10/21/2021

halloween kills

based on stan's 'HALLOWEEN KILLS' i decided to give jamie lee curtis' new film a stream on 'peacock.'  

I know the Halloween Kills discourse is heated right now, but no matter where you landed on the movie, can we all just agree that Little John & Big John were great?
Image


i can agree on that.  they were really good.  as the body count increased, i knew we'd lose them but i wish we hadn't.  they were 2 of the most memorable new characters - no, they were the 2 most memorable new characters.  


My girls and I behind the scenes on Halloween Kill Jack-o-lantern
Image


stan's comments about laurie's growth were spot on.  this installment really gave jamie lee something to dig into and she dug deep.  


i still think the 1st 'halloween' was the best.  but i would put 'halloween kills' down as the 2nd best.


check it out if you haven't already.


let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'


 Thursday, October 21, 2021.  Colin Powell and Barbra Streisand and more.



That's THE KATIE HALPER SHOW.  And, yes, Colin Powell is still dead.  Let's start with an excerpt from Margaret Kimberley's latest at BLACK AGENDA REPORT:


“But we already had two firsts. Colin Powell was one of them, and Condoleezza Rice, his successor as secretary of state. How did that redound to the benefit of black people for the United States to have a black — put a black face on imperialism, on aggressive war, on violations of international law? How does that make black people look better in the world? Is that the kind of burden that black people want to carry around?” Glen Ford

The late Colin Powell certainly had a storied career. It wound through various Republican presidential administrations from Ronald Reagan, to George H.W. Bush to George W. Bush. He served as National Security Adviser, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Secretary of State. He said this about his life and work, ““All I want to do is judge myself as a successful soldier who served his best.”

His desire to justify himself shouldn’t oblige anyone else to go along. This question must be answered in assessing Powell’s career. What makes a soldier successful? This point is especially important when talking about a man who took part in every foreign policy action from Vietnam, to Iran Contra, to Panama, to Iraq, to Haiti . Simply put, a good soldier follows orders, makes operations run smoothly, and makes his bosses look good. Powell did all of those things and that is why his legacy is so dubious.

When Major Colin Powell was stationed in Vietnam in 1968 he and his superiors received a letter written by a soldier whose tour of duty was ending. Tom Glen stated that U.S. soldiers were carrying out atrocities against civilians. Major Powell was tasked with investigating, which should have included an interview of the soldier himself. Neither he nor anyone else spoke to Glen and when Powell responded he blamed the whistle blower for not reporting the crimes to people who had chosen to do nothing about them. He then wrote a classic yes-man response which concluded, “In direct refutation of this portrayal, is the fact that relations between American soldiers and the Vietnamese are excellent.”

The following year a second soldier, Ronald Ridenhour, ended his tour with an expose of the U.S. massacre of an estimated 500 civilians in the village of My Lai. Ridenhour conducted his own investigation and sent his letter off to federal officials including president Nixon. On this occasion Powell got a surprise visit from the Inspector General’s office and was asked about combat activity around the date in question. Good soldier Powell reported only what was in the falsified record and thus played a role in an attempt to cover up which fortunately proved to be futile.

Of course Powell had committed his own crimes during his first tour of duty in Vietnam. He admitted as much in his memoir, My American Journey. “We burned down the thatched huts, starting the blaze with Ronson and Zippo lighters. Why were we torching houses and destroying crops? Ho Chi Minh had said the people were like the sea in which his guerrillas swam. Our problem was to distinguish friendly or at least neutral fish from the VC swimming alongside. We tried to solve the problem by making the whole sea uninhabitable. In the hard logic of war, what difference did it make if you shot your enemy or starved him to death?” Of course, collective punishment against a civilian population is by definition a war crime, but Powell succeeded in rising to the top and as such was immune from such truthful descriptions of his activities.

If Powell would run interference for army brass in Vietnam, he would do no less for his boss, president George W. Bush. In early 2001,  Powell said of Iraqi president Saddam Hussein , “He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors." Two years later Powell made a great show at the United Nations saying just the opposite. Bush decided to invade Iraq and good soldier Powell was tasked with making the public case for a war of aggression. He famously held up a vial which he said represented the weapons of mass destruction which he knew did not exist.

