First? You know it's Jimmy Dore.
He didn't have anything new so I'm dropping back to that one. Aren't we lucky to live in a world where Chuck Schumer defends the 'honor' of the Speaker of the House? Is Pelosi not strong enough -- in Chuck's eyes -- to defend herself? Does what he's doing qualify as some version of Mansplaining?
Now moving over to INFORMATION CLEARING HOUSE. Mika of MORNING JOE is the daughter of a War Criminal, Zbigniew Kazimierz Brzezinski. This is a rather infamous interview Daddy Zbigniew gave at the end of the 90s where he explained how the US aided the Taliban:
The Brzezinski Interview with Le Nouvel Observateur (1998)
Question: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs that the American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahiddin in Afghanistan six months before the Soviet intervention. In this period, you were the national security advisor to President Carter. You therefore played a key role in this affair. Is this correct?
Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahiddin began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan on December 24, 1979. But the reality, closely guarded until now, is completely otherwise: Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention [emphasis added throughout].
Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into the war and looked for a way to provoke it?
B: It wasn’t quite like that. We didn’t push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.
Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against secret U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, nobody believed them. However, there was an element of truth in this. You don’t regret any of this today?
B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter, essentially: “We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war.” Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war that was unsustainable for the regime, a conflict that bought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.
Q: And neither do you regret having supported Islamic fundamentalism, which has given arms and advice to future terrorists?
B: What is more important in world history? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some agitated Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?
Remember that when the US media plays shocked -- SHOCKED! -- about current events. Remember that the Taliban has been more than okay with them from time to time.
Also read Ava and C.I.'s excellent "TV: Corporate media's motives are simple " about the 'news' channels and their coverage of Afghanistan. Here's a taste:
It's an empire. Most people don't grasp it because it's not covered that way. The corporate media treats the American people like stupid children. Andrea knows all about that. It was her husband Alan Greenspan, chair of the US Federal Reserve from 1987 to 2006, who explained that the Iraq War was about oil. In his memoir THE AGE OF TURBULENCE: ADVENTURES IN A NEW WORLD, he wrote, "I'm saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil."
He was sad. Our guess is he only grew sadder as he promoted the book and immediately was pounced on for writing something so basic and truthful.
"Telling the truth can be dangerous business," Warren Beatty and Dustin Hoffman sang (in ISHTAR, Elaine May's cynical and accurate look at the US empire), "honesty and popular don't go hand in hand."
Truer words, right? Never spoken.
And truth certainly won't be spoken on corporate media. There's too much money at stake. Money for the weapons industry, money for the corporations (which does include the weapons industry), money for the US government, money for the cable and broadcast networks (corporate money), money that can be charged if they can deliver a larger number of viewers, money . . . .
Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
Tuesday, August 24, 2021. So many 'helpers' so eager to 'help' but with so little damn knowledge.
Let's start with two videos worth streaming.
Two videos to reflect on.
Diving in . . .
Peter Baker. He was a reporter once. Was. Life at THE NEW YORK TIMES has been one long embarrassment for him. Who would have thought he could bottom himself? Somehow he's found a way to sink even lower? He Tweeted this garbage:
The Taliban being a big boost to al Qaeda? ("Al Qaeda"? Guess he just loves to flaunt ignorance of other languages.) That's laughable and a conflation but that's not what I'm talking about.
I'm talking about the old whore Rita Katz.
Did his editors sign off on that promotion?
We don't note Rita who lied to the press years ago, gave a fake name, pretended to be someone else, etc.
Along with that issue, there's also the issue that Rita feeds into Islamaphobia.
It's disappointing, very disappointing. But Peter's used to disappointing. After all, he's woken up next to Susan Glasser for over two decades now -- Susan Glasser, the only one who, by contrast, could make Senator Amy Klobuchar look gamine.
Speaking of marriages, he wanted to be president and, anticipating an easy path to the 2020 nomination, he married to cover what was a non-existent sex drive. Having failed to get the 2020 presidential nomination so spectacularly that he should never try again, will he divorce her? Guess who, don't sue. (Yes, he is jabbering away in the news lately.)
Let's move over to ALL THINGS CONSIDERED where Mary Louise Kelly struggled with journalism yesterday. Context. Disclosure. Two key fundamentals of journalism. Her guest? Bilal Wahab of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy. She failed to provide context or disclosures for either her guest or his organization. When you're a Middle East 'think tank,' your audience needs to know what that means. So, for example, you could say, "Whose work has been brought to you by the generosity of AIPAC." That would be one way.
We told you forever ago that Iraq was the prize and that the great fear was that the realities in Kabul would make a US withdrawal in Iraq more likely. (The realities? 20 years down the drain -- no progress, progress can't be imposed. Nor can an authoritarian system -- the US military -- bring about democracy.) So you'd see a lot of lying.
