Mikey Likes It!

Tuesday, September 14, 2021

Jimmy Dore, Danny Haiphong

First up, Jimmy Dore.

Okay now this is from Danny Haiphong (BLACK AGENDA REPORT):

The majority of those who call themselves the “left” in the United States are really just liberals in disguise. Nowhere is this clearer than in the reaction to Joe Biden’s so-called withdrawal from Afghanistan. Squad Congresswoman Ilhan Omar and a number of “left” pundits praised Joe Biden for supposedly ending the war. Little mention was made of the scores of civilians killed by Biden’s approved drone strikes against “ISIS-K” amid the chaotic withdrawal. Biden’s history of supporting the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan in the first place was further buried underneath the heaps of praise thrown at him for ending a war that never should have started.

Make no mistake, any de-escalation of the U.S.’s military presence abroad is a good thing. However, a war criminal does not deserve praise for doing what could have been done twenty-years ago. In 2001, the Taliban offered Osama Bin-Laden in exchange for an end to U.S. airstrikes. George W. Bush and the rest of the neocon hawks in Washington declined the offer. Biden was one of these hawks on the Democratic Party side. As chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Biden supported the initial invasion of Afghanistan so long as U.S. forces carried out their so-called mission of destroying Al Qaeda.

The mission, of course, was always a big lie. Al Qaeda was the spawn of Operation Cyclone, the code name for U.S. covert support for the Mujahideen rebels that fought a bloody war against the Soviet Union and the socialist-oriented government in Afghanistan beginning in 1979. Born from this more than decade-long proxy war was an international jihadist network armed, trained, and funded by the U.S. and its Gulf allies. Biden jumped at the opportunity to wage the War on Terror along with the rest of the ruling class in the aftermath of the 9/11 tragedy because new wars were on the horizon after the collapse of the socialist bloc. NATO General Secretary Wesley Clark was told by then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld shortly after the 9/11 attacks that the U.S. would respond by invading seven countries in five years.

Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran rounded out Rumsfeld’s list . The list excluded Afghanistan because the U.S. was already bombing that country at the time of the secret directive. This underscores how the invasion of Afghanistan has always been linked to the fate of the entire region and indeed U.S. hegemony itself. Following his support of the war in Afghanistan, Biden pushed hard for the 2003 invasion of Iraq . He then supported Ethiopia’s overthrow of the Somali government and Israel’s bloody invasion of Lebanon in 2006. Under Obama, Biden demonstrated a modest reluctance to lend creditability to the U.S.-led overthrow of Libya but in the end rendered no challenge to the Commander and Chief’s expansion of the imperialist war machine deep into Africa and Asia.

The end result of Biden’s warmongering has been the loss of millions of lives and trillions of U.S. dollars.

As we now know, that ISIS-K attack the US carried out? Killed a civilian, not a terrorist. But too many were too thrilled and eager to get their war on and immediately rushed to praise Joe. It's really sad. And, honestly, we don't have presidents worth admiring. We have killers and con artists -- and some are both.

And our members of Congress aren't too much better. Fake asses like AOC who help themselves but not the people that they pledged to serve. A bunch of fake asses. If they wanted to help the people, they would. If they wanted to help us, we'd have Medicare For All, for example.

Just a bunch of fake asses.

Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Tuesday, September 14, 2021. War Criminal Condi Rice thinks she has wisdom to share.

Starting with a War Criminal.

Mad Maddie's gal Condi Rice wants to talk Iraq. On her terms. Kind of like she wanted to talk 9-11 on her terms. Remember that? Former US Senator Bob Kerrey was trying to get her to answer questions when she appeared before the 9/11 Commission and she repeatedly attempted to evade answering. Remember? Bob warned her not to try to filibuster. She claimed no one could have guessed that planes would be used. Remember? He had to repeatedly insist that she

In fact, because people may have forgotten, let's note some of that exchange:

KERREY: You've used the phrase a number of times, and I'm hoping with my question to disabuse you of using it in the future.

You said the president was tired of swatting flies.

KERREY: Can you tell me one example where the president swatted a fly when it came to al Qaeda prior to 9/11?

RICE: I think what the president was speaking to was...

KERREY: No, no. What fly had he swatted?

RICE: Well, the disruptions abroad was what he was really focusing on...

KERREY: No, no...

RICE: ... when the CIA would go after Abu Zubaydah...

KERREY: He hadn't swatted...

RICE: ... or go after this guy...

KERREY: Dr. Rice, we didn't...

RICE: That was what was meant.

KERREY: We only swatted a fly once on the 20th of August 1998. We didn't swat any flies afterwards. How the hell could he be tired?

RICE: We swatted at -- I think he felt that what the agency was doing was going after individual terrorists here and there, and that's what he meant by swatting flies. It was simply a figure of speech.

KERREY: Well, I think it's an unfortunate figure of speech because I think, especially after the attack on the Cole on the 12th of October, 2000, it would not have been swatting a fly. It would not have been -- we did not need to wait to get a strategic plan.

Dick Clarke had in his memo on the 20th of January overt military operations. He turned that memo around in 24 hours, Dr. Clarke. There were a lot of plans in place in the Clinton administration -- military plans in the Clinton administration.

In fact, since we're in the mood to declassify stuff, there was -- he included in his January 25 memo two appendices -- Appendix A: "Strategy for the elimination of the jihadist threat of al Qaeda," Appendix B: "Political military plan for al Qaeda."

So I just -- why didn't we respond to the Cole?

RICE: Well, we...

KERREY: Why didn't we swat that fly?

RICE: I believe that there's a question of whether or not you respond in a tactical sense or whether you respond in a strategic sense; whether or not you decide that you're going to respond to every attack with minimal use of military force and go after every -- on a kind of tit-for-tat basis.

By the way, in that memo, Dick Clarke talks about not doing this tit-for-tat, doing this on the time of our choosing.

I'm aware, Mr. Kerrey, of a speech that you gave at that time that said that perhaps the best thing that we could do to respond to the Cole and to the memories was to do something about the threat of Saddam Hussein.

That's a strategic view...

And we took a strategic view. We didn't take a tactical view. I mean, it was really -- quite frankly, I was blown away when I read the speech, because it's a brilliant speech. It talks about really...

... an asymmetric...

KERREY: I presume you read it in the last few days?

RICE: Oh no, I read it quite a bit before that. It's an asymmetric approach.

Now, you can decide that every time al Qaeda...

KERREY: So you're saying that you didn't have a military response against the Cole because of my speech?

RICE: No.

KERREY: That had I not given that speech you would have attacked them?

RICE: No, I'm just saying that I think it was a brilliant way to think about it.

KERREY: I think it's...

RICE: It was a way of thinking about it strategically, not tactically. But if I may answer the question that you've asked me.

The issue of whether to respond -- or how to respond to the Cole -- I think Don Rumsfeld has also talked about this. Yes, the Cole had happened. We received, I think on January 25, the same assessment -- or roughly the same assessment -- of who was responsible for the Cole that Sandy Berger talked to you about.

It was preliminary. It was not clear. But that was not the reason that we felt that we did not want to, quote, "respond to the Cole."

We knew that the options that had been employed by the Clinton administration had been standoff options. The president had -- meaning missile strikes or perhaps bombers would have been possible, long-range bombers. Although getting in place the apparatus to use long-range bombers is even a matter of whether you have basing in the region.

RICE: We knew that Osama Bin Laden had been, in something that was provided to me, bragging that he was going to withstand any response and then he was going to emerge and come out stronger.

KERREY: But you're figuring this out. You've got to give a very long answer.

RICE: We simply believed that the best approach was to put in place a plan that was going to eliminate this threat, not respond to an attack.

KERREY: Let me say, I think you would have come in there if you said, "We screwed up. We made a lot of mistakes." You obviously don't want to use the M-word in here. And I would say fine, it's game, set, match. I understand that.

But this strategic and tactical, I mean, I just -- it sounds like something from a seminar. It doesn't...

RICE: I do not believe to this day that it would have been a good thing to respond to the Cole, given the kinds of options that we were going to have.

And with all due respect to Dick Clarke, if you're speaking about the Delenda plan, my understanding is that it was, A, never adopted, and that Dick Clarke himself has said that the military portion of this was not taken up by the Clinton administration.

KERREY: Let me move into another area.

RICE: So we were not presented -- I just want to be very clear on this, because it's been a source of controversy -- we were not presented with a plan.

KERREY: Well, that's not true. It is not...

RICE: We were not presented. We were presented with...

KERREY: I've heard you say that, Dr. Clarke, that 25 January, 2001, memo was declassified, I don't believe...

RICE: That January 25 memo has a series of actionable items having to do with Afghanistan, the Northern Alliance.

KERREY: Let me move to another area.

RICE: May I finish answering your question, though, because this is an important...

KERREY: I know it's important. Everything that's going on here is important. But I get 10 minutes.

RICE: But since we have a point of disagreement, I'd like to have a chance to address it.

KERREY: Well, no, no, actually, we have many points of disagreement, Dr. Clarke, but we'll have a chance to do in closed session. Please don't filibuster me. It's not fair. It is not fair. I have been polite. I have been courteous. It is not fair to me.

I understand that we have a disagreement.

RICE: Commissioner, I am here to answer questions. And you've asked me a question, and I'd like to have an opportunity to answer it.

The fact is that what we were presented on January the 25th was a set of ideas and a paper, most of which was about what the Clinton administration had done and something called the Delenda plan which had been considered in 1998 and never adopted. We decided to take a different track.

RICE: We decided to put together a strategic approach to this that would get the regional powers -- the problem wasn't that you didn't have a good counterterrorism person.

The problem was you didn't have an approach against al Qaeda because you didn't have an approach against Afghanistan. And you didn't have an approach against Afghanistan because you didn't have an approach against Pakistan. And until we could get that right, we didn't have a policy.

KERREY: Thank you for answering my question.

RICE: You're welcome.

KERREY: Let me ask you another question. Here's the problem that I have as I -- again, it's hindsight. I appreciate that. But here's the problem that a lot of people are having with this July 5th meeting.

You and Andy Card meet with Dick Clarke in the morning. You say you have a meeting, he meets in the afternoon. It's July 5th.

Kristen Breitweiser, who's a part of the families group, testified at the Joint Committee. She brings very painful testimony, I must say.

But here's what Agent Kenneth Williams said five days later. He said that the FBI should investigate whether al Qaeda operatives are training at U.S. flight schools. He posited that Osama bin Laden followers might be trying to infiltrate the civil aviation system as pilots, security guards and other personnel. He recommended a national program to track suspicious flight schools. Now, one of the first things that I learned when I came into this town was the FBI and the CIA don't talk. I mean, I don't need a catastrophic event to know that the CIA and the FBI don't do a very good job of communicating.

And the problem we've got with this and the Moussaoui facts, which were revealed on the 15th of August, all it had to do was to be put on Intelink. All it had to do is go out on Intelink, and the game's over. It ends. This conspiracy would have been rolled up.

KERREY: And so I...

RICE: Commissioner, with all due respect, I don't agree that we know that we had somehow a silver bullet here that was going to work.

What we do know is that we did have a systemic problem, a structural problem between the FBI and the CIA. It was a long time in coming into being. It was there because there were legal impediments, as well as bureaucratic impediments. Those needed to be overcome.

Obviously, the structure of the FBI that did not get information from the field offices up to FBI Central, in a way that FBI Central could react to the whole range of information reports, was a problem..

KERREY: But, Dr. Rice, everybody...

RICE: But the structure of the FBI, the restructuring of the FBI, was not going to be done in the 233 days in which we were in office...

KERREY: Dr. Rice, everybody who does national security in this town knows the FBI and the CIA don't talk. So if you have a meeting on the 5th of July, where you're trying to make certain that your domestic agencies are preparing a defense against a possible attack, you knew al Qaeda cells were in the United States, you've got to follow up.

And the question is, what was your follow-up? What's the paper trail that shows that you and Andy Card followed up from this meeting, and...

RICE: I followed...

KERREY: ... made certain that the FBI and the CIA were talking?

RICE: I followed up with Dick Clarke, who had in his group, and with him, the key counterterrorism person for the FBI. You have to remember that Louis Freeh was, by this time, gone. And so, the chief counterterrorism person was the second -- Louis Freeh had left in late June. And so the chief counterterrorism person for the FBI was working these issues, was working with Dick Clarke. I talked to Dick Clarke about this all the time.

RICE: But let's be very clear, the threat information that we were dealing with -- and when you have something that says, "something very big may happen," you have no time, you have no place, you have no how, the ability to somehow respond to that threat is just not there.

Now, you said...

KERREY: Dr. Clarke, in the spirit of further declassification...

RICE: Sir, with all...

KERREY: The spirit...

RICE: I don't think I look like Dick Clarke, but...

KERREY: Dr. Rice, excuse me.

RICE: Thank you.

KEAN: This is the last question, Senator.

KERREY: Actually it won't be a question.

In the spirit of further declassification, this is what the August 6 memo said to the president: that the FBI indicates patterns of suspicious activity in the United States consistent with preparations for hijacking.

That's the language of the memo that was briefed to the president on the 6 of August.

And let's watch the video of Condi trying to lie to Richard Ben-Veniste at the hearing.

Condi: "I believe the title was 'Bin Laden Determined To Strike In The United States'."

"Condi Lousy" -- that's what Fred Kaplan called her at SLATE due to that testimony:

One clear inference can be drawn from Condoleezza Rice’s testimony before the 9/11 commission this morning: She has been a bad national security adviser—passive, sluggish, and either unable or unwilling to tie the loose strands of the bureaucracy into a sensible vision or policy. In short, she has not done what national security advisers are supposed to do.

The key moment came an hour into the hearing, when former Watergate prosecutor Richard Ben-Veniste took his turn at asking questions. Up to this point, Rice had argued that the Bush administration could not have done much to stop the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Yes, the CIA’s sirens were sounding all summer of an impending strike by al-Qaida, but the warnings were of an attack overseas.

Ben-Veniste brought up the much-discussed PDB—the president’s daily briefing by CIA Director George Tenet—of Aug. 6, 2001. For the first time, he revealed the title of that briefing: “Bin Laden Determined To Strike in US.”*

Rice insisted this title meant nothing. The document consisted of merely “historical information” about al-Qaida—various plans and attacks of the past. “This was not a ‘threat report,’ ” she said. It “did not warn of any coming attack inside the United States.” Later in the hearing, she restated the point: “The PDB does not say the United States is going to be attacked. It says Bin Laden would like to attack the United States.”

To call this distinction “academic” would be an insult to academia.

Rice acknowledged that throughout the summer of 2001 the CIA was intercepting unusually high volumes of “chatter” about an impending terrorist strike. She quoted from some of this chatter: “attack in near future,” “unbelievable news coming in weeks,” “a very, very, very big uproar.” She said some “specific” intelligence indicated the attack would take place overseas. However, she noted that very little of this intelligence was specific; most of it was “frustratingly vague.” In other words (though she doesn’t say so), most of the chatter might have been about a foreign or a domestic attack—it wasn’t clear.

This is who we now want input on Iraq from?

She's a War Criminal. And she's a liar. And she's lying about Iraq. She's claiming that Iraq is "increasingly stable" and, no, it is not. That's a damn liar from a damn lying War Criminal who should be hanging her head in shame but instead seem to think that anyone wants to hear from her. If she offered to stand still while various Americans threw rotten fruit at her, she could fill a stadium. But that's the only way she could ever attract a crowd.

THE NEW ARAB reports:

While Basra governorate lies on an ocean of oil - receiving foreign investments to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars per year - local people live in grinding poverty and suffer high unemployment.

They are also left vulnerable to the violent disputes which frequently erupt between armed tribes in a region where the state and security forces are almost absent.

Last year, Muhammed Al-Waeli and his family were forced to leave their home in Abu Sakhir, northern Basra, in fear of their lives due to ongoing clan disputes, Fadhil al-Gharawi, a member of the Iraqi High Commission for Human Rights (OHCHR Iraq) told Al-Araby Al-Jadeed, The New Arab's Arabic-language sister publication. Many fall victim to clashes they have no connection to.

General Amjad Qasim, who heads the Basra police force, confirms that 13 families have left their homes in the city for the same reasons.

That's 'stability'? Condi's a damn liar.

Next month, Iraqis are supposed to vote. And yet RUDAW reports:

Turnout for Iraq’s October 10 parliamentary election is expected to be a record low, with a recent poll predicting just 29 percent of eligible voters will cast ballots.

The random survey conducted by the Kulwatha Center polled 3,600 voters from all provinces. Twenty-nine percent of respondents said they intend to vote and 14 percent are still undecided.

The election was called ahead of schedule to meet the demand of anti-government protesters, but interest in the vote is low. Several parties from across the spectrum have announced they will not participate. Parties and voters are questioning the legitimacy of the vote in an environment where powerful militias operate outside of government control, activists and election candidates are threatened, and the electoral commission and political elites are accused of fraud.

The vote will take place with electronic voting and counting, but 74 percent of those surveyed by Kulwatha Center said they don't think new technology will reduce fraud and 64 percent said they support a manual recount of votes.

The survey was conducted between June 6 and August 14 and results were published on Sunday.

That's stability?

Condi Rice is not a trusted source, she's nothing but a War Criminal and outlets that treat her like anything else are dirty jokes.

The following sites updated:

Monday, September 13, 2021

Jimmy Dore, Laura Nyro, SCHEER POST

First up, Jimmy Dore.

Nancy Pelosi is corruption personified. She really should be run out of Congress on a rail. She has done a hideous job and she's so corrupt that she's made money by doing a hideous job.

Second, go check out Kat's "Kat's Korner: TREES OF THE AGES: LAURA NYRO LIVE IN JAPAN " if you haven't already. It's a great review and Laura's live album is really something. I recommend you stream it if you haven't already.

At INFORMATION CLEARING HOUSE, SCHEER POST has an important colum:

Once upon a time, a keystone of American exceptionalism was the claim of a moral high ground when it came to how our forces operated abroad, in war or peace, especially when it came to the use of torture, that hallmark of enemies we stamped as evil, primitive and sadistic. The ends were not supposed to justify the means, lest we be no better than our rivals and predecessors.
Yet, within months of the 9/11 attacks, frustration with the interrogation of a single alleged enemy agent led to the creation of a sprawling, global CIA-run torture program using violence, sleep deprivation and isolation on more than 100 men. While the program was eventually outlawed and deemed a massive strategic and moral failure, nobody was held legally accountable — except, in a terrible irony, a whistleblower who risked everything to expose it.
Nearly two decades after US taxpayer dollars began paying , against all international law, to waterboard, beat, freeze, shackle, and isolate humans in boxes not much bigger than their bodies, the only person who has been prosecuted is John Kiriakou, a former analyst and case officer for the CIA, who served 23 months in federal prison for telling reporters the truth — after being prosecuted by a Democratic administration which actually promoted the torturers.
In this week’s installment of the Scheer Intelligence podcast, host Robert Scheer hears from Kiriakou the inside story of how the the program started as part of a cynical power struggle between the CIA and FBI, why torture does not save lives or secure better intelligence, and how, while the program was started under Republican President George W. Bush, it was a top appointee of President Obama, himself a key architect of the torture program, who chose to prosecute him five years after his interviews with ABC which should have made him a national hero instead of a disgraced felon.
The discussion also reveals how much is still unknown about the torture program, and how much bipartisan work has been done to repress a full accounting of it.

Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Monday, September 13, 2021. Faucci, Iran, oh my.

Not a fan of RISING now that Krystal and Saager have left. We haven't noted the show since then. But an e-mail to the public account argued this video should be noted.

I streamed it. I agree it does need to be included and I've noted it here in the entry right before this one. I'm also including it in the snapshot at the top. Here's Senator Ran Paul speaking with Megyn Kelly about the issue.

There are periodicals like WSWS who have staked their reputation on where COVID came from -- insisting that discussing China is akin to claiming WMD in Iraq.

If it is true that it came from China -- I have no idea nor am I the gatekeeper that WSWS has tried to be lately -- that's an issue. And 'trust the science' has always been crap and I have called that out here. I don't worship science. Science gave us the atom bond. Science gave us Tuskegee. Science gave us the suicide of Frank Olson. Trust the science? I don't trust anything carried out in private.

And my feelings are not uncommon. I'm not unique in that. You should have built your campaigns around doctors. People trust their doctor -- those lucky enough to have one. We know our doctors. "Trust the science" was never an answer to concerns the people had.

It doesn't matter where it came from in terms of Dr. Anthony Faucci. He's compromised in terms of trust because of the changes in policy that have been present since the start of the pandemic. If you want to send a new tone, a message that your administration is different than Donald Trump's, the first thing you do is retire the troubled spokesperson.

B-b-b-but what if Faucci is not lying to Congress or what if his blunders were the blunders of the government and not his own (example: no point in wearing masks, everyone wear masks, etc)?

I don't care. Nor does America nor should they. I don't believe in the 'greater good' theory -- that leads to so many being exploited. But it's strange, isn't it, that the proponents of greater good never apply to it big money.

Faucci has become an issue. A large segment of the American public does not trust him. We are in the midst of a pandemic. We have switched presidents from Donald Trump to Joe Biden. It is perfectly natural for a succeeding president to 'shake up' the teams by putting in new people.

The administration is having to spend too much time defending Donald Trump's Faucci. He keeps the government off message. It's time for him to go -- for the good of the country, for the good of the administration and to help everyone get on the same page regarding the pandemic.

That we're having to open the Iraq snapshot with Faucci goes to how much of a problem he has become.

Thank him for his service and send him packing. When the spokesperson creates this much controversy, the spokesperson is the problem. He needs to go. The White House needs to be focused on COVID 19, not on defending Faucci.

The pandemic has not ended, not in the US, not elsewhere. AFP reports:

Iraq on Sunday received a donation of more than 100,000 AstraZeneca doses against Covid-19 from Italy via vaccine-sharing facility Covax, the UN children's agency UNICEF said.

More than four million people in Iraq, or around 10 percent of its 40 million inhabitants, have received at least one coronavirus vaccine jab, according to the health ministry.

Healthcare workers say they are battling not just the coronavirus but also widespread scepticism over vaccines, as a result of misinformation and public mistrust in the state.

Anyone who's very presence (Faucci) sews mistrust needs to go. That's in the US, that's anywhere.

In Iraq, the Kurdistan has continued to be attacked. Last Thursday, Iran attacked the Kurdistan (northern area of Iraq) with bombs and drones (called "suicide drones" by the press for some reason). Saturday, northern Iraq was attacked again. ALJAZEERA reported:

Erbil International Airport in northern Iraq has been targeted in a drone attack, Kurdish security officials said, the latest in a series of similar incidents over the past year.

The internal security service for Iraq’s autonomous Kurdish region, of which Erbil is the capital, initially said three rockets had hit near the airport.

A second statement by the Kurdish counterterrorism force said the attack had been carried out by explosive-laden drones.

While the US media ignored the bombing on Thursday and the bombings that continued to take place, Dilan Sirwan (RUDAW) noted:

At least three blasts had been heard near the airport. According to initial reports from Rudaw reporters citing security forces, the blasts occurred outside the airport perimeter.

[. . .]

This is the fourth time this year Erbil airport has come under attack. Previous attacks were blamed on Iranian-backed Iraqi militias who have demanded United States forces withdraw from Iraq. US forces are stationed at the airport.

Seth J. Frantzman (JERUSALEM POST) added, "The area has been targeted by drones frequently over the last eight months and also by rockets in the past. Pro-Iranian groups in Iraq are alleged to use drones and rockets to target US forces at Erbil airport or threaten the US consulate in Erbil. "

No one knew who's responsible for this attack at present but, yes, Iran has been bombing the Kurdistan region -- which is where the Erbil airport is -- since Thursday. RUDAW reported:

Iranian forces bombed the mountains around a village in northeast Erbil province on Saturday, terrifying local residents, according to the head of the village. Kurdish forces say it was an airstrike on the third day of attacks by Iran on Kurdish opposition groups based in the Kurdistan Region.

“Since 4am, Iran has been regularly bombarding the mountains in the vicinity of Barbzin, creating fear among the villagers. The lives of people who own livestock and farmers are in danger,” Mohammed Majid, mukhtar (chieftain) of the village, told Rudaw.

The village has been under fire since Thursday when Iran launched attacks against Kurdish opposition groups located within Kurdistan Region borders, sending warplanes, drones, and suicide drones across the border. Areas around Choman, Sidakan, and Haji Omran in northeastern Erbil province are the focus of the attacks. Barbzin is located in the Sidakan area.

Yet it wasn't until Sunday that the US media took notice and then it was only one outlet. Sunday, Kaelan Deese (WASHINGTON EXAMINER) reported:

The U.S. military struck down two Iranian drones attacking the Erbil airport in Kurdish-held Iraq on Saturday, defense officials said.

The late attack on the 20th anniversary of Sept. 11 did not come with any reports of casualties or damage, according to a spokesperson for the U.S.-led coalition in northern Iraq.

"Each attack against the GoI, KRI and the Coalition undermines the authority of Iraqi institutions, the rule of law and Iraqi National sovereignty," Operation Inherent Resolve spokesman Col. Wayne Marotto tweeted on Saturday. "These attacks endanger the lives of civilians and the partner forces from the ISF, Peshmerga and Coalition."

THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER covered it -- the story was then carried by YAHOO NEWS (which is where the link above goes). MSN reposts Deese's report here. And if you couldn't hide behind Deese, you didn't note the news because you were too busy pretending it never happened.

Why?

Multiple reasons. In terms of Iraq, the US had stage crafted Mustafa al-Kahdimi's trip to Iran. It came on Saturday and much to the US government's horror, that's when the latest attack took place. The whole point was to show Mustafa as a leader in the US government's desperate bid to get Mr. Useless some votes in the October election. Covering the bombing, Secretary of State Antony Blinkin himself told CNN was bad for ''optics'' and "off message.'' So that's how we determine what is and isn't news? Based on what the US State Dept says can be covered and what it says can't be covered?

And Mustafa's visit to Iran on the same day only made it more news worthy. CNN wonders why it's no longer the news outlet you can trust, well look no further than their taking orders on their coverage from Antony.

I'm so anti-State Dept these days -- that's what friends tell me. Friends who are at the State Dept. I don't think I'm anti-State Dept at all. But if US tax dollars are being used to pay off Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr and I know about it -- sorry about your slip up on the phone with me -- then I'm gong to note it. And it is news and other sshould be noting it. The US government paid off Moqtada to get him to come out in favor of the vote, this was last month. We're the only ones with the guts to tell you. RUDAW may deserve credit for, in recent days since we noted that pay out, tip-toeing around it. But the US media has ignored this topic. I don't mean, "How dare they not credit us!" They don't have to. The same State Dept person I was speaking to had already spoken to serveral members of the press and let slip about the pay off -- let slip? Bragged about it.

So this is known and yet they cover it up instead of covering it.

It's amazing also because if you really want to end Moqtada al-Sadr, the easiest way is to expose him as a US-client. That's what he is when he carries out the orders of the US government when they pay him off.

On Moqtada, to the blogger who keeps bothering me with his loud and angry e-mails telling me that I was wrong about the candidates aligned with Moqtada running for office . . .

In July or early August, I noted that a member of Moqtada's party had written at length to explain that despite Moqtada's public statements against the election, his candidates were running for office. And since then, this blogger has bothered the public account repeatedly.

From a report RUDAW filed yesterday:

Sadr himself has never run for elected office, but he has been involved in the political scene since 2005 and his party is a current partner in the sectarian quota system. The movement secured 30 - 40 seats in each parliamentary election between 2006 and 2014. And it had no fewer than ten ministers between 2010 and 2014.

It has 90 candidates across Iraq competing in the October vote and is confident of victory, Sadrist member Hassan Faleh said in an interview with Rudaw.

"The position of the next prime minister is the least that the Sadrist movement deserves, and we are certain that we will be the largest and strongest coalition in the next stage," Faleh said.

90 candidates. Guess what? August 27th, was too late for them to file to run. That's the day Moqtada withdrew his objection to the elections.

I'm sorry that you can't handle reality. But, again, this member of Moqtada's political group has been e-mailing this site since 2007. I've differed with some of his viewpoints but I've never had a problem with anything he said happened -- he's been proven right year after year.

In other news, Durrie Bouscaren (PRI) reports on the drought issues plaguing the region:

Muhammed Fouad, a cattle rancher, was just two years into a venture to bring affordable milk to his hometown in Iraq’s Anbar province, when — seemingly overnight — the cows started dying.

“We brought in veterinarians from Erbil, because they were OK and suddenly dying the next day,” Fouad said in a phone call, through a translator.

The initiative left him with $350,000 in damages. Fouad had to lay off his employees and sell his home to pay his debts to the project’s investors. He now works in construction, back in Erbil.

Unprecedented drought — driven by climate change and exacerbated by upstream irrigation — is wreaking havoc on some of the world’s oldest river-fed farmlands in Iraq and Syria.

A dry winter has pushed water levels on the Tigris and Euphrates to record lows, disrupting hydroelectric power facilities and concentrating pollution in the river to undrinkable levels. Aid groups estimate that 12 million people are affected, in a crisis they warn could tip the balance of the food system and livelihoods for the entire region.

Kat's "Kat's Korner: TREES OF THE AGES: LAURA NYRO LIVE IN JAPAN " went up earlier today. The following sites updated:

Thursday, September 09, 2021

Jimmy Dore, Michael Smith, Michael Ratner

First up, Jimmy Dore.

That's a video about Julian Assange and he'll come back in a second. Michael Smith has a column about the late Michael Ratner at BLACK AGENDA REPORT:

In the 35 years I knew Michael he never mentioned that he graduated first in his class at Columbia Law School. He went on to clerk for Judge Constance Baker Motley, the first African-American woman judge in the federal courts. She wrote that he was the best clerk she ever had.
Then Michael went on to work at the Center for Constitutional Rights. The fledging organization started in 1966. It had an office near 42nd Street in the porn district, a walk-up with linoleum floors and cubicles for the attorneys and staff.
This was in September 1971. Bill Kunstler asked Michael to go up to Attica prison and interview the survivors of the recent massacre. That’s how he started off at the CCR. It then was as Alex Cockburn called it “a small band of tigerish people.“ Michael was first a staff attorney, then the Director of Litigation, and finally its President.
Of the many significant cases Michael organized or handled two stand out. After 9/11 the U.S. government began using its base in Guantánamo, Cuba as an offshore prison where the government contended neither American nor international law or the laws of war applied. They were holding Muslims anonymously and forever. It was a secret prison and Michael realized that secrecy begets torture. These men had no right to learn of the charges against them or to be brought up in front of a judge or tried.
Michael got the CCR to get behind litigation. They lost in the lower court and in the Court of Appeals but finally the Supreme Court granted them a victory. Habeas corpus, the ancient law that went back to medieval England, was finally honored. Michael organized 600 lawyers from firms across the country, large and small, left and right, to support this basic right.
Michael was truth telling whistleblower Julian Assange’s American lawyer. He worked on Julian’s case to the end of his life. Julian was a young computer genius who figured out a way for whistleblowers to disclose damning information about war crimes and other government illegality anonymously. WikiLeaks then posted it. This kind of transparency is anathema to a police state. Michael thought this was the most important free speech case of our era.
What would Michael be doing if he were alive today? He would be supporting Julian Assange of course. He would be campaigning to end the cruel and illegal American economic and commercial blockade of Cuba, he would’ve been down in Virginia for the sentencing of whistleblower Daniel Hale, and he would be supporting Ben and Jerry for their refusal to have their ice cream sold in the occupied territories of Palestine.

I used to listen to LAW & DISORDER -- used to blog bout it here. Really don't anymore. That 'squeal.' They need to put it up on YOUTUBE. They could do visuals from the studio or just put up revolving press releases from CCR and The National Lawyers Guild. But it's the audio for me. I'm at C.I.'s so I might be able to get them over the airwaves (KPFA) but at home, I doubt it. I can't take the audio on so many podcasts and radio stations these days -- YOUTUBE has spoiled me.

Anyway, Julian needs to be set free. He's being held in the UK and there's no reason for them to continue to hold him. He also does not need to be brought to the US. He needs to be set free and go where ever he wants to go.

And here's a video of CCR remembering Michael Ratner.

Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Thursday, September 9, 2021. Iran bombs the Kurds, Iraq struggles to engage the electorate in next month's elections, and much more.

Chelsea Manning has been having a snit fit over Glenn Greenwald's TV appearances. Marcia's "Chelsea and Glenn " and our "Talking post" dealt with it last week and I thought that was it but I want to respond to a whiny e-mail to the public account and hopefully this will close the discussion on Chelsea Manning. She has publicly stated that she wishes she could give the $10,000 back to Glenn. She can't.

Because its not just $10000. What eh fool doesn't grasp is that standing up for her wasn't easy. The LGBTQ community wouldn't support her enough to make her an honorary martial in a gay parade -- that sounds like something Karen would say on WILL & GRACE, but it's honestly the truth. Over and over, she divided the gay community and this was when she was Bradley Manning. Being imprisoned during this, she may not be aware of it. But ask anyone who stood up for her when she was in a military jail and they'll tell you very clearly that a lot of people hated her. A lot.

Let's also discuss the lack of gratitude. Se was desperate for money and people were fundraising for her. There was no "Please don't donate if in the future you might go on FOX NEWS'' or any other qualifiers. She was desperate and people stepped up to help her. It goes beyond bad manners for her to now attack and insult the people who stood by her.

It's not surprising, but it's appalling. That's why we walked away from her the day she attacked Ann Wright. Like Glenn, Ann had been tireless in her support for Chelsea. And her thanks? To be insulted and rebuked publicly by Chelsea.

So let's get this straight, Glenn's wrong for going on FOX NEWS and Ann's wrong for what? Retiring from the State Dept in protest of the Iraq War? I mean, who is it that is pure enough for Chelsea now.

That bitch needs to get her s**t straight. We all have lives. Around the world, people who never met her gave to her -- gave time, gave money, gave support. And there's no gratitutde. We've had many, many public statemetns from Chelsea. We've never seen a thank you.

She's an ungrateful bitch and that's why she's so miserable. By her own words, after she was sentenced, her actions were wrong. She's not anti-war, she made clear when attacking Ann Wright. She's so stupid and vapid that over ten years after the Iraq War started she said publicly she still didn't know where she stood on it.

Hey, that's your first sign to shut your damn mouth and figure out what's going on in your head. You clearly haven't arrived at a point where you need to lead others.

Life is very hard for Chelsea, we're to understand, and she suffered. No, she really didn't. Barack Obama let her out early. The Iraqi people suffered. You know, the group of people she can never talk about. She can never issue a statement in support of them. She can never note their pain.

She wants to act as though she's been betrayed? She's the biggest betrayer of all. Maybe her next announcement can find her begging forgiveness from the Iraqi people? Or at least acknowledging the very real harm that they suffered and continue to suffer in a war that she's largely apathetic to.

If her foes had their way back when she was on trial, she'd be in a military prison for life. It was thanks to the work of everyone that she got released, that her story was known in the first place. The lack of gratitude? It's just one more bad feature making her a very ugly person.

Let's move on to a topic that matter, I AM SAMUEL.

That's the trailer for the new documentary. After seeing the film, Kurdish activist Zhiar Ali spoke with Queer Film Festival Utrech:

Zhiar, after the movie I Am Samuel you spoke with Tessa from Shelter City Utrecht. First of all… What did you think of the movie? Were you able to see it?

The movie was wonderful. I was really touched by Samuel’s story. I think on many levels, LGBT+ people somehow relate to his story.

I myself have had a very troublesome relationship with my family because of my sexuality. It got to a point where I was kicked out of my home and received death threats from my own brother. They ended up disowning me for the simple fact that I am gay. A lot of other LGBT+ youth share the same story, and I think that being afraid to be who you are should no longer be a thing in the 21st century.

Why were you invited to this conversation? What did you talk about?

The movie was really relatable to what is currently happening in Iraq, even though it focuses on Kenya. I was invited to the QFFU by Justice and Peace Netherlands, a project by Peace Brigades International, to help raise awareness about how the same thing is also happening in other middle eastern countries.

For example, in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, a lot of real estate brokers refuse housing to LGBT+ youth, who are forced into the streets when they are kicked out of their family homes. In fear of sharing the same fate, a lot of gay men end up marrying women against their will, only for the feeling of security and having a roof over their heads.

This kind of discrimination exists in the work field too: LGBT+ youth either get low paying jobs where they usually face harassment from co-workers, or don’t get any jobs at all.

Zhiar Ali Tweets:

I was honored to participate in the screening of #IAmSamuel by #QFFU. I had the opportunity to speak with them on my journey as an openly gay LGBT+ rights activist and the community’s struggle towards freedom and social equality in Iraq.

Here's Eli Lieb's "Boys Who Like Boys"

And one of the many things I like about Eli's song is that it throws the responsiblity where it belongs: What's your problem?

Persecution of LGBTQs -- and those suspected of being one -- continues in Iraq -- even when the press moves on to whatever hot topic everyone else is chasing at the moment.

They never really addressed the Turkish government's continual bombing of Iraq or sending in foot soldiers or putting up bases. Their laid back attitude to this breach of national sovereignty and these acts of war always meant other governments would feel emboldened. Layal Shakir (RUDAW) reports:

Iranian warplanes and at least one suicide drone attacked bases of Kurdish opposition groups located within Iraqi borders in Erbil province on Thursday morning, a top party official said. There are no reports of casualties.

“We have recovered the remains of a drone that was used in the attack on one target and we have photos,” Kawa Bahrami, top Peshmerga commander of the Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran (KDPI) which was the target of the attack, told Rudaw English.

The attacks started at 6:00 in the morning. Iranian warplanes, drones, and artillery targeted several locations in the Sidakan and Choman areas of Erbil province where several Kurdish opposition groups have small bases.

Top commanders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) this week ratcheted up their threats and called on civilians in the Kurdistan Region to avoid areas where these groups have their bases.

The actions of the Turkish government made the above possible. Boycott Turkey notes:

"There are no PKK forces in that region. These are just the fields of the villagers. They’ve hit these fields. They hit a house. There was also a place of worship in the vicinity. It got hit too. The target of this war is clearly not only the PKK."

Iraqi Kurdistan: ‘Turkey has built nearby military bases armed with artillery that now threaten the...

Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT) promote conflict resolution and represent an international violence-reduction and human rights 

Turkey keeps claiming that they're harming and killing terrorists but the people on the ground don't match the claims of the Turkish government. For example, Karwan Faidhi Dri (RUDAW) notes:

A family of three was hospitalized in northern Duhok province this week after Turkish forces bombed near their home. The family said the bomb produced a bad-smelling smoke. Authorities are investigating the cause of their health problems.

Turkey dropped six bombs in the vicinity of Hirore village in Kani Masi sub-district on Saturday. They landed nearly a kilometer from Abdullah Hassan’s house, which is located on the edge of the village.

Hassan, his wife Hadiya Mustafa, and their daughter Zhiman were hospitalized two hours after smoke from the bombs reached their house.

“A Turkish bomb brought this to me. Smoke came towards me and I said ‘go inside as this smoke stinks.’ I went into the house,” Mustafa, 66, told Rudaw.

SYRIAC PRESS Tweets:

#Turkish bombing creates fires in four villages in #Nohadra (#Duhok) in Kurdistan Region of #Iraq | #Turkey #KRI

Turkish bombing creates fires in four villages in Nohadra (Duhok) in Kurdistan Region of Iraq -...

NOHADRA, Iraq — Iraqi security sources reported that Turkish aircraft bombed areas in Nohadra (Duhok) Governorate in the Kurdistan Region 

Turkey bombs homes, hospitals and refugee camps and the world is largely silent. It's no surprise that now the government of Iran thinks it can get away with doing the same.

Next month, Iraq is set to hold elections. THE WASHINGTON POST's Louisa Loveluck Tweets:

As Iraq prepares for elections, chronic mistrust in country's political class will likely result in low voter turnout. In remarks here, @MunqithDagher
 suggests it could be around 30%.

Iraq’s October Elections: A Game Changer or More of the Same?

On Tuesday September 7, AGSIW will host a discussion on Iraq’s upcoming parliamentary elections

Here's the video of that online discussion.

Mustafa Saadoun (AL-MONITOR) reports on The October Revolution:

Emerging Iraqi political movements declared their open opposition to the political system formed after 2003, calling instead for substantial reforms.

On Sept. 4, an expanded conference was held in the Iraqi capital, Baghdad, by a group of forces that reportedly emerged from the October 2019 protests.

The groups declared their opposition to the country’s political system and signaled they would not be participating in the election.

The conference, titled “The Opposition Forces Gathering,” tackled the “disadvantages” of the Iraqi political system.

It announced the boycott of the elections, saying “[the elections] lack integrity, fairness and equal opportunities.”

It also called for commemorating the start of the protests on the first of next month with a “million-man” demonstration.

Contrary to some protest forces and movements, this conference did not raise the slogan of “overthrowing the regime” or finding an alternative. Rather, it indicated the need for reforms, which is what most large and small political parties in Iraq are calling for.

In a statement on Aug. 26, Bassem al-Sheikh, a spokesman for the opposition forces, said, “The opposition is working to reform the regime, and it may take bigger steps than those that were taken in the 2019 protests.”

According to the spokesman for the forces, the opposition gathering includes 40 movements and groups of movements and gatherings that emanated from the protests witnessed in Iraq over the past two years.

The following sites updated:

Mikey Likes It!

Tuesday, September 14, 2021

Jimmy Dore, Danny Haiphong

Monday, September 13, 2021

Jimmy Dore, Laura Nyro, SCHEER POST

Thursday, September 09, 2021

Jimmy Dore, Michael Smith, Michael Ratner

About Me

Links

Mikey Likes It!