nujaifi said he worried that his country was being lost to Iran.
[. . .]
Nujaifi, whose province includes Iraq's second-largest city of Mosul, addressed his letter to Representative Ed Royce, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and asked that it be placed into the record for a hearing this week on the administration's strategy against the Islamic State. The Iraqi governor also sent copies to President Barack Obama, House Speaker John Boehner, Secretary of State John Kerry and John Allen, the retired Marine general who is U.S. envoy to the coalition against the Islamic State.
Royce told me that he agrees with Nujaifi that the administration has failed to challenge Iran's efforts to expand throughout the Middle East.  "The fact that the governor is compelled to reach out directly to us in Congress speaks volumes about the sway that Iran holds over critical positions in the government in Baghdad," he said. 

Nujaifi wrote that Iran "has essentially taken over the fight in Iraq against ISIS." He added, "But the threat goes even deeper -- there is a grave and immediate threat that Iran is taking over decisive points in the government of Iraq itself."


Atheel al-Nujaifi is the Governor of Nineveh Province.  He is also the brother of former Speaker of Parliament and current Iraqi Vice President Osama al-Nujaifi.


Atheel stood up to Nouri al-Maliki who launched one attack on him after another during Nouri's second term (2010 - 2014).  Nouri attempted to force him to resign at one point.

If Atheel can stand up to Nouri, it's doubtful he's going to be 'managed' by the White House.  They might need to start paying attention right about now.

Human Rights Watch ‏@hrw 7h7 hours ago

Dispatches: Doomed to Repeat History on Iraq? http://bit.ly/1xwhrfT  by @HicksPeggy #HRC28

Human Rights Watch ‏@hrw 7h7 hours ago

Dispatches: Doomed to Repeat History on Iraq? http://bit.ly/1xwhrfT  by @HicksPeggy #HRC28

View photo 50 retweets 25 favorites

1. 
   

 

Turning to today's violence, Mu Xuequan (Xinhua) reports, "Separate clashes on Tuesday between Iraqi forces and Islamic State (IS) militants in Iraq's western province of Anbar left a total of 55 people killed and 71 wounded, security and medical sources said."

Senator Johnny Isakson is the Chair of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee.  Time permitting, we'll note the Committee's hearing later in the week but for now we'll note this statement his office issued today:

Isakson to VA: Unacceptable to Tell Veteran ‘We Can’t Help’

Calls on VA leaders to ‘stop making excuses,’ fully implement Veterans’ Choice reforms

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, today called on the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to act quickly to implement a more sensible interpretation of the Veterans’ Choice distance criteria to allow veterans better access to health care.

 

At a committee hearing held today, March 24, 2015, Isakson raised concerns over how the VA has implemented the distance criteria that was included in sweeping reforms passed last year in the Veterans’ Access, Choice and Accountability Act. The distance criteria, known informally as the “40-mile rule,” requires the VA to allow a veteran to receive care outside the VA health system if the veteran resides more than 40 miles from the nearest VA medical facility.

 

Earlier today, VA Secretary Robert McDonald announced that the VA would change its interpretation of the Veterans’ Choice Program's “40-mile rule” in response to repeated calls from Isakson and other members of Congress to address these challenges and expand veterans’ ability to receive care.

 

“This interpretation makes a lot of sense. What doesn’t make a lot of sense is that it took so long for VA to come to that decision, but I’m glad it finally did,” said Isakson. “I’d rather …see to it that our veterans are being helped instead of VA continuing to make excuses and telling a veteran who would risk his life for our country that we just can’t help him. That’s just not right.”

Since the Veterans’ Choice Program began in November 2014, the VA has measured the 40-mile distance “as the crow flies,” or in a straight line on a map, as opposed to measuring the 40 miles in driving distance, thus disallowing veterans who live within the 40-mile radius of a facility but have to drive more than 40 miles to get there from benefiting from the Veterans’ Choice Program.

 

At today’s hearing, Isakson called on VA Deputy Secretary Sloane Gibson to swiftly implement the changes in the VA’s interpretation of the distance criteria so that all veterans could receive the proper care they need, regardless of proximity to a VA facility.

 

“The Senate VA Committee’s job, and the members of the Senate’s job, is to get more money if we need to; it is not to make excuses as to why we can’t do things for our veterans,” said Isakson. “The veterans expect us to deliver and Congress expects y’all to deliver… We’ll do it right the first time and we’ll be committed to providing funding to deliver care to our veterans. I appreciate very much the Secretary’s movement to address the issue with the 40-mile rule and I appreciate that the VA is now talking about what we can do rather than talking about what we can’t do.”

 

Isakson also pointed to a second ongoing issue with the Veterans’ Choice Program’s distance criteria –veterans who live within 40 miles of a VA facility but are unable to receive the necessary treatment at that particular facility are currently ineligible to receive care outside the VA health system. Isakson indicated that he and Senator Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., the ranking Democrat on the Senate VA Committee, will work with VA on legislation to address this issue.

 

“The faster we act on that the better off we will be. If there is a legislative impediment, let’s fix it, because our intent is to see to it that veterans get the service,” said Isakson.

 

Isakson questioned Deputy Secretary Gibson about how the VA will properly communicate these changes to veterans. Isakson highlighted the lack of information available to veterans about the Veterans’ Choice Program, including information about the appeals process.

 

“As long as the VA is doing everything it can do to see to it that veterans are not frustrated, but in fact are pleased with the communication they get, then I think we will all be better off,” said Isakson.

 

View Isakson’s opening remarks from today’s hearing here.

 

Video of today’s hearing is available online here. 

 

###

 

The Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs is chaired by U.S. Senator Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., in the 114th Congress.

Isakson is a veteran himself – having served in the Georgia Air National Guard from 1966-1972 – and has been a member of the Senate VA Committee since he joined the Senate in 2005. Isakson’s home state of Georgia is home to more than a dozen military installations representing each branch of the military as well as more than 750,000 veterans.

iraq

Someone else is needed

A columnist notes that Hillary Clinton's e-mail scandal and front runner status are causing concerns:

 
All that has prompted worry among Democrats, some of whom are quietly concerned that Clinton’s strength in party polls renders her a singular target more than a year before the election -- a problem not shared by most eventual nominees of the past, who, in primary and caucus season, had to share the spotlight with challengers.
“I would say this: Watch out,” former Vice President Walter F. Mondale, the Democrats’ 1984 nominee, said in a telephone conversation this month. “I had front-runner status that I think sort made me look presumptive and presumptuous. Voters don’t like that. I didn’t handle that as well as I might have. It is a really risky position to be in.”


It really is time for Hillary to step aside and do what is best for the party.

I really do not think she can win.

She is divisive.

She comes off entitled as the front runner.

And the more America sees Hillary being political, the less they like her.


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

Monday, March 23, 2015.  Chaos and violence continue, the US 'protests' fizzle out, the Tehran-Baghdad assault on Tikrit still remains outside the city, bombs are dropped on the city, a prominent US official (CIA Director) joins the chorus warning about the rise of sectarianism in Iraq fueled by Tehran, and much more.




Oh, the worthless and the pathetic.  Let's start there.

The World Can't Wait, Cindy Sheehan and a lot of others thought they could hijack the anniversary of the Iraq War to pimp their pet causes.

No one turned out.

Most locations were lucky to mount a baker's dozen worth of 'protesters.'

Debra Sweet's embarrassing organization offered suggested Tweets ahead of the 'days' of protests.


The suicide rate among recent veterans is 50% higher than for civilians - these wars are wrong & we know it. http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-veteran-suicide-20150115-story.html
US veteran suicides are as high as 8,000 per year, exceeding U.S. death rates on battlefield
http://www.veteransandptsd.com/PTSD-statistics.html
http://iava.org/campaign/combatingsuicide/


I don't know how those are Tweets, but okay.


I'm sorry, they want you to be sympathetic to veterans?

They want to talk about pressure on veterans?

I'm sorry, Cindy Sheehan and Debra Sweet attacked and savaged Chris Kyle.

That's why I'm not promoting their crazy.

We did a parody of World Can't Wait at Third ("The World Can Wait (Parody)"") and that was February 8th.  I didn't want to do anything else to draw attention to these pathetic souls.

Chris Kyle was not a mercenary.

He did what he was trained to do and what he was ordered to do.

If you're unhappy with that, you take up with the government of the United States.

You don't trash him.

And if you do trash him, then stop pretending you give a damn about veterans because you clearly do not give a damn.

Imagine a US sniper who's returned to the US and feels that the US does not need to be in Iraq still.  He or she may look for people who feel similar.  But reading Cindy and Debra's attacks on Chris Kyle, would that veteran feels he or she would be welcomed by Cindy and Debra's groups?

Probably not.

The enemy is not veterans.

The enemy is a government that lies.

But all the weak protests offered was hatred.

It's really funny as they carved out this group and that group and ran their oppression Olympics -- to such a degree that even their hero Karl Marx wouldn't have been allowed at the protests were he alive today.

Whether you think Occupy was a movement or not, what it did -- at its best -- was attempt to united.  It was the 99% versus the 1%.

That was inclusive.

There was nothing inclusive about the protests this weekend.

Only San Francisco's protest really bothered to address Barack Obama.

Even more appalling was that the limited attention to Iraq did not include a cry to stop the War Crimes.

Are they even aware of that?



ABC News aired an important report March 11th and The a second one March 12th. March 12's report is transcribed below:



David Muir: Now to new fall out after our ABC investigation last night. It involves the fight against ISIS known for those awful videos, lining up their victims on the beach.  And now a new concern.  Are some of the Iraqi forces -- trained and paid for by US taxpayers -- using techniques that are just as brutal?  Well the State Dept tonight responding to our report and ABC's chief investigative reporter Brian Ross back on the job tonight.

Brian Ross:  The State Dept called these scenes today serious and disturbing.  Brutal images of what appear to be Iraqi forces and militias carrying out, celebrating, torture and beheadings.  In this torture scene, two US weapons against the wall. This video shows two civilians, pleading for their lives, about to be shot dead.  A man with an American supplied weapon walks by, a gunman with what appears to be the insignia of Iraqi Special Forces caught on tape.

US State Dept spokesperson Jen Psaki: Their behavior must be above reproach or they risk being painted with the same brush as ISIL fighters.


Brian Ross:  The Pentagon says it has already cut off money to some Iraqi units because of gross human rights violations.  But Senator Patrick Leahy says the ABC News report shows the government should cut off money to more Iraqi units.

Senator Patrick Leahy: When you look at at the videos and look at the uniforms being worn, do we really want to say the US condones that?

Brian Ross: US officials tonight tell ABC News that America's top military leader Gen Martin Dempsey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, has repeatedly warned Iraqi leaders about the conduct of the Iraqi military and the militias that fight with them -- especially because the US is sending $1.5 billion to the Iraqi army and almost 3,000 American troops to help train them.

             

So where was the call for the White House to stop supporting War Crimes?

Where was the call for the White House to stop looking the other way?

Thirteen days ago, ABC News first reported that.

Yet all the alleged caring for Iraq by Debra Sweet and Cindy Sheehan never allowed either the time to note that.

This is what they ignore.

1. uygar aktaş ‏@uygaraktas  6h6 hours ago

   US backed Iraqi shia militants accused a sunni of being #IS & tortured and executed him. #Iraq

   

   View photo83 retweets15 favorites

That should have been the heart of their protests.

US-trained, US-backed, US-weapon supplied forces in Iraq are attacking civilians.

This is a violation of the Leahy Amendment and the law requires that all aid be immediately stopped to Iraq.

But they didn't make that point, did they?


They don't care about Iraq.

And the fauxtests demonstrated that.

In Utah, a fauxtester spoke, Socialist Gregory Lucero, "On the anniversary of the Iraq War we see U.S. imperialism targeting people from all around the world, from Iraq to Venezuela. These people are not our enemies. Our real enemy is here at home, in our Senate, in the House of Representatives, and in every branch and office that keeps this machine running."

The enemy is in Congress.

Not the White House, you understand.

Congress.

The White House's actions in Iraq are carried out without Congressional approval -- as was the White House's war on Libya.

And the person in the White House?

Barack Obama.

But a fauxtester can't name Barack.

(Again, he was named in San Francisco.)

Democracy Now! today featured Ming Chen declaring, "I am here to take a real stand against the Bush regime’s war on the Middle East as well as Obama’s continuation on the war in the Middle East."

That damn Bush regime!  Still in power after all these years!

"As well as Obama's continuation . . ."

Poor Ming Chen, in the crowd Chen runs with that almost passes for bravery.

They had nothing to show and no way to inspire.

So it was the weakest and smallest 'protests' to take place on the anniversary of the Iraq War ever.

They're a joke.

They've made themselves a joke.

They thought they could use the anniversary of the Iraq War to garner publicity for their pet causes.

Not only did that not happen but they demonstrated just how little they knew about events in Iraq beyond the Bully Boy Bush years.

Today, the White House issued the following:

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release

March 23, 2015

Statement by the Press Secretary on the Visit of Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi of Iraq

President Obama will host Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi at the White House on Tuesday, April 14.  The Prime Minister’s visit underscores the strategic partnership between the United States and Iraq and the strong U.S. commitment to political and military cooperation with Iraq in the joint fight against ISIL.  The President and Prime Minister will discuss a range of issues, including continued U.S. support to Iraq to degrade and ultimately destroy ISIL, the Government of Iraq’s actions to address the needs of the Iraqi people and to strengthen cooperation between all communities in Iraq, and advancing a broad U.S.-Iraqi partnership through expanded political, commercial, and cultural relations under the U.S.-Iraq Strategic Framework Agreement.


What's the real point of the meet-up?

Maybe the stalled assault on Tikrit and what that might mean.

Al Jazeera thinks it means one thing, "If Iraqi forces are unable to push ISIL back and recover lost territory, US President Barack Obama would be faced with a choice of accepting failure in Iraq or committing US combat troops - something both US and Iraqi officials have spoken firmly against."


The assault on Tikrit has demonstrated a number of things including that the Iraqi military is still not ready.

It's also demonstrated that Iran can't handle a ground war.

That's not a typo: Iran.  (Not Iraq.)

How embarrassing for Iran.

They've sent all those forces in, they've taken over as 'leaders' of the assault and the assault ground to a stand still.

Press TV reports the assault is back on! And they note Iraqi planes bombed Tikrit.

Jonathan Beale and the BBC attempt to say that coalition planes are helping.  Attempt.

Beale's a damn liar and an embed who can't stop fawning and lying.

If coalition forces are bombing Tikrit -- as the text maintains but the video report doesn't bear out -- that's a story.  Instead of getting reported, the world is reminded yet again that the same BBC that whored out their good name to pimp the Iraq War is still doing so today.


Friday, Mitchell Prothero (McClatchy Newspapers) reported:


The much ballyhooed Iraqi government operation to capture the central city of Tikrit from the Islamic State has stalled three weeks after it began, amid widespread reports that Shiite Muslim militias and the government are badly divided over tactics and roiled by claims that the militias have engaged in war crimes against the local Sunni Muslim population.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2015/03/20/260513/operation-to-retake-tikrit-from.html#storylink=cpy

Sunday, AP noted, "Operations to recapture Tikrit have been on hold for nearly a week" while today Press TV says they're back on.

 The Tehran - Baghdad alliance has been most noted for its repeated failures and, again, for telegraphing to the world that the Iranian forces can no longer hold their own in a ground war.

Iraq and Iran were an issue that US State Dept spokesperson Marie Harf attempted to dance around in today's press briefing:



QUESTION: On Iraq and Iran’s role – I mean, for observers, we’re seeing the country really from inside and outside Iraq, Iran seems to have taken over the leadership of the war against ISIS from the United States. When you see --


MS. HARF: I think that the Iraqi Security Forces would strongly disagree with that --


QUESTION: Can I --


MS. HARF: -- as would the Kurdish forces.


QUESTION: The United States has led a coalition against the Islamic State.


MS. HARF: Mm-hmm.


QUESTION: But over the past – say since the war against – in Tikrit started, the – to recapture Tikrit, the United States has been bombing ISIS only in the areas where the Kurds advance, not in Tikrit. No airstrike in Tikrit, where the Iraqis are focused.


MS. HARF: Well, we – the coalition has continued to provide air support in the fight against ISIL with multiple airstrikes on ISIL targets in various locations, with the last strikes occurring over this weekend.


QUESTION: But all of them have been in --


MS. HARF: Let me finish.


QUESTION: -- the Kurdish area.


MS. HARF: Let me finish with the – and I said in various areas, various locations. And this fight against ISIL is much bigger than Tikrit. That’s one – certainly one part of it. That battle is ongoing. But the fight against ISIL on the military side is much bigger than Tikrit. The United States is leading that with our Arab partners, with our Iraqi partners, our Kurdish partners, but then there’s all the other four lines of effort beyond that that we are leading a coalition around the world.


QUESTION: But isn’t it really fair to say that the Iranians are helping the Iraqi Shia government and the militia – Shia militias who are helping the Iraqi Government to recapture the area? The United States is helping only the Kurdish government at the moment.


MS. HARF: That is patently false.


QUESTION: At the moment.


MS. HARF: That is patently false.


QUESTION: That’s practically true, though.


MS. HARF: No, it is patently false, actually. What you said is not true.


QUESTION: At the moment.


MS. HARF: At the moment, what you said is not true. I will keep saying that until I make my point 
clear --


QUESTION: Well, what --


MS. HARF: -- that the – wait, let me finish – that the United States is supporting the Iraqi Security Forces and the Kurdish forces throughout Iraq in a variety of ways to help them push back on ISIL. We are training Iraqi forces; we are helping them get them more equipment; we are supporting them on a day-to-day basis, day in and day out; we’re helping the coalition take strikes. This is something we’re very committed to.
So yes, Tikrit is a small part of it. But clearly, the United States military is very focused on this and is playing a leading role in helping push back on ISIL.


QUESTION: Just one more question. An Iraqi lawmaker, prominent one, said that there are as many as 30,000 Iranians on the ground in Iraq. Does that concern you?



MS. HARF: I can’t confirm that that number is accurate.



Marie's attempts at spinning today follows yesterday's confession that the US government is worried about Iran's involvement in Iraq.

As we noted last night, CIA Director John Brennan appeared on Fox News Sunday (link is video and text), "During the wide-ranging interview, Brennan said that Iran and the Islamic State are equal in the threat they pose to the United States."  AP notes this morning, "The comments by CIA Director John Brennan on Fox News Sunday are among the strongest yet voiced by American officials about the involvement of shadowy Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani in the war against the extremist group."

Brennan may have made the strongest comments from any US official but his comments followed those of others in Iraq and out of Iraq in recent days.

At SUSRIS, Riad Kahwaji offers an analysis which includes:


Despite extensive efforts by the Obama administration to assure its Arab allies that their long-term strategic partnership will remain strong and will not be affected by the signing of a nuclear deal with Iran, a very skeptical mood prevails in the traditionally pro-Western Arab capitals. “The U.S. has sold us to Iran and it is now executing an agenda aimed at helping Tehran assert its influence in the region,” said one Arab official. The official reiterated views expressed by many of his counterparts in the region. “Look how Iranian Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) are spearheading the Iraqi army attack against Tikrit under the eyes of the Americans who have troops deployed in the country and are providing air cover to forces advancing against Daesh,” he added. Daesh is the Arabic acronym for the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) that controls large swathes of Iraq and Syria and is today under attack by an International and Arab Alliance providing air power to the Iraqi forces.
Fears expressed earlier by the U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, that the Iranian involvement in the fighting in Iraq could turn the war on terrorism into a sectarian war is proving truer by the day. Media reports out of Tikrit are talking about dozens of billboards and banners of Iranian leaders like Ayatullah Khoumaini and Ali Khaminei were put up at all the main gates of Tikrit, a Sunni stronghold. The IRGC has reportedly even deployed Iranian-made multiple rocket launchers around the city. An Iraqi Shiite Memeber of Parliament Ahmed Al Assadi told the pan-Arab daily Al-Hayat on March 18 that Iran was providing the Iraqi Shiite militias with all the weapons they need, which is a clear violation of United Nations Security Council resolutions that bar Iran from exporting arms. There are growing fears of atrocities and massacres that could be committed by the Shiite mil itias operating under the IRGC against the Sunni residents of Tikrit. The Iraqi House Speaker and other members of Parliament have repeatedly called over the past few weeks for independent investigations into reported massacres and sectarian cleansing committed by the Shiite militias known as the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) in Sunni towns and villages that were occupied by ISIS. Failure of the international community to investigate these reported acts of genocide and the continued role of the PMU alongside the IRGC are making the United States look complicit with Iran in a war against the Arabs in a conflict that is quickly turning into a large-scale sectarian war.



As criticism of Tehran's involvement has grown so strong -- especially as the reports of human rights abuses (War Crimes) taking place have grown -- Iraq's Council of Ministers has issued a statement denying any Iranians are in Iraq.  Rudaw reports, "Iraq’s Council of Ministers on Monday denied there were any foreign combat forces in the country, reacting to reports that Iranian forces have been fighting alongside the Iraqi Army in the war with ISIS."


The denial was in response to statements made on Sunday by a Kurdish MP.  Rudaw reports:

At least 30,000 Iranian soldiers and military experts are in Iraq and involved in the fight against ISIS,  a Kurdish lawmaker in the Iraqi parliament said Sunday, calling it a “threat to Iraq’s sovereignty.”
“At least 30,000 soldiers and military experts from the Islamic Republic of Iran are fighting ISIS militants in Iraq,” Shakhawan Abdullah, head of the parliamentary security and defense committee, told Rudaw.



Their denial indicates that either the Council of Ministers is composed of a pack of liars or else they're not in touch with their colleague who serves as the Minister of Transportation.

AFP spoke with that minister yesterday, Hadi al-Ameri, who is currently serving in the (illegal) capacity of "commander of the Badr militia" and al-Ameri couldn't stop singing the praises of Iranian Qassem Soleimani (identified by the US government as a terrorist) who is there, in Iraq, "whenever we need him," according to al-Ameri.  AFP notes:

Soleimani has advised Iraqi forces in multiple operations against ISIS, which led a major offensive last June that overran large areas north and west of Baghdad.
In doing so, he and other Iranian advisers provide the kind of forward support during operations that U.S. President Barack Obama has yet to authorize American forces to undertake.

And others are disturbed by Iran's involvement as well.  Sherine Tadros (Sky News) reports:

Iraq's vice president Iyad Allawi has told Sky News that Iran's involvement in his country is unacceptable and is failing to push Islamic State fighters back.

Speaking from his office in Baghdad, Mr Allawi said he was very concerned about Iran's increasing influence on the militias fighting the war against IS in Iraq.

He said: "I think the role of any regional power or any power in Iraq's affairs is unacceptable."



Saturday, the editorial board of the Washington Post observed:

The Obama administration, focused on completing a nuclear deal with Iran and eager to minimize direct U.S. involvement in the latest Iraq war, has played down the militia menace. While not supporting the attack on Tikrit with airstrikes, senior officials have characterized it as a positive development. Such statements suppose that a force including commanders and units on the State Department’s global terrorism list and steered by an Iranian general who previously directed attacks on U.S. troops will somehow advance the aim of reconstructing a multiethnic Iraq.

In fact, a new report from Human Rights Watch documents how Shiite militias have pursued a brutal scorched-earth policy in areas already liberated from the Islamic State. After U.S. airstrikes drove Islamic State forces out of the town of Amerli, in northeastern Iraq, late last summer, the militias went on a sectarian rampage, burning and bulldozing thousands of homes and other buildings in dozens of Sunni villages. The intent was to violently alter the demography of once ethnically diverse areas so that Shiites could dominate them.

Today, the Defense Dept announced:

Airstrikes in Iraq
Fighter aircraft conducted six airstrikes in Iraq, approved by the Iraqi Ministry of Defense:
-- Near Mosul, an airstrike destroyed two ISIL fighting positions.
-- Near Ramadi, an airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL fighting position.
-- Near Rawah, an airstrike struck an ISIL trailer.
-- Near Sinjar, two airstrikes struck an ISIL staging area and an ISIL tactical unit.
 -- Near Tal Afar, an airstrike destroyed an ISIL excavator.

There is no mention of Tikrit on that list.

BBC needs to back up their reporting or retract it.

 Vivian Salama (AP) reports 3 Baghdad bombings have left 19 people dead and thirty-six injured. Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) counts 189 violent deaths across Iraq today.

iraq