Those who remembered his assurances that Hussein posed no threat were few in number and the corporate media were ready to help the Bush administration get support for the invasion. Powell’s past statements magically disappeared as were any narratives that might contradict the Bush administration. Powell was the public face of the case for a war crime which eventually killed some 1 million people in Iraq.


No, was not Jesus despite the breathless way the media treated him especially since he died.  Elain's "Barbra Streisand is one stupid bitch" went up last night.  Read Margaret Kimberley in full and grasp that's who Barbra Streisand is praising.  Grasp all that she covers and toss in his homophobia as well.  That's who Barbra's praising.  She's standing not with the Iraqi people, not with the Vietnamese victims, she's standing with their oppressor.


An e-mail whines in the public account that Elaine was being unfair to Barbra and don't I agree?


No, I don't.  First off, stranger, I've been friends with Elaine since college and I knew her before that because I dated her brother.  Thanks for stumbling onto the public account but maybe stumble onto a doctor if you're thinking your e-mail will make me turn on Elaine as you insist that I must publicly rebuke her.  


Relinquish the fantasy.


Before we move on to Colin, let me note Barbra.  I know her.  I like her.  I applaud the art she produced with YENTL.  We promoted RLESE ME 2 here.  I've praised her performance in THE GUILT TRIP.  And I try to say nice things about her in real life.  Which is why friends were surprised when I recnetly slammed her here.  Industry friends couldn't stop calling as that was circulated.  Basically saying, "You do get it then?"  Yes, and I always have.  But I'm not a director and I never had to put up with that crap on a set and I'm smart enough never to be in a film with her.  Her image is well earned.  It has nothing to do with my interaction with her.


But when ego mania and a her need to be the center of attention at all times caused her to trash Bradley Cooper?  I know Bradley and he did not deserve her crap.  So I would have objected for that reason alone.  But I have known Joan Didion for decades now.  And to watch, while Joan's in such poor health, as Barbra stole the credit that Joan and her late husband John Gregory Dunne deserve?


No.


As I wrote, this is why she doesn't get awards.  It's why she's never won a second Academy Award for acting and never will.  It's why she's hated by so many who have worked with her and others who refuse to work with her.  Joan and John were ending their vacation in Hawaii when Joan turned to John and exclaimed something like, "A STAR IS BORN with Carly Simon and James Taylor!"  That idea popped into her head and that's how you got the 70s A STAR IS BORN.  


The script was a hot property and the studio was willing to do it with Carly and James -- but they ended up not wanting to do the film.  (Too close to home at the time as James' career was muddling.)  Various other women expressed interest and it was a go project.  It was happening.  As it was coming down to the wire, it was Cher's film.  She would be starring in it.  And the Sue and Barbra swoop in.


That film is garbage, pure garbage.  Kris isn't bad in it but he's undercut by all the focus on Barbra -- especially when he's emoting but the camera's instated trained on Barbra.  Did the crew really mix s**t in with mud for a scene where Barbra was in the mud?  I don't know.  Frank Pierson, the director of the film, told me they did.  It's not surprising if they did.  She's a terror on a set.  I'd never go on a set with her.  And you can go to YOUTUBE and see her screeching homophobia when she visits Harrison Ford on one of his film sets.  That's Barbra.  


She destroyed the script for the film.  She destroyed the balance that was needed.  And the biggest complain, which no one makes but I think everyone viewing gets, is that the film should end on Kris.  You do one wrap up scene.  Instead, Kris dies and it's Babs Babs Babs.  Oh, she's walking through the lonely mansion, oh she hears his voice on a tape recorder, oh this and oh that and then that never ending two song medley where her nose is frightening.  She who screeches about unflattering photography has allowed some of the worst video of her ever captured -- worst in terms of appearance -- and for what?  To hog the movie?  To sing bad songs.  


And she's going to slam Bradley's film?  His film works, her film does not.  


She's going to slam Brad and she's going to steal Joan and John's credit?  Slamming Brad because she made the film about singer-songwriters and blah blah blah.


She didn't do s**t with that.  She added the Orioles (which I always found racist) and she demanded that a type of feminist sensibility be put into the film -- her sense of a feminist sensibility which has always been a rather strange one.  


She made a bad film that's an endurance contest to get through and she wants to slam Bradley and she wants to steal Joan and John's credit?


As I said when I wrote about it here, this is exactly why she doesn't get awards from her peers.  It's that ego that claims credit for everything.  It's that ego that has to put others down to build herself up.  I can indulge in that in casual interactions with her but I'm smart enough never to work with her.    Carole King wasn't.  Carole's basically a nice person.  So she won't publicly slam Barbra.  But Carole was a much bigger musical act in 1972 than Barbra when they did a George McGovern benefit and ask Carole how much rehearsal time she was allowed.  Ask Quincy Jones how much time he go tot rehearse.  Ask them who monopolized the venue with rehearsal after rehearsal for what were poor and simplistic arrangements.  She has no concern or care for other artists.


So I posted that here and it gets circulated around a number of friends and then the circle gets larger and larger.  And I'm getting all these phone calls because it's the truth but people are surprised I'd say it.  Normally, I wouldn't.  But she went after Bradley and Joan.  She atacked one, she erased the other.  

I wasn't in the mood.  And I don't give her a pass because her son Jason is gay.  She's homophobic so I'm honestly not surprised that 'gay rights' Barbra would praise the homophobic Colin Powell.


On Colin Powell, THE NATION and THE PROGRESSIVE remain silent.  It's several days after Colin's death.  But?  COMMON DREAMS:



That's their top ten most read currently.  Number ten, days later, is Jon Queally's piece on Colin.


There is interest in the topic.  There's also a need for it.


Hagiography and worse is attempting to sell this vile man who destroyed so many lives as someone worthy of praise.  It's really our duty to speak up and to speak out.


When I learned of his death, I was on the treadmill dictating the snapshot.  I thought I was finished and the friend I was dictating it too asked if I was going to mention Colin Powell?  Why?  That's when and how I found out he died.  I didn't want to write about him, he's disgusting and surely others would cover it but to note it, in Monday's snapshot, we reposted Ava and My piece from 2006.


And that was going to be it.


Then Monday night, I saw all the non-stop praise and hoopla about The War Criminal and knew I'd have to cover him in the next day's snapshot. 


How?


I'm not trying to be the megaphone of what everyone else writes.  So what could I contribute?  Okay, let's talk about his homophobia.  Let's talk about what he did in 1993 and how the US government is trying to fix it now.  All these years later, LGBTQ-ers are still harmed by that.  


I knew I'd have to cover him in Wednesday's snapshot because I'd have to include Margaret on the topic.  But BAR didn't publish early Wednesday morning.  So we're including her today.  And thanks to the e-mailer who was whining about Elaine, I have a new way to write about Colin -- via the idiot Barbra.  


And she is an idiot.  She praises Frank Rich?  That's hilarious.  She's spent years linking to him.  Praising his judgments because they were on the same partisan side.  You know what?  I recommend, on behalf of Barbra, that all of Frank's work be widely re-read.  Especailly those hit pieces he did on her movies.  


Now I can look the other way here on some things.  There are people who get linked to that have trashed offline me.  During the time this site has been up, THE WASHINGTON POST wrote a very mean thing about me and I was shocked because: Why?  I mean it was untrue but I don't epect truth from the press.  I was shocked because what was the point, why were they even writing about me?  There was no reason to.  I wasn't promoting any ware or trying for attention and they just slam me out of the blue.  And I was mad.  I didn't read it but I had people calling saying, "Did you see what they said!"  And the paper had an important Iraq story.  So we still linked to it because this site, it's not about me.  But I can promise you if someone had attacked me the way Frank Rich did Barbra Streisand over and over, year after year, they wouldn't be up here.  And I wouldn't be praising him.


He was vile, sexist and brutal.  And she's praising him because he's on the same partisan side and she's so desperate to have some 'intellectual' (he wishes) in her corner.


She's uneducated and uninformed.  When she's tried to lear about a topic, she's either fired the tutor or they've been too in awe of her and pretended that she had something right when she didn't.  I don't know if she's got a cognitive issue or if she just can't absorb anything that doesn't relate to her but she can 'study' something for months and still not have a basic understanding.


And her stupidity, her need for attention and her desire to have a buddy in her partisan battles leads her to embrace Colin Powell.  


Rob Reiner?  He's a joke and I don't have anything to say about him.  The industry's tired of him -- lucky for him or skeletons would be surfacing.  He's also not that popular among the public.  No one's saying, "I wonder what Meathead thinks about this matter?"  Barbra still retains some vestiges of fame and if she's going to use it to promote War Criminal Colin, then we need to push back.


And that's how we can cover Colin for another day -- hopefully, the last time this week -- with me throwing something of my own out there and not just having to say "So and so writes and then another person . . ."


This is a War Criminal.  And he's a War Criminal that the corporate media is glorifying -- and I'd argue that crap Amy Goodman served up this week was close to glorifying since it sough to justify the actions of a War Criminal -- so we have to push back.  If we don't, don't claim to believe in peace.  If we don't, don't claim to stand with the Iraqi people or the Vietnamese.  He destroyed lives across the world and his homophobia in the US did great damage.  There's nothing to glorify.  And if you can't find some way to write about that, you shouldn't be writing.  Katrina pays a lot of people a lot of money but they can't do anything of value, can they?  You're seeing the realities of THE NATION right now.


MEMO reports:


The Turkish presidency yesterday submitted a memorandum requesting parliament extend the authority granted to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to carry out military operations in Syria and Iraq for another two years, starting from 30 October, Anadolu Agency reported.

The agency said the memorandum explained that the risks and threats to national security caused by the developments and the ongoing conflict in areas adjacent to Turkey's southern borders, are constantly escalating.


Turkey has terrorized Iraq and violated its national sovereignty.  Hundreds of civilians have died in the last years because Turkey has bombed them or shot them.  They need to be standing in a world court.  If Turkey did to the UK what it's done to Iraq -- if Turkey did for one month just what it does to Ira qfor one week -- there would be a full on war with all western countries supporting the UK.


Two Sundays ago, Iraq held elections.  The results are disputed.  Things are at a standstill currently.  Asharq al-Awsat reports:

 Efforts to calm down the situation in Iraq continued after protests against the results of recent elections turned into an open sit-in outside the Green Zone gates in Baghdad.


At the same time, forces that lost in the elections are betting on the results of the appeals submitted to the Elections Committee before they enter negotiations with other political parties.


In other news, TRADE ARABIA notes:


Learning levels in Iraq are among the lowest in the Mena region and are likely to decline even further because of the impact the pandemic has had on education service delivery, including prolonged school closures, said the World Bank.

The World Bank Group’s new report “Building Forward Better to Ensure Learning for All Children in Iraq: An Education Reform Path” says that while, now more than ever, investments are needed in education to recover lost learning and turn crisis into opportunity, these investments must be accompanied by a comprehensive reform agenda that focuses the system on learning outcomes and builds a more resilient education system for all children.

The report builds on key priorities in education recently identified in the Government of Iraq’s White Paper and the World Bank Group’s Addressing the Human Capital Crisis: A Public Expenditure Review for Human Development Sectors in Iraq report, and provides actionable reform recommendations to boost learning and skills.

Human capital is essential to achieve sustainable and inclusive economic growth. However, according to the World Bank’s 2020 Human Capital Index (HCI), a child born in Iraq today will reach, on average, only 41% of their potential productivity when they grow up.







The following sites updated:

 

10/20/2021

fx's impeachment

'impeachment'? it airs weekly on 'fx.' it's the 3rd season of 'american crime story.' this season focuses on the events leading up to the impeachment of bill clinton during his 2nd term as president of the united states. so we have monica lewninsky and linda tripp sarah paulson is magic as linda tripp and beanie feldstein is pretty damn good as monica.

the others? in much smaller roles, judith light and rae dawn chong dig deep and do a great job.

but edie falco is awful as hillary clinton. she's nothing like hillary but completely like edie falco in every thing she does. i can't believe she didn't even try for a voice like hillary. she didn't. it jars you and brings you out of reality every time she's on. you can get caught up in the story and then edie falco pops in and you're like, 'oh, yeah, it's a t.v. show.' you're pulled completely out of the story and what you're watching.

the 1 person who should be glad that edie's in the cast?

clive owen. clive is a great ctor and a good looking guy. and he is awful as bill clinton. flat out awful. i agree with ava and c.i. from their 'TV: Can we Impeach WSWS?:'

 As for Clive Owen?  He's awful.  He's wrong for the part and he's awful in the role.


He doesn't sound like Bill Clinton and he never seems like Bill.  He comes across as an actor struggling to nail down a role but failing.  Repeatedly.  More troubling?  His frame.


Bill Clinton didn't have a nice body.  Nor was he thin during this period.  Is vanity stopping Clive Owen from delivering a performance?  The show has no problem showing Monica Lewinsky (Beanie Feldstein) and Linda Tripp (Sarah Paulson) as packing pounds.  And that's accurate and how it was in real time.  They may have slapped a fake nose on Clive but his body still comes off GQ ready and we're honestly wondering about his own narcissism and failure to commit to the role.


so there's a lot to recommend but better people should have been chosen to play bill and hillary.


okay, so julieta notes 'alpha bayton.'





















let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'


 Wednesday, October 20, 2021.  This just in, Colin The Blot Powell remains dead.



In breaking news, War Criminal Colin Powell is still dead.  


Despite the corporate press and other idiots presenting him as their own personal Jesus Christ, Colin has not risen.  It's day three and he has not risen.


Repeating, War Criminal Colin Powell remains dead.


He has not risen.  Apparently saddened by that development, 'leading' periodicals on the 'left' remain silent: THE PROGRESSIVE and THE NATION.  And Katrina, get better journalists for your entertainment coverage.  Click-biat garbage about shows that undermine values?  There are many reasons Donald Trump became president.  People voted for him, to be sure, and Hillary Clinton refused to take her ass where it needed to go (if campaigning tires you, don't run for office), etc.  The long list also includes what was endorsed as 'entertainment' and what the glorified.  Stop worrying about what video games kids are playing and start contemplating the real damage grown adults do when they promote certain TV shows as admirable.


Ted Rall (COUNTERPUNCH) notes:


It would be impossible to overstate the import of Powell’s February 2003 speech, in which he claimed that the United States had amassed a stockpile of evidence that proved that Iraq had retained chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction in violation of its commitments under the 1991 Gulf War ceasefire. Iraq’s government, Powell argued forcefully, presented such a clear and present danger to its neighbors that the international community—led by the U.S.—had a right, even a duty, to remove it with an invasion. President George W. Bush and his co-conspirators had spent the better part of the previous year working to convince Americans to support a second war against Iraq over WMDs. Polls showed that voters remained unconvinced.

Possibly in preparation for a 2004 White House run—hard to imagine in these polarized times, but the ex-general had long been considered a top presidential prospect by both major political parties—the even-tempered Powell had previously distanced himself from his fellow cabinet members, dominated as they were by neoconservative hotheads, throughout the first two years of his term. Powell’s credibility towered over everyone else in American politics to an extent rarely seen before and certainly never since.

When you join a gang, you’re required to prove your loyalty. “You’ve got high poll ratings,” Vice President Dick Cheney told Powell as he ordered him to support the push for war. “You can afford to lose a few points.”

Which is why Bush and Cheney sent him to the U.N. They knew that Powell alone could close the deal with a public made recalcitrant by historical precedent: the U.S. had never before launched a full-out war without a pretext that made some sort of sense. And Where the president had failed the prestigious Powell succeeded brilliantly, with the American public as well as with key allies like Great Britain and Australia. Seconds after he stopped talking, TV talking heads told us what we already knew: the fate of a million Iraqis was sealed. We were going to war.



Binoy Kampmark (DISSIDENT VOICE) notes:

The Secretary of State also ran with the al-Qaida-Iraqi connection, another spurious link manufactured in the aftermath of 9/11 linking the terrorist attacks to Baghdad.  “Iraqi officials deny accusations of ties with al-Qaida.  These denials are simply not credible.”  His UN speech makes special reference to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, suggesting that al-Qaida “affiliates based in Baghdad now coordinate the movement of people, money and supplies throughout Iraq for his network”.

Powell spent subsequent years calling his presentation “painful”, a “blot” that would “always be part of my record.”  But ever mindful of public relations, he could find other more worthy alibis for his conduct.  Blame could be saddled and pinned down elsewhere – for instance, upon the more nefarious Donald Rumsfeld.  Or the devious Vice President Dick Cheney, whose office authored the speech.

For those keen to confine the scope of Powell’s errors and assessments, it is also worth remembering that the taste for regime change did not stop with the placing of boots in Mesopotamia.  As chair for the Bush’s Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba, Powell oversaw the production of a 2004 report advocating various ways the Cuban government might be overthrown.  These were familiar: insinuating market capitalism into the state; introducing multi-party elections; giving Cuban Americans living in the US restitution for losses suffered under the Castro regime.  Accordingly, Washington should “support the Cuban people as they … work to transform themselves” and enable them “to develop a democratic and civic culture … and the values and habits essential to both.”  Such mindful benevolence.

With the imperium in respectful lockstep and sighing deferentially to a departed soldier, Powell’s blemishes can be overlooked by glowing reference to his “service” and patriotism.  But in performing that service, Powell’s legacy will be associated with the murderous, not infrequently incompetent adventurism of US foreign policy and its messianic bent.



Colin is responsible for the deaths of over one million Iraqis.  He is responsible for encouraging hate against the LGBTQ community and for harming LGBTQ members of the US military.  He plotted to overthrow Cuba.  He lied and covered up a massacre in Vietnam.  Those are just the big marks, the well knowns.  Yet THE INTERDCEPT wants to tell you he was a "nice man."  And THE NATION and THE PROGRESSIVE don't wnat to comment and would rather spend their time 'covering' NETFLIX.  


You're not just seeing the collapse of corporate media, you're also seeing the reality of beggar media -- you know, the ones who call themselves 'independents' because they're always begging you for money to pay their bills.  And what are you paying for?  So they can cover NETFLIX?  


Certainly not so that they'll cover the Iraq War because they don't even know that it continues.  Qassim Abdul-Zahra and Zeina Karam (AP) report:



Word of his death Monday at age 84 dredged up feelings of anger in Iraq toward the former general and diplomat, one of several Bush administration officials whom they hold responsible for a disastrous U.S.-led invasion that led to decades of death, chaos and violence in Iraq.

His U.N. testimony was a key part of events that they say had a heavy cost for Iraqis and others in the Middle East.

“He lied, lied and lied,” said Maryam, a 51-year-old Iraqi writer and mother of two in northern Iraq who spoke on condition her last name not be used because one of her children is studying in the United States.

“He lied, and we are the ones who got stuck with never-ending wars,” she added.


Please, Coiln worshippers in the US, don't let the realities that Iraqis have suffered from make you enjoy your continuous moments of worship any less.  It is, after all, all about the joy you feel in the safety of the distant land and not about the people whose lives were actually destroyed by Colin Powell, right?  (That was sarcasm.)

New York Governor Kathy Hochul has declared that Colin died due to someone who did not receive the COVID-19 vaccine.  Glenn Greenwald notes:


Given that the CDC changed its masking guidelines based on its view that fully vaccinated people can still contract and transmit the virus to others, how does

know that Colin Powell got COVID from an unvaccinated person? Did she just make this up?


And:


Obviously Hochul wants to demonize unvaccinated people by claiming one of them basically murdered Powell by giving him COVID. But she can't know if the person who gave Powell COVID was vaccinated or not, she just invents a claim that suits her. This is what has destroyed trust.


It's somehow fitting, isn't it, that when a government official comments on Colin's death, they make claims that they can't back up?  As he was in life, so he is in death.










We'll continue to follow this story for any developments; however, as of today, Collie The Blot Powell, despite the constant press liturgy, has not risen and remains dead.


Turning to the land Colin helped destroy, Iraq.  Two Sundays ago, elections were held.  In useless filing after useless filing, so-called journalists yammered away about this or that but refused to note the problem Human Rights Watch had called attention to ahead of the election.  Today, Human Rights Watch's Belkis Wille writes:

In the weeks leading up to the October 10 parliamentary elections, Iraq’s Independent High Electoral Commission (IHEC) promised to take steps to ensure people with disabilities could vote.

But on election day, videos circulated suggested IHEC’s promises to make polling places accessible, with ballot boxes on the ground floor, went unfulfilled. A week later, we spoke to Haidar Jassim, 40, who has a physical disability. Here is what he said:

I was so optimistic when I heard IHEC would make polling places accessible to people with disabilities.

At 11:30 a.m. on election day, I went to the polling place in my Baghdad neighborhood, in my wheelchair, full of hope that I would be able to vote. I showed my voter ID to two IHEC staff. One looked at me and said, you have to make it to the second floor. I asked if I could vote without going to the second floor. The head of the polling place said they could not move the ballot boxes downstairs, but that I could come back later in the day and he would try to think of a solution. I told them about the IHEC announcement. He said he had no information about it.

Another staff person said, “Let me give you some advice, just go back home. Your vote won’t make a difference anyway.” I was shocked. I explained that I want to exercise and enjoy my rights like anyone else. I can only conclude that he and his colleagues do not consider us to be human beings with the same rights. He then told an older man in a wheelchair to also go home without voting, and left.

I went home and changed my electric wheelchair to a lighter, manual one, and went back to the polling place with my cousin. With help from another IHEC employee, they carried me to the second floor, and I was finally able to vote.

Sadly, I know many people with disabilities who couldn’t vote in Baghdad because the polling places were not accessible. 

The IHEC should explain to Haidar, and everyone it let down on election day, why did it not implement its limited promises around accessibility, and what it is planning to do before the next elections to make sure this doesn’t happen again.


Meanwhile ALJAZEERA reports:


Hundreds of supporters of Iraq’s powerful Hashd al-Shaabi – a pro-Iranian former paramilitary force – protested on Tuesday against “fraud” at recent parliamentary elections in which their movement performed poorly.

The Conquest (Fatah) Alliance, the political arm of the multiparty Hashd, won about 15 seats in the October 10 vote, according to preliminary results.

In the last parliament, it held 48 seats, making it the second-largest bloc.

Several hundred Hashd al-Shaabi supporters gathered on a Baghdad street leading to the entrance of the high-security Green Zone, home to the US embassy, other diplomatic missions, and government offices.


Don't be surprised if protests continue over the count.  Don't be surprised that the electoral commission has further undermined the trust of the Iraqi people.  Over the weekend,  Dilan Sirwan (RUDAW) reported, "The Iraqi electoral commission announced the official preliminary results of the Iraqi parliamentary elections late Saturday night, following the manual recount of votes from thousands of polling stations." 

So that's what they announced, now let's deal with reality.  The same commission announced ahead of the elections (last Sunday), that they would announce the results the following day.  That would have been Monday.  There was no reason to have made such an announcement or such an absurd claim.  But they made it.  And they didn't keep it.  


The Commission shouldn't have made the promise to begin with but they did.  They told the Iraqi people it would be done on Monday and it wasn't.  They did this in an environment of distrust.  Going into the election, in the months leading up, it was known that a growing distrust of the government was going to lead to a depressed turnout.  It was known.  The last thing needed was for any other government body to make a promise that they couldn't keep.  In this environment, the commission made a promise that it should have known (and probably did know) it couldn't keep.


That was dangerous, that was stupid and it was uncalled for.


Outside of Iraq, if most people even know the above, that's all they likely know.  But if you live in Iraq, you know a lot more.  More than we could ever, ever list.  But we'll note one more thing.  Three years ago, there was parliamentary election in Iraq.  The results were hotly contested.  The commission promised a manual recount.  Any of this sounding familiar because, for some reason, western outlets have amnesia and are stupidly unaware of it.  So there was going to be a manual recount.  How did that turn out?


It didn't.


The commission halted it.  Half the ballots were in a Baghdad warehouse that just happened to catch fire meaning no complete manual recount could be done.


In this environment, you do not make a promise you can't keep.


But there's no accountability in Iraq -- and the celebration and worship of War Criminal Colin Powell makes clear that there's little accountability anywhere.   

 


The following sites updated: