Tuesday, June 16, 2020

Isaiah, Jimmy Dore and Cynthia Chung

 From Sunday, Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Joe The Racist"

joebi

Also going up Sunday?  Kat's "Kat's Korner: Hamilton Leithauser and Ronnie Spector and that album we never actually got to hear" which reviews two great albums.  I went to AMAZON and got them both. 


Now here's Jimmy Dore with a hilarious sketch about how useless Chuck Schumer is.



INFORMATION CLEARING HOUSE has an interesting paper by Cynthia Chung:

The Trilateral Commission was founded in the wake of Watergate and oil crisis of 1973. It was formed under the pretence of addressing the “crisis of democracy” and calling for a reshaping of political systems in order to form a more “stable” international order and “cooperative” relations among regions.
Its formation would be organised by Britain’s hand in America, the Council on Foreign Relations, (aka: the offspring of the Royal Institute for International Affairs, the leading think tank for the British Crown).
Project Democracy would originate out of a Trilateral Commission meeting on May 31st, 1975 in Kyoto Japan, where the Trilateral Commission’s “Task Force on the Governability of Democracies” findings were delivered. The project was overseen by Trilateral Commission Director Zbigniew Brzezinski and its members James Schlesinger (former CIA Director) and Samuel P. Huntington.
It would mark the beginning of the end, introducing the policy, or more aptly “ideology”, for the need to instigate a “controlled disintegration of society.”
The Trilateral Commission is a non-governmental body, its members include elected and non-elected officials scattered throughout the world, ironically coming together to discuss how to address the “crisis of democracy” in the most undemocratic process possible. It is an organisation meant to uphold the “interests” of its members, regardless of who the people voted in.
You see, by the 1970s democracy was obviously broken, and someone had to put things back in order, right?
This elite grouping of people decided that this approach would be the best for all democracies and just like that, it was brought into official policy across the western hemisphere.
On Nov 9th, 1978, Trilateral Commission member Paul Volcker (Federal Reserve Chairman from 1979-1987) would affirm at a lecture delivered at Warwick University in England: “A controlled disintegration in the world economy is a legitimate object for the 1980s.” This is also the ideology that has shaped Milton Friedman’s “Shock Therapy”.
By the time of Jimmy Carter’s Administration, the majority of the government was being run by members of the Trilateral Commission. But who runs the Trilateral Commission?
Well, keeping in mind that this whole operation is run as an “open conspiracy”, in May 1981, Henry Kissinger who replaced Brzezinski as the head of the Trilateral Commission gave a speech at Chatham House describing his term as Secretary of State:
“[The British] became a participant in internal American deliberations, to a degree probably never practiced between sovereign nations…In my White House incarnation then, I kept the British Foreign Office better informed and more closely engaged than I did the American Department…It was symptomatic.” (emphasis added).
In his speech, Kissinger outlined the conflicting ideologies between Churchill and Roosevelt, and concluded with his support for the British worldview as the more superior of the two.

Looks like the Churchill loyalists have won.


Chung's tackling the CIA and she has some interesting takes on it so make a point to read it.


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


Monday, June 15, 2020.  Turkey continues to carry out terrorist bombings on Iraq, Mustafa finds an apparent patsy, Julian Assange is back in the news and much more.



Iraq is the land of unemployment and now it's only more so.


The protests that began September 30th had to do with corruption and the lack of dependable public services -- electricity, potable water etc.  It also had to do with the lack of jobs.

Now 10,000 oil workers have been laid off which just makes things worse.




That's Iraq's new prime minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi on his recent trip to Mosul talking about jobs and other issues.  


A new International Organization for Migration (IOM) report sheds light on the negative impact the coronavirus has had on the Iraqi economy. The intergovernmental organization said that restrictions aimed at curbing the spread of the pandemic will continue to hurt small and medium-sized businesses in Iraq.
“The already dire situation is likely to deteriorate and become even more challenging for job and economic opportunity creation,” the IOM said in the report. “Livelihoods have been widely disrupted across the country, driven primarily by movement restrictions."
The IOM is a “related organization” of the United Nations and works closely with the international body on migration and displacement issues. Its Enterprise Development Fund supports job creation and economic growth in Iraq. The country hosts more than a million internally displaced persons and refugees. The fund was responsible for the report.
Iraq went into a lockdown in March when its number of confirmed coronavirus cases was still relatively low. Only essential businesses like supermarkets and pharmacies remained open. The country then eased restrictions in late April. Late last month, Iraq returned to a full lockdown after a surge in cases.
The report based its findings on data collected in April from small and medium-sized enterprises in the manufacturing, food, retail, service and other sectors. Small and medium-sized enterprises are independent firms that do not rely on subsidies and have a few hundred employees or less.


Iraq went into a lockdown in March . . . and that lockdown continues as this AP video report from last week makes clear.



There is so much to protest in Iraq.  There's Operation Claw-Eagle, for example.  That's the latest name the Turkish government has given to their terrorism of Iraq.  For years, going back to when Bully Boy Bush occupied the White House, the government of Turkey has been bombing northern Iraq.  The Turkish government gave the US government a location near the border to build a CIA outpost that allows them to monitor northern Iraq.  The US government does not trust the Kurds -- that's why they screw them over repeatedly.  The CIA deal was during the White House occupation of Bully Boy Bush.

Barack Obama and Donald Trump have both been president since.  Neither has bothered to object to the terrorism the Turkish government continues to carry out.  It is a violation of Iraqi sovereignty.  Despite the claims that the strikes are 'precision' and only take out 'terrorists,' many civilians and animals (livestock) have been killed in these strikes.

For example?

Dropping back to May 30th:

The government of Turkey continues to terrorize the Iraqi people.  For years now, they have been ignoring Iraq's sovereignty and bombing the country of Iraq.  These bombings have resulted in many dead.  Seth J. Frantzman (JERUSALEM POST) reports:

Turkish airstrikes killed civilians on Saturday, days after another set of airstrikes killed members of a far-left Iranian dissident group in the mountains of the Kurdistan region of northern Iraq. The attacks appear to represent an increase in Ankara’s use of drones and airstrikes against Kurdish groups. Ankara claims these groups, linked to the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) are “terrorists” but presents no evidence that any of them are involved in “terror.”