Bilal was first out of the gate with an article entitled "After Afghanistan, Iraqis Fear They Could Be Next" and we'll assume that ALL THINGS CONSIDERED is familiar with that report from last week since they used the same title for yesterday's segment.
It's cute the way Bilal claimed briefly to have spoken to Iraqis in the interview since he failed to do so last week in his long article. But he insisted he had, faceless, unknown people:
That is the perception, and that is the fear of many of the Iraqi leaders and family members and journalists and civil society activists that I spoke to.
Someone forgot to program Mary Louise yesterday which is why she didn't immediately ask the obvious to everyone follow up: If this is the fear of many, as you put it, how do you account for the fact that the majority of Iraqis want US troops out of their country and that this has been a consistent opinion for years and years?
No, Mary Louise didn't want to do journalism. She's tired, you understand. She gets paid a lot of money, yes. But it was a Monday. And she was having a bad hair day and her eyes looked puffy and she just wanted to get home, kick off her shoes and curl up with her cat.
People don't understand, Mary Louise feels, just how hard her life is and they really can't understand how hard her life is, especially now that the CATHY comic strip has been discontinued. For years and years, that comic strip provided people with a semblance of insight into the life of Mary Louise Kelly.
Insight into Cyrus S? I'm not traipsing through that soggy mind, you have at it if you want. But Cyrus seems determined to prove -- as he advocates for the destruction of Iran -- that he doesn't understand much at all:
Is that what ISIS did?
Goodness, speak to Iraqi Christians and the Yazidis and others and you'd get a different picture. Maybe next time Cyrus wants to draw analogies, he'll do so with something that he truly understands?
In the meantime, could someone advise him that ISIS also attacked Sunnis? If he needs remedial help -- and he clearly does -- refer him to this 2014 report from Martin Chulov (GUARDIAN):
Over at THE SPECTATOR, Andrew Bacevich offers:
Like the Vietnam war, the Afghanistan war stands as a judgment of the American national security elite and of the military profession. The essence of that judgment is this: given an accommodating adversary — Iraq’s Saddam Hussein is a perfect example — the armed forces of the United States are capable of delivering an impressive performance. If the punching bag stands still, we can deliver a helluva wallop.
But against an adversary that refuses to cooperate, that demonstrates even a modicum of resilience, US forces fare less well. As wars drag on, US military effectiveness diminishes, duration exposing our inability to adjust — put simply, to learn.
An enemy that refuses to fight on our terms baffles us. Yes, the bombs continue to fall and the barrels of shit keep burning, but to little avail. Our side appears to adapt but actually stands still. Eventually, advantage accrues to the enemy.
At that point, defeat is just a matter of time. This is what happened in Vietnam and what is happening again in Afghanistan today. But don’t expect the leaders of the Big Green Machine to learn any more from this failure than they did from the one we suffered a half-century ago.
Hey, Mary Louise, is there a reason ALL THINGS CONSIDERED didn't invite Bacevich on? A colonel in the US Army, a historian, so much experience. What was the one thing he was lacking? Oh, right, didn't receive funds from AIPAC. Gotcha.
Over at COUNTERPUNCH, Patty Cock Burn is pissing his panties again. What will happen to Afghanistan???? What have "the US and its western allies" done????? Oh, Patty panty pad, what can we say, except hold your own accountable and get back to the UK pronto. We don't need any more of your trashy family in this country. Not a one. Go back to the UK and start writing about what the UK did regarding Afghanistan. You're truly pathetic.
Let's wind down with this from RUDAW:
A nasty smell is spreading through eastern Kirkuk and residents are
worried about the effect on their health from nearby industries,
including oil facilities.
“We don’t smell the nasty scent all the time, but sometimes we do. It smells like burnt crude. Our air conditioners pull the smell into our houses. We breathe it in while we sleep,” said Mohammed Najjar who lives in Kirkuk’s Panja Ali neighbourhood.
An oil refinery is located less than a kilometer away.
“Just try to stay here for one night, especially in the summertime. We don’t even dare to turn on our air conditioners, despite the nuisance of mosquitoes,” said Mohammed Hadi, a neighbor.
The environment directorate in the oil-rich province said they have carried out inspections and industries in the area are meeting regulations.
“We checked the area. According to our rules and regulations, however, the existence of the factories in the area is allowed,” said Mohammed Fatih, head of the Kirkuk environment department.
But the pollution has doctors worried.
“We live in an oil-rich city. The gasses that exist in the air of our city carry most of the heavy [pollutants], resulting in breathing problems and poisoning and asthma, as well as blood and lung cancers,” said microbiologist Dr Pakiza Fuad.
The following sites updated: