Kautzman’s AP GO PO Blog

James P. Pinkerton
Newsweek
October 2, 2007

Do you ever find yourself in a scary situation where you start spontaneously reciting the 23rd Psalm? You know, “The Lord is my shepherd … “?

Well, a new movie, “Trade,” gave me the shuddering feeling that I needed protection from wickedness – that we all do, that America does.

“Trade,” starring Kevin Kline, opening Friday, is a fictionalized look – sometimes lurid, always harrowing and, by the end, profoundly spiritual – at the sex-trafficking industry, demonstrating clear and present danger to our national well-being.

The genesis of “Trade” was a 9,000-word article by Peter Landesman appearing in The New York Times Magazine on Jan. 25, 2004. Landesman chronicled the international sex-trafficking business, stretching from Eastern Europe to Mexico to such ordinary places as Plainfield, N.J., where in 2002 police raided a house and rescued four Mexican girls, ages 14 to 17, working as sex slaves.

That’s sex slaves, not prostitutes.

Landesman described an interior that was the “land-based equivalent of a 19th-century slave ship, with rancid, doorless bathrooms, bare, putrid mattresses; and a stash of penicillin, ‘morning after’ pills and misoprostol, an anti-ulcer medication that can induce abortion.”

This was here in America.

Landesman cited government estimates suggesting that there could be as many as 50,000 such sex slaves in the United States, although nobody really knows; as a State Department official told him, “We’re not finding victims in the United States because we’re not looking for them.”

The reaction to Landesman’s article has been revealing. Left-libertarians, who take their political cues from the American Civil Liberties Union, savaged the article. Jack Shafer, writing the “Press Box” column for Slate.com at the time, launched a fusillade against Landesman’s truthfulness.

Last Sunday, The Washington Post presented a front-page article finding that only 1,362 such cases have been identified by authorities since 2000. This story inspired Shafer to follow up with yet another piece attacking Landesman and “Trade,” headlined, “The Sex-Slavery Epidemic That Wasn’t.”

If one were conspiratorial, one would say there’s been an organized campaign to minimize the sex-trafficking problem on the eve of the movie’s release.

Some might say that 1,362 is a big number when human beings are involved. The fate of the “Jena 6″ – the six black Louisiana teenagers involved in a racially tinged brawl – has provoked a national outcry. That’s the way we are, or should be; we should care about each other, and we should worry about injustice, wherever it is found, in whatever quantity.

In a recent interview, Landesman defended his credibility, as well as the plot line of “Trade.” While the story is fictional, all the “mechanics of sex trafficking” depicted in the movie – the kidnapping in Mexico, the transporting across the border, the online auctioning of girls for sexual exploitation – are “100 percent true.”

As for the number of only 1,362?

“For every case they know about, there have to be hundreds they don’t,” Landesman answered. “How many kilos of imported cocaine do the feds actually see?”

For my part, I will say this: If the number of sex-trafficked girls – and boys – is greater than zero, we have a problem. Specifically, we are suffering from a criminal and moral cancer that will force us to take an even harder look at border security, and perhaps also the use of the Internet for nefarious purposes.

Alas, “Trade” is likely to get trashed for political reasons. Already, Variety has slammed it, worrying that the film will “further the psychic and political divide between the U.S. and Mexico.”

Even as the critics rage, “Trade” is worth seeing. But it wouldn’t hurt to remember the sacred words: “Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil.”

Because you will need some moral or psychic armor. And then steely resolve to fix this shameful problem.

Ed Morales
Progressive Project
October 2, 2007

The United States must stop relying on mercenaries in Iraq.

The Sept. 16 incident in Baghdad, where Blackwater USA, a private security company, killed at least 11 Iraqi civilians, has created a diplomatic crisis between the United States and Iraqi governments.

Worse, it has made a mockery of U.S. efforts to establish democracy in the country it invaded more than five years ago. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has already called for Blackwater to cease operations, saying the mercenary army amounted to a challenge of his nation’s sovereignty.

While initial accounts of the incident said Blackwater was responding to gunfire, subsequent Iraqi reports claimed that there was no attack. Instead, they said Blackwater security guards opened fire at a car that didn’t stop when told to by a policeman, and its passengers – a couple and their infant – were killed.

Blackwater, which is the primary provider of security to senior U.S. officials, including Ambassador Ryan Crocker, operates outside the law and governmental supervision. Having received a no-bid contract and operating on billions of dollars in taxpayer funds, Blackwater plays the role of renegade cowboys, flying low in helicopters with guns drawn. It is despised by Iraqis, and even some U.S. military personnel.

This is not the first time that Blackwater operatives have been involved in serious incidents in Iraq. The Iraqi government has announced it is investigating five previous incidents that occurred earlier this year in which 10 Iraqis were killed and 15 wounded. Last Christmas Eve, an off-duty Blackwater contractor allegedly killed a bodyguard for the Iraqi vice president.

The reckless use of Blackwater greatly undercuts the moral authority of the United States as a beacon of democracy, and calls into question the true extent of Iraqi sovereignty. How can the U.S. claim to be bringing freedom and democracy to Iraq while imposing a mercenary army on an Iraqi government that is not empowered to prosecute it?

Blackwater’s role in maintaining security is so crucial that its removal presents a logistical nightmare. That, in itself, shows how reliant on mercenaries the United States has become.

This practice should end now, and those responsible for civilian deaths should be brought to justice.

Joshua Partlow
Washington Post
October 2, 2007

BAGHDAD – The number of U.S. soldiers and Iraqi civilians reported killed across the country last month fell to their lowest levels in more than a year, a sharp decrease in violent deaths that American military officials attribute in part to the thousands of additional soldiers who arrived here this year.

The death toll for Iraqi civilians fell sharply in September, according to Iraqi government and U.S. military figures. One count from Iraq’s Health Ministry put the monthly death toll at 827 civilians, a 48 percent drop from the total in August, according to an official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to release the statistics.

The Associated Press reported that at least 988 civilians, government workers and Iraqi security personnel were killed in September, a 50 percent drop from its 1,975 total in August.

The downward trend among victims of violence was mirrored by dropping fatalities among U.S. soldiers. By month’s end, at least 66 U.S. soldiers were killed, the lowest monthly total since 65 died in August 2006, and about half the number who died during the deadliest month this year, according to icasualties.org, a Web site that tracks military deaths in Iraq.

U.S. military officials expressed optimism Monday about the declining death tolls, particularly because the reduction comes during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, a time when violence has risen in past years. But they warned that insurgent groups such as al-Qaida in Iraq remain lethal and are likely planning for a counteroffensive of violent attacks.

“And we have seen such an uptick in the number of attacks recently in the last few days, but it has not been either at the level of intensity or the severity or the numbers that we’ve had before,” Rear Adm. Mark Fox, a U.S. military spokesman, told reporters in Baghdad. “We think that they’re still dangerous, but we also feel that we have been doing the kinds of operations that have kept al-Qaida off balance.”

Calculating civilian deaths in the war has always been imprecise. The U.S. military uses a methodology that includes tallying deaths that soldiers encounter directly, plus reported deaths from Iraqi government sources that are not always verified. The anonymous and isolated nature of many killings, along with the Muslim custom of burying victims rapidly, mean not all deaths are reported.

The Health Ministry statistics provided to the Washington Post, for example, rely on counts from Iraqi morgues, a measure that excluded bodies that families bury directly.

To compound the confusion, different Iraqi officials within and among various government ministries have in the past disclosed conflicting figures. And independent studies and analyses have placed the fatality counts much higher those of the Iraqi government or U.S. military tallies.

One U.S. military official said Monday that 1,461 Iraqi civilians were killed or wounded in September, representing the lowest casualty count since early 2006.

Numbers alone cannot describe the level of danger, and the pervading sense of insecurity, that still exist in much of Iraq. Some U.S. soldiers in Iraq have argued that sectarian cleansing in some Baghdad neighborhoods has progressed to the point that there are fewer opportunities for killing rivals. Many Iraqis still refuse to travel from their homes or immediate neighborhoods for fear of crossing into territory under the control of rival militias or insurgents. Thousands of residents each month are still driven from their homes and from the country, afraid for their lives.

Bush’s Approval Rating Ties All-Time Low
By Jon Cohen and Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, October 2, 2007; A01

Most Americans oppose fully funding President Bush’s $190 billion request for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and a sizable majority support an expansion of a children’s health insurance bill he has promised to veto, putting Bush and many congressional Republicans on the wrong side of public opinion on upcoming foreign and domestic policy battles.

The new Washington Post-ABC News poll also shows deep dissatisfaction with the president and with Congress. Bush’s approval rating stands at 33 percent, equal to his career low in Post-ABC polls. And just 29 percent approve of the job Congress is doing, its lowest approval rating in this poll since November 1995, when Republicans controlled both the House and Senate. It also represents a 14-point drop since Democrats took control in January.

Despite discontent with Congress this year, the public rates congressional Republicans (29 percent approve) lower than congressional Democrats (38 percent approve). When the parties are pitted directly against each other, the public broadly favors Democrats on Iraq, health care, the federal budget and the economy. Only on the issue of terrorism are Republicans at parity with Democrats.

Part of the displeasure with Congress stems from the stalemate between Democrats and the White House over Iraq policy. Most Americans do not believe Congress has gone far enough in opposing the war, with liberal Democrats especially critical of their party’s failure to force the president into a significant change in policy.

At the same time, there is no consensus about the pace of any U.S. troop withdrawals from Iraq. In July, nearly six in 10 said they wanted to decrease the number of troops there, but now a slim majority, 52 percent, think Bush’s plan for removing some troops by next summer is either the right pace for withdrawal (38 percent) or too hasty (12 percent would like a slower reduction, and 2 percent want no force reduction). Fewer people (43 percent) want a quicker exit.

John Csanadi of Nanuet, N.Y., said he has mixed feelings about what to do next in Iraq. Asked about Bush’s proposal for a modest drawdown of troops, he said: “It’s a start. Not the best solution, but at least it’s a start.”

Sara Carter, a schoolteacher from Westland, Mich., called Bush’s plan “better than it might be, not as good as it could be.”

But Don Hiatt of Las Vegas said he sees the proposal as a holding action by a president stalling for time. “I think he’s trying to just play it until he gets out of office and let the next president handle it, and that’s not a good thing if that’s what he’s doing,” Hiatt said.

Overall, 55 percent of Americans want congressional Democrats to do more to challenge the president’s Iraq policies, while a third think the Democrats have gone too far. The level of agitation for more action in opposition to the war has not dissipated since August 2005, when Democrats were the minority party in Congress.

Lee Martin, an information technology consultant from Chicago, said that after last year’s midterm elections, he and others anticipated a change in Iraq policy. “The reason Congress is down is they’re [Democrats] in there and basically nothing is changing,” he said.

Robert Holtzman of Philadelphia said there is not much Democrats can do, given the ability of Republicans to block most action in the Senate. Still, he expressed frustration: “I’m satisfied with the Democratic Congress on small things, but they haven’t gotten it together on the bigger issues.”

More than eight in 10 liberal Democrats said Congress has been too restrained, while about the same percentage of conservative Republicans said it has been too aggressive. A narrow majority of independents, 53 percent, want more congressional action.

A central challenge for all policymakers is that those who want more congressional action are not unanimous in what they would like done. Almost all of those who would like congressional Democrats to do more to oppose the Iraq war disapprove of how the president has handled it, but about a quarter want U.S. troops to remain in Iraq until civil order is restored. More than a third see Bush’s plan to withdraw the “surge” troops by next summer as about right or even too fast.

There is broader public agreement on how Congress should approach war funding. About a quarter of adults want Congress to fund fully the administration’s $190 billion request; seven in 10 want the proposed allocation reduced, with 46 percent wanting it cut sharply or entirely. About seven in 10 independents want Congress to cut back funds allocated for the war effort, as do nearly nine in 10 Democrats; 46 percent of Republicans agree.

Democratic leaders are increasingly anxious about the perception that they are not accomplishing much on central issues. The House will vote tonight on a measure that would give the Bush administration 60 days to report to Congress on its planning for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq, then require reports on withdrawal every 90 days.

Bush and the Republicans may also be headed for a political setback from the fight over the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), even if Congress does not override Bush’s threatened veto.

More than seven in 10 in the poll support the planned $35 billion spending increase, and 25 percent are opposed. About half of all Americans “strongly” support the increased spending; 17 percent are firmly against the additional funds. Eighty-one percent of Democrats, 69 percent of independents and 61 percent of Republicans are in favor.

Democrats hold a big edge over Republicans on health-care issues. Overall, 56 percent said they trust Democrats to handle health care, and 26 percent side with the GOP.

Democrats also have a greater share of the public trust on other key issues, including Iraq (a 15-point advantage), the economy (18 points) and handling the federal budget deficit (23 points). On the campaign against terrorism, 41 percent put more faith in Democrats, 40 percent in Republicans.

But when Americans look more broadly at Congress as an institution, they are increasingly unhappy. Barely a third of liberal Democrats approve of the job Congress is doing; in April, 59 percent approved. Among independents, 24 percent approve, equaling last year’s pre-election low mark for the GOP-controlled Congress.

Deteriorating reviews of congressional job performance are linked to a broad-based assessment that Congress has not accomplished much this year. Although Congress has passed four of the Democrats’ “Six for ‘06″ agenda items and a promised overhaul of congressional ethics and lobbying rules, more than eight in 10 Americans, including large majorities across party lines, said Congress has accomplished “not too much” or “nothing at all” this year.

By a 2 to 1 margin, those who see little accomplishment in Congress’s first nine months blame the inaction on Bush and the GOP more than they do the majority Democrats. Fifty-one percent place primary fault with the president and congressional Republicans, and 25 percent on the Democrats. Among independents, 43 percent blame Republicans, 23 percent Democrats and nearly three in 10 blame both sides equally.

The poll was conducted Thursday through Sunday among a national random sample of 1,114 adults. The results have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.

Polling analyst Jennifer Agiesta and staff writer Jonathan Weisman contributed to this report.