The PKK is one of many Kurdish groups which supports and fights for a Kurdish homeland. Aaron Hess (International Socialist Review) described them in 2008, "The PKK emerged in 1984 as a major force in response to Turkey's oppression of its Kurdish population. Since the late 1970s, Turkey has waged a relentless war of attrition that has killed tens of thousands of Kurds and driven millions from their homes. The Kurds are the world's largest stateless population -- whose main population concentration straddles Turkey, Iraq, Iran, and Syria -- and have been the victims of imperialist wars and manipulation since the colonial period. While Turkey has granted limited rights to the Kurds in recent years in order to accommodate the European Union, which it seeks to join, even these are now at risk." The Kurdistan Regional Government in Iraq has been a concern to Turkey because they fear that if it ever moves from semi-autonomous to fully independent -- such as if Iraq was to break up into three regions -- then that would encourage the Kurdish population in Turkey. For that reason, Turkey is overly interested in all things Iraq. So much so that they signed an agreement with the US government in 2007 to share intelligence which the Turkish military has been using when launching bomb raids. However, this has not prevented the loss of civilian life in northern Iraq. Aaron Hess noted, "The Turkish establishment sees growing Kurdish power in Iraq as one step down the road to a mass separatist movement of Kurds within Turkey itself, fighting to unify a greater Kurdistan. In late October 2007, Turkey's daily newspaper Hurriyet accused the prime minister of the KRG, Massoud Barzani, of turning the 'Kurdish dream' into a 'Turkish nightmare'."

Frantzman notes, "Iraq has complained to Ankara about the airstrikes but Ankara acts with impunity and international organizations that usually monitor human rights refuse to critique Turkey or visit the areas of the drone strikes." 


This morning, Zhelwan Z. Wali (RUDAW) notes the Turkish government is yet again claiming that they targeted terrorists, however . . . :

 PKK-linked Firat News Agency claimed the strikes targeted a refugee camp and a hospital. 
“ The Turkish state has launched a wave of air raids in southern Kurdistan, northern Iraq tonight. The strikes targeted several positions in the regions of Qandil, Maxmur (Makhmour) and Shengal (Sinjar), including a refugee camp and hospital,” it said.
Makhmour camp hosts more than 12,000 Kurdish refugees who have fled persecution by the Turkish state, largely in the 1990s. The camp has a governing council and an armed force, the Makhmour Protection Units, established in 2014 when Islamic State (ISIS) militants attacked the area. The units are believed to have ties to the PKK.
Bedran Pirani, co-mayor of the Makhmour Camp Municipality, told Rudaw that strikes near the camp left several children unconscious, who were then rushed to hospital.

"The airstrikes lasted an hour from 12:10am to 01:10am. They were a large number of unmanned drones and jets hovering overhead," Pirani said.


 The Iraqi Joint Operations Command (JOC) condemned on Monday the Turkish airstrikes against suspected positions of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) in several areas in northern Iraq.
A JOC statement said that 18 Turkish warplanes carried out a series of airstrikes late on Sunday night on refugee camps in Sinjar, some 100 km west of Nineveh's provincial capital Mosul, and Makhmour, about 60 km southeast of Mosul.
The Turkish warplanes also flew over the areas of al-Kuwayr, Erbil and al-Shirqat, with 193 km deep inside the Iraqi territories, the statement said.
The JOC described the Turkish airstrikes as "provocative act and is inconsistent with the good-neighborliness in accordance with international conventions and is a flagrant violation of Iraqi sovereignty."
Iraq called on Turkey to stop the violation of Iraqi territories and said that it is "fully prepared for cooperation between the two countries to control the security situations on the common borders," the statement added. 
When will other government join the Iraqi one in condemning the terrorism that Turkey continues to carry out?  When will Turkey be forced to respect Iraq's sovereignty?

When will trash outlets like BLOOMBERG stop referring to these acts of terrorism as "a show of military might"? 



Turkey bombs PKK in northern Iraq as Kurds attempt pro-democracy protests
Pushpin
The attack began hours before public protests in Turkey led by the country’s main pro-Kurdish political party, which were due to start on Monday.

How many have to be wounded or killed before the people of the world can find the courage to condemn these terrorist attacks carried out by the Turkish government?



BBC News (link has text and video) reports on last night's bombing, "An air strike by Turkish warplanes near a Kurdish village close to the border with Iraq has left 35 people dead, officials say. One report said that smugglers had been spotted by unmanned drones and were mistaken for Kurdish rebels." Reuters quotes Uludere Mayor Fehmi Yaman explaining that they have recovered 30 corpses, all smugglers, not PKK, and he declares, "This kind of incident is unacceptable. They were hit from the air." AFP adds, "Local security sources said the dead were among a group smuggling gas and sugar into Turkey from northern Iraq and may have been mistaken for Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) rebels."
  

How long?  How high must the death toll reach before the global community calls for these acts of terrorism to end?


May 7th, Mustafa became the new prime minister of Iraq.  In the lead up to this, he promised (in April) that his government would address the murder of protesters.  And now?  AL-MONITOR notes the government is trumpeting one arrest -- their only arrest so far:

Defense Ministry Spokesman Yehia Rasool confirmed to Al-Monitor that the suspect, identified only as Al Jurithi, is suspected of killing a protester in Baghdad and threatening others. He also confessed to rioting, burning property and striking security forces, and he was arrested under the direction of new Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi.
Sweeping anti-government demonstrations broke out in October 2019, aimed at dismantling the political establishment and bringing attention to government corruption, poor public services and high unemployment. Rights groups accused security forces of using violent tactics to suppress the unrest, including firing live ammunition at peaceful protesters.   
In documenting the deaths of 490 protesters, the United Nations wrote in a report last month that the “absence of accountability for these acts continues to contribute to the pervasive environment of impunity.” The UN also reported 33 activists were assassinated and at least 99 people had been abducted. 
The widespread protests prompted the resignation of Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi in late November 2019. Some five months later, Kadhimi was sworn in as his successor, bringing an end to the political deadlock. 
 
Security forces are responsible for the killings and for injuring protesters and for disappearing protesters.  It appears the government has either found a patsy or the lone killer that was not connected to the security forces.  All the empty talk talk talk from Mustafa.  One arrest.  That's all he can muster. 



A spike in violations of the right to free expression during widespread protests at the end of the former government’s term in office and during the Covid-19 pandemic underscores the need for Iraq’s new government to reform its laws, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. Iraqi authorities, including in the Kurdistan Region, have routinely used vaguely worded laws to bring criminal charges against people who express opinions they dislike.

The 42-page report, “‘We Might Call You in at Any Time’: Free Speech Under Threat in Iraq,” examines a range of defamation and incitement legal provisions that authorities have used against critics, including journalists, activists, and other dissenting voices. The Iraqi and Kurdistan Region parliaments should replace criminal defamation articles in the Penal Code with civil defamation penalties and amend laws that limit free speech to comply with international law. Given Mustafa Al-Kadhimi’s new role as prime minister and his stated willingness since taking office to address some of Iraq’s most serious human rights challenges, the government has a unique opportunity to tackle over a decade of free speech restrictions.

“The Covid-19 pandemic highlights the vital and sometimes lifesaving role of a robust and inquisitive press and social media,” said Belkis Wille, senior crisis and conflict researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Iraqi leaders should commit to fostering respect for international law as a way to better inform and protect their people.”

Human Rights Watch examined 33 cases involving the prosecution of 21 activists and 14 journalists who suffered attacks, 13 cases involving support of protest activities over social media, and 7 involving coverage of government corruption in mainstream or social media. None of the cases from Baghdad-controlled areas occurred since the current prime minister and government took office.

Iraq’s Penal Code, which dates back to 1969, includes numerous defamation “crimes” such as “insult[ing] the Arab community” or any government official, regardless of whether the statement is true. Although few people serve prison time for defamation, the criminal process itself acts as a punishment. Reporting on abuses by the security forces or about corruption is especially risky.

Haitham Sulaiman, 48, a protest movement organizer, in an April 6, 2020 Facebook post called on the Muthana governor to investigate allegations of health department corruption linked to the purchase of Covid-19 masks. He was arrested on April 10, beaten, and forced to sign a document stating that the United States had bankrolled the protest movement.

In 2014, the Communications and Media Commission, “an independent institution” linked to the parliament, issued “mandatory” guidelines to regulate media “during the war on terror,” which were updated and renamed the “Media Broadcasting Rules” in 2019 and are still in place today. Human Rights Watch was unable to determine any legal basis for the guidelines or the agency’s actions.

Following the start of widespread protests in October 2019, the authorities ordered the closure of 8 television and 4 radio stations for 3 months for allegedly violating media licensing rules, based on the guidelines, and issued warnings to 5 other broadcasters over their coverage. Unidentified armed men raided and damaged the offices of at least three news outlets in October. In early April 2020, the commission suspended Reuters’ license and fined it 25 million IQD (US$21,000) for an April 2 article alleging that the number of confirmed Covid-19 cases in the country was much higher than official statistics indicated. The authorities lifted the suspension on April 19.

Kurdistan regional authorities are using the region’s penal code, Press Law, and Law to Prevent the Misuse of Telecommunications Equipment to curb free speech. A 40-year-old man was arrested after he live-streamed a demonstration on the morning of January 26, 2019 and charged with Penal Code and Telecommunications Law violations. A judge dismissed the charges and authorities released him after 29 days in custody.

Interviewees who had been criminally charged felt that the prosecutions were to intimidate critics. Eleven said they did not hear from the prosecution for extended periods, leaving them unsure of whether the cases were still active. One said “When the Asayish [Kurdish security forces] released me after I paid a fee on March 10, 2019, they told me, ‘We might call you in at any time.’”

Eleven said security forces had ill-treated them at the time of arrest or in detention. All 14 journalists and 4 activists interviewed said they regularly received threats, usually from anonymous sources by phone or social media, and sometimes from security forces or government officials. Amanj Bakir, a journalist, said that threats he received over two articles about the Kurdistan region in March have taken a toll on him.

On April 29, Human Rights Watch wrote to the Iraqi government and Kurdistan Regional Government soliciting information regarding the cases documented in the report. While the authorities in Baghdad did not respond by the time of publication, the Kurdistan Regional Government responded on May 20 in a “preliminary” manner, stating that the KRG “is committed to the preservation of journalists’ rights” and would follow up with more information.

International human rights law allows for restrictions on freedom of expression to protect the reputations of others, but such restrictions must be necessary and narrowly drawn. Human Rights Watch believes that criminal penalties are always a disproportionate punishment for alleged reputational harm.

Iraqi federal and Kurdistan regional authorities should direct security forces to end intimidation, harassment, arrest, and assault of journalists and others for exercising their right to free expression and investigate credible allegations of threats or attacks by government employees or others against critics.

“Given the mistrust between civil society and the media on the one hand and authorities on the other, Iraq’s new government and Kurdish authorities should reform laws to bring them in line with international standards,” Wille said. “Getting rid of vague provisions on insults and incitement would show that the authorities are committed to protecting free speech.”

Let's wind down by noting the latest on journalist and political prisoner Julian Assange.  Paul Daley (GUARDIAN) reports:


US prosecutors have failed to include one of WikiLeaks’ most shocking video revelations in the indictment against Julian Assange, a move that has brought accusations the US doesn’t want its “war crimes” exposed in public.
Assange, an Australian citizen, is remanded and in ill health in London’s Belmarsh prison while the US tries to extradite him to face 18 charges – 17 under its Espionage Act – for conspiracy to receive, obtain and disclose classified information.
The charges relate largely to the US conduct of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, including Assange’s publication of the US rules of engagement in Iraq.

The prosecution case alleges Assange risked American lives by releasing hundreds of thousands of US intelligence documents.


Dean Yates was the head of REUTERS' Baghdad beureau when the July 12, 2007 attack took place killing REUTERS journalists Namir Noor-Eldeen and Saeed Chmagh -- the attack carried out by the US government.  Daley quotes Yates stating, "What he did was 100% an act of truth-telling, exposing to the world what the war in Iraq looks like and how the US military lied … The US knows how embarrassing Collateral Murder is, how shameful it is to the military – they know that there’s potential war crimes on that tape."

Julian Assange remains persecuted by the US government.  His crime is that of journalism.  THE GUARDIAN's been hostile to Julian for some time but possibly their current press indicates that they grasp what is at stake with the US efforts to criminalize journalism?

In another article, Daley focuses on Dean Yates:

Yates, shaking his head, says: “The US assertions that Namir and Saeed were killed during a firefight was all lies. But I didn’t know that at the time, so I updated my story to take in the US military’s statement.”
[. . .]
Reuters staff had by now spoken to 14 witnesses in al-Amin. All of them said they were unaware of any firefight that might have prompted the helicopter strike.
 Yates recalls: “The words that kept forming on my lips were ‘cold-blooded murder’.”
The Iraqi staff at Reuters, meanwhile, were concerned that the bureau was too soft on the US military. “But I could only write what we could establish and the US military was insisting Saeed and Namir were killed during a clash,” Yates says.
The meeting that put him on a path of destructive, paralysing – eventually suicidal – guilt and blame “that basically f**ked me up for the next 10 years”, leaving him in a state of “moral injury”, happened at US military headquarters in the Green Zone on 25 July.










Sunday, June 14, 2020

Idiot of the week

Anybody remember NSYNC? 



I feel like Joe Biden remembers them.  I feel like when I'm trying to think who to pick for Idiot of the Week, Joe's singing into his hairbrush, "It's Gonna Be Me."

Well he's right.  Two weeks in a row he gets Idiot of the Week.

George Floyd is not MLK.  There's no reason to compare the two of them unless, like Joe, you're a racist.  See Betty's "Racist Joe Biden needs to apologize and then he needs to stop offering his take on Black -- his racist take" and wonder why everyone's not calling racist Joe out?  They should be.

Racist Joe needs to go.

Let's talk MARVEL AGENTS OF SHIELD.

This week's episode was a stronger one -- that's two in a row that have been worth watching.

This episode they were in the fifties.  Jemma posed as Betty Carter of AGENT CARTER fame but what's his name (Victor on DOLLHOUSE) shows up and knows she's not Betty so he arrests her and Colson.  Mae and Yo-Yo went after the bad woman.  Mac was sidelined again.  I did like it when he told both Daisy and Deke that he was the one calling the shots.  He needs to tell that to Colson.

Deke offered to Daisy that he's trying to be better than the person he was when they first met.  She tried to get him to kill a kid who grows up to be the head of Hydra and episode back and he wouldn't.  So he was explaining why this episode. 

Here's Jimmy Dore.



Joe's an idiot.  We need someone better for the nominee. 

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

 
Friday, June 12, 2020.   The talks between the US and Iraq yield only vague pledges, Joe Biden -- of all people -- wants to talk about stealing elections -- except as it relates to him.


Starting in Iraq, REUTERS notes, "Iraq and the United States have affirmed their commitment to the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq without giving a timeline, state news agency INA said on Friday, citing Iraq’s Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi."  Is anyone leaving Iraq?  There's nothing that says anyone's leaving.  Equally true, Mustafa's original statement to the press was that all US troops were leaving Iraq.  He had to walk that one back.  Louisa Loveluck (WASHINGTON POST via STARS AND STRIPES) notes, "Seventeen years after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, the talks, which began Thursday, focus on a wide range of issues. Thorniest among them is the question of foreign troop presence: Iraq's parliament has urged the U.S.-led coalition to leave, and Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi is under pressure to satisfy that demand without risking security gaps that Islamic State fighters might exploit."  Of the alleged 5200 US troops on Iraqi soil, how many would be leaving?  Probably none.

It's hard to believe that if there was any real advance on this issue one side -- or both -- wouldn't be trumpeting it.  Especially considering how quickly Mustafa ran to the press with his 'all US troops are leaving' claim.  And "alleged"?  There is no verification and the US government tosses out the unconfirmed number of 5,200.  The 5200 would not include a number of additional service members that were present for surveillance operations, special-ops, etc.

Not only has no number been given for any troops being withdrawn -- actual number, percentage, nothing, Loveluck quotes US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs stating, "There was no discussion of a timeline."


The Trump administration is worried that Iraq is falling short on human rights obligations to detainees and is hampered by widespread corruption, according to a State Department assessment obtained by Foreign Policy, as the United States kicks off talks on Thursday that will help determine the future of the U.S. presence in the war-torn country.
As thousands of Islamic State prisoners sit in lengthy and sometimes undocumented pretrial detention that may pose constitutional questions, the Iraqi legal system is bogged down by an insufficient number of judges, overflowing facilities, and the use of bribes, a snapshot of Iraq’s corruption challenges that kicked off widespread anti-government protests last year.

Falling short on human rights obligations and widespread corruption?  

Yes, that is why the ongoing protests, which started September 30th, have been taking place in Iraq.

Let's turn to Killer Joe Biden.  Killer Joe wanted the Iraq War.  All the Purell in the world won't remove the blood from his hands.




Dithering Joe the killer.


Where do we go from here?

Let's stay with the killing for a moment.







 

FRANC ANALYSIS.  We noted that in yesterday's snapshot.  There are people who are supposedly independent that are now trying to tell you who to vote for.  Trying to tell grown ass people who to vote for.  Because we're all too stupid, right?

It's the come-to-Jesus tale.  It's supposed to motivate you to do the same.  We called it out in 2008 -- the laughable liars the DEMOCRACY NOW! brought on.  Especially, the liar who is also a lousy daughter because she claimed her mother was ill, implying the end any moment, but she goes to Denver for a convention she's not paid to be at, not obligated to be at?  Remember that liar?  She was a Hillary supporter who had gone over to Barack and we were supposed to relate to her and follow her lead.  Of course, she was a f**king liar, a piece of trash who thought she could con the American people.  Liars always trip up.  She was a firm supporter of Hillary -- when?  If you listened to her remarks after they moved on to another topic, you quickly grasped that she started supporting Barack in February of 2007 for the 2008 election.  Exactly when was she ever a Hillary supporter?

Lying whores.  We don't need them.  

So Krystal Ball and Kyle Kulinski want to trick you.

They think it's important because of the violence in the US.

What about the violence the US does around the world?

Kathy Kelly stumbles around useless (intentionally -- her career would argue "Yes!") at COUNTERPUNCH offering:

And if we’re to learn how to live together without killing one another, how can we dismantle and repurpose the vast killing machine that protects our unfair white privilege?


White privilege exists.  But let's stop pretending that the US government isn't at war with the Muslim world.  Let's stop pretending that it was an accident or an 'overreach' to round up and jail Muslims after 9/11.  These were planned actions.  And it is the height of xenophobia to look the other way regarding Joe Biden's actions in the Arab world.   Franco notes this Tweet by Richard Medhurst:

Kyle and Krystal are saying they might vote for Biden because Trump crossed the line when he deployed the military. Which essentially means “we’re fine with our imperialist military on OTHER PEOPLE’S streets just not ours”. Your american exceptionalism and privilege is showing.


The Arab world has suffered because of people like Joe Biden.  This notion that he's an answer and you need to herd people over to him?

He's a bloody killer who never did a thing in his life except hide away in Congress.

When he was draft age, he didn't serve.  Though he played football and baseball in high school and college, when it came to go to the draft board what did Joe claim?  Asthma.  His asthma wouldn't let him serve.  What a load of, yes, malarkey.


He has no shame.




I don't know what to say here.  On the one hand, I try to grasp that the American people are poorly served by their media but it's 10 years since Iraq held elections in March of 2010.  Yes, the media did a lousy job covering it.  But at some point, grow the hell up and take responsibility for yourself.

If you aren't put off by Joe's words in the clip above then you either don't care about other people or you're not just trying to inform yourself.

Karma.  That's the word that would be applied should Donald do what Joe's floating.

It would be karma for Joe.

In 2010, Iraq held elections.  

The Iraqi people voted out thug Nouri al-Maliki.

But Nouri got a second term.

How did that happen?

If you don't know by now that's on you.  If you're not watching the coverage of Joe's remarks and not being appalled, that's on you.

No one else at this late date.

Your government does things in public?  It's your job to know about it.  Or else just shut up about who to vote for.  Truly, no one needs your ignorance.

In 2010, the world knew Nouri was a thug.  Sunnis were targeted and being disappeared.  Secret prisons and torture centers -- the kind Saddam Hussein ran and we were supposedly outraged by -- were back in Iraq.

But that didn't matter to the US government.

They wanted Nouri to get a second term.

So Joe sold The Erbil Agreement -- a legal contract signed off on by all the leaders of Iraq.  It ignored the results, overturned them, and gave Nouri a second term.

How did they get others to sign off?

By lying.  They said the contract was legally binding and had the full backing of the US -- and written into the contract were certain things that the various blocs wanted.  

They lied.

The contract was used to give Nouri the second term and then ignored.

And the US government did nothing.  Despite their earlier lies.

That's bad but let's zoom in on the overturning.

'Liberation' and 'democracy' were the terms people in the US government -- Democrats and Republicans -- used to describe the Iraq War.

But when there was time to show what democracy was and how elections work, the US government -- led by Joe Biden (he was Barack's lead on Iraq) -- shredded any hopes of democracy.  The people risked everything to vote -- including their lives.  And they voted real change, voting Nouri out.

And Joe Biden backed Nouri.  Joe didn't back democracy.  Nouri was a thug and that didn't matter to Joe.  Nothing did except keeping the thug in power.

The message this sent to the Iraqi people?  Election turnout has gotten lower as a result.  They are in the streets because the ballot box has failed them repeatedly.

Joe wants to talk about stolen elections?  Then the press needs to ask him to justify giving Nouri a second term after the Iraqi people said no.

et's again note the August 2015 broadcast of Kevin Sylvester's THIS SUNDAY EDITION (CBC) which featured Emma Sky discussing Iraq:



Emma Sky: And that [2010] national election was a very closely contested election. Iraqis of all persuasions and stripes went out to participate in that election.  They'd become convinced that politics was the way forward, that they could achieve what they wanted through politics and not violence.  To people who had previously been insurgents, people who'd not voted before turned out in large numbers to vote in that election.  And during that election, the incumbent, Nouri al-Maliki, lost by 2 seats.  And the bloc that won was a bloc called Iraqiya led by Ayad Allawi which campaigned on "NO" to sectarianism, really trying to move beyond this horrible sectarian fighting -- an Iraq for Iraqis and no sectarianism.  And that message had attracted most of the Sunnis, a lot of the secular Shia and minority groups as well.

Kevin Sylvester:  People who felt they'd been shut out during Maliki's regime basically -- or his governance.

Emma Sky:  Yes, people that felt, you know, that they wanted to be part of the country called Iraq not -- they wanted to be this, they wanted Iraq to be the focus and not sect or ethnicity to be the focus.  And Maliki refused to accept the results.  He just said, "It is not right."  He wanted a recount.  He tried to use de-Ba'athification to eliminate or disqualify some Iraqiya members and take away the votes that they had gained.  And he just sat in his seat and sat in his seat.  And it became a real sort of internal disagreement within the US system about what to do?  So my boss, Gen [Ray] Odierno, was adamant that the US should uphold the Constitutional process, protect the political process, allow the winning group to have first go at trying to form the government for thirty days.  And he didn't think Allawi would be able to do it with himself as prime minister but he thought if you start the process they could reach agreement between Allawi and Maliki or a third candidate might appear who could become the new prime minister. So that was his recommendation.

Kevin Sylvester:   Well he even calls [US Vice President Joe] Biden -- Biden seems to suggest that that's what the administration will support and then they do a complete switch around.  What happened?

Emma Sky:  Well the ambassador at the time was a guy who hadn't got experience of the region, he was new in Iraq and didn't really want to be there.  He didn't have the same feel for the country as the general who'd been there for year after year after year.

Kevin Sylvester:  Chris Hill.

Emma Sky:  And he had, for him, you know 'Iraq needs a Shia strongman. Maliki's our man.  Maliki's our friend.  Maliki will give us a follow on security agreement to keep troops in country.'  So it looks as if Biden's listening to these two recommendations and that at the end Biden went along with the Ambassador's recommendation.  And the problem -- well a number of problems -- but nobody wanted Maliki.  People were very fearful that he was becoming a dictator, that he was sectarian, that he was divisive. And the elites had tried to remove him through votes of no confidence in previous years and the US had stepped in each time and said, "Look, this is not the time, do it through a national election."  So they had a national election, Maliki lost and they were really convinced they'd be able to get rid of him.  So when Biden made clear that the US position was to keep Maliki as prime minister, this caused a huge upset with Iraqiya.  They began to fear that America was plotting with Iran in secret agreement.  So they moved further and further and further away from being able to reach a compromise with Maliki.  And no matter how much pressure the Americans put on Iraqiya, they weren't going to agree to Maliki as prime minister and provided this opening to Iran because Iran's influence was way low at this stage because America -- America was credited with ending the civil war through the 'surge.'  But Iran sensed an opportunity and the Iranians pressured Moqtada al-Sadr -- and they pressured him and pressured him.  And he hated Maliki but they put so much pressure on to agree to a second Maliki term and the price for that was all American troops out of the country by the end of 2011.  So during this period, Americans got outplayed by Iran and Maliki moved very much over to the Iranian camp because they'd guaranteed his second term.

Kevin Sylvester:  Should-should the Obama administration been paying more attention?  Should they have -- You know, you talk about Chris Hill, the ambassador you mentioned, seemed more -- at one point, you describe him being more interested in putting green lawn turf down on the Embassy in order to play la crosse or something.  This is a guy you definitely paint as not having his head in Iraq.  How much of what has happened since then is at the fault of the Obama administration?  Hillary Clinton who put Chris Hill in place? [For the record, Barack Obama nominated Chris Hill for the post -- and the Senate confirmed it -- not Hillary.]  How much of what happens -- has happened since -- is at their feet?


Emma Sky:  Well, you know, I think they have to take some responsibility for this because of this mistake made in 2010.  And Hillary Clinton wasn't very much involved in Iraq.  She did appoint the ambassador but she wasn't involved in Iraq because President Obama had designated Biden to be his point-man on Iraq and Biden really didn't have the instinct for Iraq. He very much believed in ancient hatreds, it's in your blood, you just grow up hating each other and you think if there was anybody who would have actually understood Iraq it would have been Obama himself.  You know, he understands identity more than many people.  He understands multiple identities and how identities can change.  He understands the potential of people to change. So he's got quite a different world view from somebody like Joe Biden who's always, you know, "My grandfather was Irish and hated the British.  That's how things are."  So it is unfortunate that when the American public had enough of this war, they wanted to end the war.  For me, it wasn't so much about the troops leaving, it was the politics -- the poisonous politics.  And keeping Maliki in power when his poisonous politics were already evident was, for me, the huge mistake the Obama administration made. Because what Maliki did in his second term was to go after his rivals.  He was determined he was never going to lose an election again.  So he accused leading Sunni politicians of terrorism and pushed them out of the political process.  He reneged on his promises that he'd made to the tribal leaders who had fought against al Qaeda in Iraq during the surge. [She's referring to Sahwa, also known as Sons of Iraq and Daughters of Iraq and as Awakenings.]  He didn't pay them.  He subverted the judiciary.  And just ended up causing these mass Sunni protests that created the environment that the Islamic State could rear its ugly head and say, "Hey!"  And sadly -- and tragically, many Sunnis thought, "Maybe the Islamic State is better than Maliki."  And you've got to be pretty bad for people to think the Islamic State's better. 



Emma Sky is the author of THE UNRAVELING: HIGH HOPES AND MISSED OPPORTUNITIES IN IRAQ.  



 

Wednesday night was a group post night with the topic of what live TV production NBC and FOX need to do next: Ann's "Gentlemen Prefer Blondes,"  Marcia's "Jelly's Last Jam," Rebecca's "jamaica," Stan's "MEMPHIS," Mike's "THOROUGHLY MODERN MILLIE," Trina's "Pajama Game," Ruth's "I CAN GET IT FOR YOU WHOLESALE," Elaine's "THE FANTASTICKS," Betty's "SOPHISTICATED LADIES" and Kat's "BEAUTIFUL."


 
  • The following sites updated:






    Thursday, June 11, 2020

    Whores or truth tellers, who do you want to listen to?

    First, here's Jimmy Dore.



    Second, an e-mail asks why I'm not noting RISING?  Why would I?  I note Jimmy because he's not a partisan hack.  I did watch RISING.  But I stopped.  I don't like partisan hacks. Krystal Ball seems to think I'm stupid enough to be tricked by her conversion tale and that I'll follow her over to Joe Biden.  To which I say, "F**k you, Krystal."

    Elaine and I have a daughter.  If Elaine writes "Is Krystal Ball trying to Dick her Cheney? Not into sell outs." -- and she did -- you better believe we're on the same page.  We addressed Krystal's nonsense at THIRD with "Editorial: War Hawk Joe is a threat to Muslims:"

    And speaking of looks, it looks like Krystal Ball's edging on over to Joe.  She's to be our come-to-Jesus moment.  As she slowly makes and details her conversion, we're supposed to go along.

    Sorry, it's not happening.

    Just like RISING refuses to cover the fact that Joe's support is coming from his fellow War Hawks -- Bill Kristol, Collie Powell, Condi Rice, Bully Boy Bush, etc.



    I'm not interested in liars.  And I'm at the age where I really find it insulting when someone who depends on viewers for income thinks they can trick me, thinks I'm so stupid I won't realize what they're doing. 

    I don't need a whore trying to lead me somewhere.  She doesn't respect me and she doesn't respect herself. 

    Bye, Felicia.

    If you want truth, Nigel Clarke serves up a lot of truth at DISSIDENT VOICE:

    These, the derisive words of then-President Obama to an unruly crowd at a campaign stop for Hillary Clinton in 2016. They would become, in the years that followed, a calling card for Democratic operatives, printed on stickers and hats and coffee mugs, taken up as organizational slogan and event title. They are words which would become particularly relevant after the murder of George Floyd at the hands of four Minneapolis police officers and subsequent protests which erupted in the Twin Cities and across the country and world. As people poured into the streets, Democrats like 71-year-old white millionaire Senator Ron Wyden, insisted, don’t protest, vote!
    Of course, when Democratic politicians like Obama and Wyden say ‘vote,’ they don’t simply mean ‘participate in the electoral process.’ They mean, vote for Democrats.
    Perhaps nowhere in the country has this advice been taken to heart quite like the state of Minnesota and the city of Minneapolis. The state is led by a Democratic Governor and has had a Democratic Attorney General, that is, a Democrat as its chief legal officer, since 1971. The Mayor of Minneapolis is a Democrat, and has been since 1978, while 12 out of 13 seats on the Minneapolis city council are held by Democrats (the final seat is held by the Green Party).
    Minnesota Nice’ may or may not involve booing, but it has certainly included voting for Democrats.
    The results of this approach are well documented. A 2015 study revealed Minnesota to have “some of the worst racial disparities in the country,” gaps larger than most or all other states in education, employment, household income, home ownership, and poverty. African Americans in Minneapolis are nearly five times more likely than their white counterparts to live in poverty, and nearly three times more likely to be unemployed. They are nearly ten times more likely to be arrested for low level offenses and 13 times as likely as white Minnesotans to be killed by police, a disturbing fact born out in the high-profile killings of Jamar Clark in 2015, Philando Castile in 2016, and now, George Floyd.
    It is telling to note that the state’s current Democratic Senator, and, perhaps until this week, the presumptive vice-presidential frontrunner to join Joe Biden atop the Democratic ticket, has been an integral part of the construction of the way Minneapolis functions today. From 1999-2007, Amy Klobuchar was the chief prosecutor for Hennepin County, encompassing the city of Minneapolis. During this period, Klobuchar declined to bring charges in over two dozen cases where people were killed by police, instead, focusing her attention on aggressively prosecuting low-level offenders, disproportionately people of color, for whom she sought longer-than-recommended sentences. Summed up by longtime Minneapolis community activist Michelle Gross, “she’s a racist who basically made our prisons the blackest place in this state.”


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

     
    Thursday, June 11, 2020.  The US and Iraq are engaging in talks to determine the future relationship between the two countries, the State Dept has released their annual report on religious freedom around the world, JEZEBEL details the very real issues at play in the attacks on Tara Reade, and much more.


    Yesterday at the US State Dept in DC, Secretary of State Michael Pompeo declared: 

    On Iraq:  The Government of Iraq has agreed to the Strategic Dialogue proposed in April, beginning tomorrow.  Under Secretary Hale will lead that discussion with the representatives from Department of Defense, Treasury, Energy, and other agencies, and their Iraqi counterparts.
    In keeping with previous dialogues based on our 2008 Strategic Framework Agreement, the dialogue will cover all of the areas of interest between our two countries: politics, economics, security, culture, and energy.
    With new threats on the horizon, including the global coronavirus pandemic, collapsed oil prices, and a large budget deficit, it’s imperative that the United States and Iraq meet as strategic partners to plan a way forward for the mutual benefit of each of our two nations.

    Yesterday a dialogue started between the governments of Iraq and the United States.  It continues today.  



    On the verge of crucial strategic talks between the United States and Iraq set to take place on June 10, former Iraqi Foreign Minister Mohamed Ali Alhakim said the process is a necessary, long-planned step in ongoing bilateral ties between Baghdad and Washington.
    But he took pains to call the process a dialogue involving the US government and the sovereign state of Iraq, one which will define the Pentagon’s future presence in Iraq as well as non-military aspects of the relationship including education, energy, culture, trade, and foreign investment.
    “Here in the local papers, they’re calling it negotiations, but we are not negotiating anything,” Alhakim said. “It’s an agreement signed by the two sides. The only thing we need to do is figure out the bits and pieces.”
    Speaking June 9 in a webinar with Abbas Kadhim, director of the Atlantic Council’s Iraq Initiative, Alhakim noted that because of COVID-19, the upcoming talks will be held virtually—a departure from the long-standing arrangement of alternating the sessions every six months between Washington and Baghdad.


    AFP quotes the Middle East Institute's Robert Ford who declares, "The entire US-Iraq bilateral relationship will not be fixed in a single day. But for once, we seem to have the right people in the right place at the right time."  May 7th, Mustafa al-Kahdemi became the latest prime minister of Iraq.    Ali Mamouri (AL-MONITOR) notes that the talks were accompanied with a rocket attack on Baghdad.  






    Ali Mamouri also notes that unlike Adel Abdel Mahdi, the previous prime minister, al-Kahdemi "included the strategic dialogue with the United States as part of his plan of action presented to the parliament. The plan, which was approved by the parliament, does not mention the departure of US troops from the country."  MIDDLE EAST ONLINE cites two unnamed Iraqi government officials who state "Kahdemi has been invited to the White House this year, a diplomatic olive branch his predecessor Adel Abdel Mahdi had never received."  Mahdi did call for US withdrawl but did so only after he had resigned (and over a month after Parliament accepted his resignation).  While that might explain the lack of invitation to the White House since January (when he called for withdrawal of US forces), it doesn't explain why there was no invitation since October 2018 (when he became prime minister).  Mahdi had huge support in the US from the intelligence community which had been pimping him as the answer to Iraq ('liberating' it or just controlling it) since 2006.  ALJAZEERA offers the following prediction:

    The main event will be the fate of US-led troops, deployed in Iraq from 2014 to head a military coalition fighting the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS) group.
    "Whatever comes out of the dialogue is going to set the future of our strategic relationship," an American official from the coalition told the AFP news agency.
     "Am I still going to fly surveillance drones or not? Do you still want our intelligence?" he added.
    The coalition has already consolidated to just three bases in recent months, down from a dozen, and the talks would likely bring a further drawdown.
    "There are no details yet on troop levels, but the US draft on a joint statement mentions a 'reduction of US forces'," one senior Iraqi official told AFP.
    ALJAZEERA also offers this video report by Simona Foltyn.




    Simona Foltyn explains in the video above, "The US and the Iraqi governments both appear to favor a partial reduction of troops but the question is whether they will agree on the terms that will govern their future presence.  Whatever the outcome, the dialogue is likely to usher in a new chapter of US - Iraqi relations."  So the withdrawal -- not drawdown -- that the world wants, that Iraq needs, is not likely to happen according to the media.

    John Davison (REUTERS) accompanied the current prime minister of Iraq to Mosul yesterday.  He reports:

    Three years ago, the world
    rejoiced when Iraqi forces backed by the United States and Iran
    liberated this ancient city from the brutal rule of Islamic
    State. The people of Mosul hoped to rebuild their shattered
    lives.
        Today, a different battle plays out.
        Taking place largely behind the scenes, from legislative
    halls that overlook the city's bombed-out streets to hotel
    meeting rooms in Baghdad, it is a power struggle among parties,
    politicians and militiamen. Some are backed by Iran. Others
    favour the United States.
        At stake: political control of Nineveh province, of which
    Mosul is capital – a region rich in natural resources and a link
    in a supply route from Tehran to the Mediterranean. The route
    serves Iran-backed militias, Washington's fiercest enemy here
    since the defeat of Islamic State.
        Iran's allies had been winning. They installed a governor
    favoured by Tehran a year ago. But then anti-government
    protests, U.S. sanctions and the assassination of Iran's
    military mastermind Qassem Soleimani challenged Iranian
    influence. The pro-Western camp replaced the Nineveh governor
    with a longtime U.S. ally.
        The contest mirrors a wider struggle over the future of Iraq
    itself.
        Speaking to Reuters over the span of a year, around 20 Iraqi
    officials involved in the political tussle over Nineveh
    described how Iran and its allies developed the networks to
    influence local government, how pro-Western officials tried to
    hit back, and how this tug of war has crippled Mosul's recovery.
    If any side prevails, many of these insiders believe, it will
    ultimately be the side aligned with Iran. Iran helps its allies
    with money, political backing and sticks with them, explained
    Nineveh councilor Ali Khdeir. The United States, in contrast,
    "has left no real mark on Iraq."


    Dropping back to the May 28th Iraq snapshot:

    MIDDLE EAST MONITOR ONLINE reports that Iraqi Brigadier General Yahya Rasoul is insisting that ISIS "has already been vanquished, no longer poses a threat to Iraq."  Unfortunately, reality slaps Rasoul in the face.  ISIS has never been vanquished.

    Monday, ALMASDAR NEWS reported, "The Iraqi security forces announced on Monday that an Iraqi military plane was hit by terrorist forces in the Al-Rutbah Desert during an operation to destroy Islamic State"  Iraqi security forces said a member of ISIS had "14.5 mm mono weapon and fired at one of the planes, lightly wounding the plane."  Doesn't sound like it's been vanquished or that it no longer poses as a threat.  Monday night, David Rose (THE AUSTRALIAN) reported:



    Islamic State has waged its deadliest terrorism campaign in Iraq for nearly two years, raising fears jihadists are staging a resurgence.
    In the past month, since the start of Ramadan, Islamic State (also known as ISIS) has claimed responsibility for more than 260 attacks across Iraq, allegedly killing or wounding 426 people.
    The attacks form part of the group’s self-proclaimed “battle of attrition” campaign, which also has inspired violence by Islamic State branches in Syria, Egypt, Nigeria, Niger, Congo and Mozambique in recent weeks.


     The assailants came at dusk, creeping on foot through the dusty palm groves near the Tigris River, armed only with a rocket-propelled grenade, a light machine gun and Kalashnikovs. They had laid roadside bombs to kill anyone who rushed to help the unsuspecting local guards, who were in their sights.
    When the attack on the village last month was over, nine members of a Sunni tribe that had opposed the Islamic State were dead and four were wounded, one of them nearly burned to death.
    This is the Islamic State in Iraq in 2020: low-tech, low-cost, rural, but still lethal. And while it has not carried out attacks on the scale that it did a few years ago, the number of attacks has begun to grow again.
    As American and Iraqi negotiators begin a new round of strategic talks on Thursday, the question of how to respond to the Islamic State’s quiet resurgence — and how much American help is required to do so — will be at the center of the discussion.

    We called out the lie on May 28th because it was a lie.  It's a shame the military spokesperson felt he could lie, it's a bigger shame that no one in the press called him out in real time.  

    Calling out?  Some have called Tara Reade out.  She's the woman with the credible allegation that Joe Biden assaulted her in 1993 when she was working in his office.  Rubbish like Michael Tracey have tried to attack her because they can't attack her charges.  They pretend that talking about her unpaid bills somehow tells you whether or not she was raped -- in their biased minds, only women of wealth can be raped.  


    A narrative has emerged from this reporting that ties questions of Reade’s trustworthiness to her financial background. Economic class is brought in as character evidence.  At JEZEBEL, Tracy Clark-Flory observes:
    In May, the New York Times published a lengthy report that forwards this framing. It spins Reade’s economic background, financial struggles, and history of intimate partner violence into a tale of a “messy life,” a “tumultuous journey,” a “shambolic life.” As the article puts it, “If the national stage is new for Ms. Reade, the sturm and drang is anything but.” Much of that “sturm and drang” relates to abuse and poverty, yet the piece includes no discussion of how these two things are cyclical and interconnected. Instead, in the Times piece and others like it, a case is made for the way that trouble has followed Reade around—the implication being that she creates it.
    Reade’s class permeates the Times’ discussion of Reade’s time working in Biden’s office in the 1990s. “The Biden Senate world was populated by striving Type A’s, and had a small-c conservative culture in which Ms. Reade didn’t quite fit,” the piece reads. “Former aides remember her as prone to storytelling and oversharing personal information.” It continues to note that she “rarely socialized with colleagues after work” and chafed “at the Ivy League tilt of the staff” while :arguing for more interns from state schools.” These facts set the stage for interpreting Reade through the lens of an outsider, that she didn’t gel with the staff is seen as a telling detail of her character.
    Additionally, the Times reports that Biden’s office manager “admonished [Reade] to dress more modestly,” which not only has potential class insinuations but also recalls the long history of sexual assault victims being assessed by their clothing. This is not the first time reporters have clung to the subject of Reade’s attire in Biden’s office. Previously, in late May, Buzzfeed interviewed former Biden staffers and “two people brought up the clothes [Reade] wore to work—specifically recalling that she wore capes and dressed in a ‘hippie’ style.” Cara Ameer, then a legislative correspondent, said, “You were in a professional environment, so you wanted to be professional in every way—to look and act that way.” Ameer added, “She definitely seemed to me to march to her own drum. Maybe she didn’t like us. Maybe she thought we were a bunch of preppy Capitol Hill staffer types. If there was a mold of a Capitol Hill staffer, I would kinda say we probably fit it. We were well dressed.”
    The assessment of her dress is not merely aesthetic but rather mired in class-based assumptions. This evaluation recalls Paula Jones, who in 1994 alleged that Bill Clinton exposed himself to her. (Note that Jones’ allegation came a year after Reade alleges that she was assaulted by Biden. ) In return, she was relentlessly mocked as low class: James Carville famously responded to her allegation by saying, “If you drag a $100 bill through a trailer park, you never know what you’ll find.” A journalist from Newsweek referenced her reputation as “just some sleazy woman with big hair coming out of the trailer parks.” Four years later, Jones got a makeover and the Washington Post’s Robin Givhan wrote: “Her braces are gone. She has smoothed the frizzy mane of curls that once reached to such dazzling heights. Her makeup is now subtle and based on natural, not neon, hues. Her clothing is inspired by the boardroom instead of the secretarial pool.” By modeling herself on the aesthetics of DC’s professional set, Givhan wrote that Jones had “embraced the markers of dignity, refinement and power.” Most relevantly: the markers of class. “She is not white trash. She is not a big-haired floozy,” her spokesperson said of the image overhaul.
    The Times continues its focus on Reade as an outsider in discussing a later job as an aide for State Senator Jack O’Connell, reporting that “two people familiar with her tenure said she regularly failed to appear at constituent meetings.” Then, “as the complaints about her work continued, Ms. Reade confessed that she was having a hard time at home, these people recalled.” Those hard times are unspecified, but the Times notes that Reade had feared for her safety after her then-husband, Ted Dronen, responded to news of her pregnancy by “slamming things around the house.” The Times continues, “She was given a lighter schedule, but when the behavior repeated itself, she and the office agreed to part ways.” The “behavior repeated itself” is an awfully blameful way to refer to a woman who is, it is implied, struggling at work alongside fear of her own husband. The Times fails to note research showing, as a Purdue University report puts it, that the impacts of domestic violence can “lead to tardiness, absenteeism and lack of productivity.”

    Tara Reade's allegation was credible and remains credible.  Assaults and smears on her do not change her allegation.  Assaults and smears do not erase the corroborating witnesses she has.  The attacks and smears on her have taken place with far too many feminists either staying silent or joining in (Joan Walsh, Katha Pollitt and others have joined in).  How this is supposed to help survivors is beyond me and a lot of people should be ashamed.  Nick Givas (FOX NEWS) notes, "Former Colorado governor and current Senate candidate John Hickenlooper said Wednesday that he believes allegations made by Tara Reade against 2020 presidential candidate Joe Biden are true but will still be voting for him anyway."

    A lot of people are covering for 'innocent' Joe Biden.  They appear unaware of what he's done to the world and unaware that politicians serve us, not the other way around.  






    We'll note that video again tomorrow.







    We started with Mike Pompeo, we'll close with him.  His remarks about Iraq (quoted at the start) were made at the press briefing he gave for the release of the 2019 International Religious Freedom Report.

    SECRETARY POMPEO:  Good morning, everyone.  It’s great to be with you all today.  I’m here one more time, proudly, to talk about freedom and free societies.  And while America is not a perfect nation by any means, we always strive towards that more perfect union, trying to improve.  We remain the greatest nation in the history of civilization.
    One of the good things that we do in this administration is our dedication to the protection of religious freedom all around the world.  Last week, President Trump signed the first ever executive order that instructs the entire U.S. Government to prioritize religious freedom.
    Here at the State Department, I’ve hosted the Ministerial to Advance Religious Freedom now twice.  We’ve launched the International Religious Freedom Alliance.  We’ve trained our Foreign Service officers to understand religious freedom issues much more deeply.
    And today, I’m proud to release the 2019 International Religious Freedom Report.  There is no other nation that cares so deeply about religious freedom, that we gather accounts from all across the world – it’s an enormous, it’s a comprehensive accounting of this fundamental human right.
    Let me highlight a few positive developments we’ve observed in this past year:
    The Gambia, an International Freedom Alliance member, has courageously brought a case before the International Court of Justice regarding crimes against the Rohingya.
    The United Arab Emirates, long an ally for religious freedom in the Middle East, has become the first country in the Middle East to permit the construction of a temple of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
    In Uzbekistan, steps have been taken to improve its record on religious freedom, and those steps continue.  I had a great chat with religious leaders where I was there earlier this year.
    We documented no police raids of unregistered religious group meetings during 2019, compared with 114 such raids in 2018, and 240 – 240 the year before that.  These are great strides, real progress, the efforts of our State Department team showing or bearing fruit.
    But there’s also a great darkness over parts of the world where people of faith are persecuted or denied the right to worship:
    The Nicaraguan Government harasses and intimidates religious leaders and worshipers and desecrates religious spaces, often using proxies.
    In Nigeria, ISIS and Boko Haram continue to attack Muslims and Christians alike.  ISIS beheaded 10 Christians in that country just this past December.
    And in China, state-sponsored repression against all religions continues to intensify.  The Chinese Communist Party is now ordering religious organizations to obey CCP leadership and infuse communist dogma into their teachings and practice of their faith.  The mass detentions of Uighurs in Xinjiang continues.  So does the repression of Tibetans and Buddhists and Falun Gong and Christians.
    I commend the report released today to everyone.  Its very existence is evidence of our strong resolve to defend human dignity.




    The following sites updated: