The Wonderful Horrible Life of Ahmed Chalabi

Time was, Ahmed Chalabi was Donald Rumsfeld’s main man. Sure, the Iraqi National Congress leader claimed the right to rule Iraq after Saddam even though he hadn’t lived in the country since he was 9 years old. Sure, he was a convicted bank embezzler and con man. (Chalabi claimed the Jordanian government framed him.) But he was a smooth talker, and the neocons—themselves so used to conning others that they were all the more easily taken themselves–in the nascent Bush Administration literally bought–at a cost of millions of dollars–his fictional intelligence.

Invading Iraq, Chalabi told Cheney and Condi, would be a cakewalk. Flowers on the streets.

So the Department of Defense flew Chalabi in with the invading forces, against longstanding US policy, to take over the Iraqi government. The 50 guys you saw celebrating the Marines’ pulling down of the Saddam statue at Farbus Square in Baghdad were all Chalabi’s INC goons. Really. You can look it up.

Of course, naysayers on what the rightist maniacs call “the far left”–in truth, no one from the far left has gotten a word into print in the United States in decades–pointed out that Chalabi was full of shit. Now the rightist maniacs are coming to the same conclusion. In today’s news, it seems that Chalabi may have betrayed the fact that the CIA had broken Iranian code to the Iranians, who are fellow Shias. And the Bush Administration, which went so far as to seat Chalabi next to Laura Bush at the State of the Union address earlier this year, has decided that Chalabi (gasp!) falsified intelligence.

Like the war itself, anyone with half a brain could see that no good could come out of this. And lots of people with that perceptiveness said so, loud and clear. Now would be a good time for the rightist maniacs and their mouthpieces in the mainstream media to admit that, as usual, they were wrong and we were right. Better yet, now would be a good time for them to promise to stay out of politics once and for all. America just can’t afford the rightist maniacs and their incessant fuckups anymore.

Pat Tillman Killed by Friendly Fire

Obviously I had no way to know this when I drew That Cartoon, but major press outlets are reporting that former NFL player Pat Tillman was killed by “friendly fire.” The following comes from USA Today:

FRIENDLY FIRE PROBABLY KILLED PAT TILLMAN

FORT BRAGG, N.C. (AP) — Former pro football player Pat Tillman was probably killed by friendly fire as he led his team of Army Rangers up a hill during a firefight in Afghanistan last month, the U.S. Army said Saturday. Pat Tillman, a member of the elite Ranger unit since 2002, was awarded a Purple Heart and Silver Star. Tillman walked away from a $3.6 million NFL contract to join the Army after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Previous military statements suggested he was killed April 22 under enemy fire.

“While there was no one specific finding of fault, the investigation results indicate that Cpl. Tillman probably died as a result of friendly fire while his unit was engaged in combat with enemy forces,” Lt. Gen. Philip R. Kensington Jr. said in a brief statement to reporters at the Army Special Operations Command. Kensington said the firefight took place in “very severe and constricted terrain in impaired light” with 10 to 12 enemy combatants firing on U.S. forces.

An Afghan military official told The Associated Press on Saturday that Tillman died because of a “misunderstanding” when two mixed groups of American and Afghan soldiers began firing wildly in the confusion following an explosion. The Afghan official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, also contradicted U.S. reports that the American soldiers had come under enemy fire.

Kensington, who heads Army Special Forces, took no questions Saturday morning after reading the statement.

When Tillman was awarded the Silver Star, the Army said he was killed after his platoon was split into two sections for what officials called a ground assault convoy. Tillman was in charge of the lead group. His group was safely out of the area when the trailing group came under mortar and small arms fire, according to the Army, and he ordered them to return.

“Through the firing, Tillman’s voice was heard issuing fire commands to take the fight to the enemy on the dominating high ground,” the award announcement said. “Only after his team engaged the well-armed enemy did it appear their fires diminished. “As a result of his leadership and his team’s efforts, the platoon trail section was able to maneuver through the ambush to positions of safety without a single casualty,” the announcement said.

Tillman, a member of the elite Ranger unit since 2002, was posthumously promoted from specialist to corporal and also awarded a Purple Heart.

“The result of this investigation in no way diminished the bravery and sacrifice displayed by Cpl. Tillman,” said Kensington, who heads Army Special Forces. He took no questions Saturday morning after reading the statement.

A woman who answered the phone late Friday at the home of Tillman’s uncle said the family would have no immediate comment.

At a memorial service in his hometown of San Jose earlier this month Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., called him “a most honorable man.” “While many of us will be blessed to live a longer life, few of us will ever live a better one,” McCain, who spent 5 1/2 years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, said at Tillman’s memorial service.

The friendly fire account was first reported by the Arizona Republic and The Argus of Fremont (Calif.) on Saturday. “It does seem pretty clear that he was killed by friendly fire,” Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., a member of the House Armed Services Committee, told the Republic. Franks said his panel was alerted to the information by the Army’s Legislative Liaison Office.

The Afghan official told the AP that two groups of soldiers had drifted some distance apart during the operation in the remote Spera district of Khost province, close to the Pakistani border. “Suddenly the sound of a mine explosion was heard somewhere between the two groups and the Americans in one group started firing,” the official said, citing an account given to him by an Afghan fighter who was part of that group, not Tillman’s. “Nobody knew what it was — a mine, a remote-controlled bomb — or what was going on, or if enemy forces were firing. The situation was very confusing,” the official said. “As the result of this firing, that American was killed and three Afghan soldiers were injured. It was a misunderstanding and afterwards they realized that it was a mine that had exploded and there were no enemy forces.”

U.S. military officials in Kabul had no immediate comment.

So much for the argument that Tillman died fighting for his country. Or for the bullshit cover story concocted by the military to justify awarding him a posthumous Silver Star. I wonder if the Pentagon will have the integrity to revoke it?

So, to recap: Tillman gave up $3.6 million to get killed by his fellow soldiers. I guess I do owe an apology after all, but not for calling him a sap: In my cartoon, I said Tillman got offed by the Afghan resistance. That part, as it turns out, wasn’t true.

Bushie war apologists may email their apologies to MSNBC, which canceled my cartoons as the result of my cartoon. And prospective soldiers may want to take this opportunity to reconsider the wisdom of enlisting. It’s bad enough to get killed by friendly fire; it’s still worse to get killed by friendly fire while fighting an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war.

Here’s their May 15th review of my new book:

Aghast that America has gone to the far-right dogs, editorial cartoonist and columnist Ted Rall wants it back in commonsense—that is, liberal—hands.

Democrats and Republicans alike have ceded the communal high ground, he writes with particular energy, and radical conservatives are ramped on greed and self-righteousness. What we need at this closing-on-fascism juncture, Rall declares, is a reformed Democratic Party, longtime purveyor of a liberalism that aims to “help the downtrodden, not coddle slackers” and can prudently protect our nation without giving up basic liberties—indeed, that will protect individual rights via the Bill of Rights. America has never been a conservative nation, the author asserts: in the 20th century alone, it tamed the Industrial Revolution with regulation and labor laws, set up a social safety net, fought fascism, expanded civil rights, and lifted the sociopolitical status of minorities. Not perfectly, Rall admits, but at least the angle was correct. Is it right for a CEO to pay himself millions as he lays off thousands, or for someone to kill a man because he is gay or Iraqi, or for hospitals to allow people to die because they can’t pay for medical help? It’s not just a matter of statistics, he argues, though those also help prove his point; an instinctive “no” to all of the above is part of the American persona. How has the Republican right virtually consumed the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government? Because of the Democratic Party’s lack of focus, its lack of cool, its unwillingness to approach politics as a barroom fight rather than a tea party, states Rall. He tenders an encouraging Democratic platform, with winning issues from minimum wage to college tuition to vacation time.

Senator Kerry could do worse than to read closely this flurry of smart advice (aside from the author’s fondness for they-pull-a-knife, you-pull-a-gun politics), which serves as a quick, bracing, and welcome series of wake-up slaps.

Greetings from Gitmo

Still doubt that the right-wing bloggers are off the hook? Check this out! Scroll down and you’ll find an actual, bonafide writing campaign to Attorney General John Ashcroft about little old me. Their goal: to have me thrown into a U.S. government gulag, and presumably executed (yes, really), for treason. Treason, it seems, means disagreeing with the Bush Administration, the Republicans, and their wars against Iraq and Afghanistan.

In a follow-up to the cut-and-paste Ashcroft letter–which ought to give the chills to any American, regardless of political persuasion–blogger J.B. Corrigan adds:

First, I want to thank everyone who sent me copies of their messages to Attorney General John Ashcroft regarding the acts of Treason committed by Ted Rall (see previous entry). It is gratifying to me that so many people are willing to stand up and fight such despicable actions. Now it will be up to the U.S. Department of Justice as to whether the law as defined in the Constitution will be enforced.

However one whiner wrote in to make the predictable charge that it was ‘censorship’ and a violation of the First Amendment to take Rall to task for his Treason.

And to that I say: BULLSHIT. Rall committed Treason, and that Treason is perfectly defined by Article III, Section 3 of the United States Constitution…

And Rall? It is my fervent prayer that I might live long enough to see that S.O.B. lined up before a firing squad and executed for that act of Treason. Tell me where that dirtbag gets buried and I’ll join the long line of real Americans who will no doubt be ready to p*ss on him.

My.

I scoured the rightist blogosphere for reactions. I found positive responses at Blogs for Bush, Pardon My English and elsewhere. Not one right-winger had a problem with this.

These are the kinds of people we’re dealing with, folks. If they had their way, they’d recreate Nazi Germany right here in America. That’s why we must make certain they NEVER get their way.

P.S. If there’s a good lawyer reading this, I’d appreciate an email (chet@rall.com) advising me what to do about this extreme form of harrassment and abuse of government agencies. I should probably start by filing a Freedom of Information Act request to uncover the names and addresses of the individuals who filed these “treason” complaints against me, but can I/should I protect myself legally? If so, how?

Kerry’s Vice President

Among the more outlandish options floated recently for the veep spot on the Democratic ticket are John McCain and Ralph Nader. The McCain thing, I think it’s safe to guess, ain’t gonna happen. There hasn’t been a party crossover ticket in more than fifteen decades, and a year when the electorate is polarized won’t see the second. Choosing a conservative, pro-life Republican as vice president would alienate the liberal base, driving many to stay away from the polls or vote for Nader. I myself would retract my longstanding pledge to vote for the Democratic nominee since a McCain veep could become a Republican president. The Democratic Party, as I’ve written in my new book WAKE UP, YOU’RE LIBERAL: HOW WE CAN TAKE AMERICA BACK FROM THE RIGHT, needs to get back to its roots, not trash them entirely.

I don’t think much will come out of the Nader talk, but I think he’d be a brilliant choice–one that might lock up the election once and for all. A Nader VP would energize the liberal base like nothing else, neutralize a spoiler threat and infuse vibrant new ideas into the ossified Democratic Party political machine. Nader could become Kerry’s Cheney–the power behind the throne, the guy’s who’s always thinking new stuff up.

My money’s still on John Edwards or Bob Graham, though–and either of them would be just dandy.

30,000 Dead Iraqis

The psycho right bloggers, unwilling to acknowledge that information exists offline, keep asking where people like me come up with the figure that we killed at least 30,000 Iraqis during the war. The answer is: Bob Woodward. In his book “Plan of Attack,” he quotes Bush Administration sources as saying that we killed that many Iraqis during the first few weeks of war. Obviously that figure has since risen. Since I like to keep my statistics on the conservative side, however, I use the official Pentagon figure of 30,000.

More news from the glorious liberation of Vichy Mesopotamia:

Reuters and NBC staff abused in Iraq

Tue 18 May, 2004 20:28

By Andrew Marshall

BAGHDAD (Reuters) – U.S. forces beat three Iraqis working for Reuters and subjected them to sexual and religious taunts and humiliation during their detention last January in a military camp near Falluja, the three say.

The three first told Reuters of the ordeal after their release but only decided to make it public when the U.S. military said there was no evidence they had been abused, and following the exposure of similar mistreatment of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad.

An Iraqi journalist working for U.S. network NBC, who was arrested with the Reuters staff, also said he had been beaten and mistreated, NBC said on Tuesday.

Two of the three Reuters staff said they had been forced to insert a finger into their anus and then lick it, and were forced to put shoes in their mouths, particularly humiliating in Arab culture.

All three said they were forced to make demeaning gestures as soldiers laughed, taunted them and took photographs. They said they did not want to give details publicly earlier because of the degrading nature of the abuse.

The soldiers told them they would be taken to the U.S. detention centre at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, deprived them of sleep, placed bags over their heads, kicked and hit them and forced them to remain in stress positions for long periods.

The U.S. military, in a report issued before the Abu Ghraib abuse became public, said there was no evidence the Reuters staff had been tortured or abused.

Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez, commander of ground forces in Iraq, said in a letter received by Reuters on Monday but dated March 5 that he was confident the investigation had been “thorough and objective” and its findings were sound.

The Pentagon has yet to respond to a request by Reuters Global Managing Editor David Schlesinger to review the military’s findings about the incident in light of the scandal over the treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib.

Asked for comment on Tuesday, Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said only: “There are a number of lines of inquiry under way with respect to prison operations in Iraq. If during the course of any inquiry, the commander believes it is appropriate to review a specific aspect of detention, he has the authority to do so.”

The abuse happened at Forward Operating Base Volturno, near Falluja, the Reuters staff said. They were detained on January 2 while covering the aftermath of the shooting down of a U.S. helicopter near Falluja and held for three days, first at Volturno and then at Forward Operating Base St Mere.

The three — Baghdad-based cameraman Salem Ureibi, Falluja-based freelance television journalist Ahmad Mohammad Hussein al-Badrani and driver Sattar Jabar al-Badrani — were released without charge on January 5.

“INADEQUATE” INVESTIGATION

“When I saw the Abu Ghraib photographs, I wept,” Ureibi said on Tuesday. “I saw they had suffered like we had.”

Ureibi, who understands English better than the other two detainees, said soldiers told him they wanted to have sex with him, and he was afraid he would be raped.

NBC, whose stringer Ali Muhammed Hussein Ali al-Badrani was detained along with the Reuters staff, said he reported that a hood was placed over his head for hours, and that he was forced to perform physically debilitating exercises, prevented from sleeping and struck and kicked several times.

“Despite repeated requests, we have yet to receive the results of the army investigation,” NBC News Vice President Bill Wheatley said.

Schlesinger sent a letter to Sanchez on January 9 demanding an investigation into the treatment of the three Iraqis.

The U.S. army said it was investigating and requested further information. Reuters provided transcripts of initial interviews with the three following their release, and offered to make them available for interview by investigators.

A summary of the investigation by the 82nd Airborne Division, dated January 28 and provided to Reuters, said “no specific incidents of abuse were found”. It said soldiers responsible for the detainees were interviewed under oath and “none admit or report knowledge of physical abuse or torture”.

“The detainees were purposefully and carefully put under stress, to include sleep deprivation, in order to facilitate interrogation; they were not tortured,” it said. The version received on Monday used the phrase “sleep management” instead.

The U.S. military never interviewed the three for its investigation.

On February 3 Schlesinger wrote to Lawrence Di Rita, special assistant to Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, saying the investigation was “woefully inadequate” and should be reopened.

“The military’s conclusion of its investigation without even interviewing the alleged victims, along with other inaccuracies and inconsistencies in the report, speaks volumes about the seriousness with which the U.S. government is taking this issue,” he wrote.

Sarin,Schmarin

The report that a roadside bomb attack may have used a shell that contained sarin nerve agent has the right wing media all atwitter. Aha! WMDs!

Not yet.

While there’s something to the notion that where there’s one mouse there are a dozen more living in your wall, the possible presence of sarin in one cannister hardly justifies invading Iraq at a cost of more than $150 billion, 30,000 dead Iraqis (the number comes from the Bush Administration, courtesy of Bob Woodward’s “Plan of Attack”) and 1,200 dead coalition troops.

More to the point: Even if we were to discover enormous warehouses full of nuclear weapons, the war still wouldn’t have been justified. The point being, the US claimed that it KNEW that Iraq had WMDs when it clearly did not. Guessing correctly doesn’t count, not that that’s what happened here.

What Happens to the Death Threat People?

A number of you have written to ask what, if anything, I do regarding people who send me threatening emails. The answer is, I take them seriously. Anyone who is so psychologically unbalanced that they would threaten an artist or writer is a danger not only to me, but anyone with whom they come into contact.

I report these communications to the FBI, local law enforcement authorities and the Internet Service Providers. What happens next, as they say, ain’t my business.