3/19/2022

'dynasty'

'dynasty' returned with new episodes last week.  didn't see it in my queue until a few hours ago.  


fallon attempts to go back to work - remember she was in a coma until christmas, she's informed the board doesn't want her there.  she's a health risk per the insurance company and must build up a history of good health.  she tries to get liam to help her because dominizue explained that her deal was with fallon and now fallon's not helping so dominique can take her reality t.v. offerings to another network.  so liam acts as fallon's puppet with her in his ear while she is overhead in the ceiling telling him what to say.  she then sees a rat.  he repeats that thinking she's still feeding him lines.


jeff meanwhile is having no luck getting back into the business world.  he tells dominique who tells fallon.  fallon ends up naming him her temporary successor.


crystal?  i didn't like it on the original 'dynasty' whenlinda evans' krystal was kidnapped and a bustitute was put in her place and that time the storyline had linda evans and heather locklear.


i don't mind the actress who plays this crystal - she's the 3rd one to play the role on the reboot.  and the actor playing her evil brother beto is good.  but it's not connected to anything.  


when sammy jo had krystal kidanpped and replaced 


with rita on the original 'dynasty,' she had a history and she was a major character.


beto?  he's been a guest star

geovanni gopradi has only been on ten episodes and that goes back to 2019.  he's not some 1 we're invested in.


he was at his best in a series of 2 or 3 episodes where he slept with sam (for 1 episode only) to get what he wanted.  don't even remember whta it was.  but he used sam to get dirt on crystal. if they had sam and beto sleeping together again right now that would make the story more interesting.  


crystal is a boring character and her being kidnapped by her minor character brother doesn't really enthrall.  again, if they hooked sam and beto back up, it would make for more tensions in the storyline and more interest.


amanda continued to try to get her mother alexis out of jail.  she's convinced adam killed the man her mother's suspected of killing.  you might remember that before the long (2 month) break, amanda had found out a drone was flying around the building so she hoped that it would have caught the man falling from the balcony and proved that alexis didn't kill the man.

she finds it.  and, dex, has the drone.  his nephew's been flying it.  she gets the video she wanted.  at the prison, she's shown it to alexis already and they then call adam and show it to him.  


he sees himself on the balcony with the man.  it doesn't show the man dying.  so adam says it proves nothing.  he is informed that it proves he was on the balcony with the dead man.  the police will let alexis go and arrest him.  alexis wants a moment alone with adam.  he's going to hand over control of his anti-aging drug and she'll keep silent.  otherwise, the police get the video.


he hands over the video.


kirby had helped amanda find the drone owner.  otherwise, she spent the bulk of her time this episode with sam as they attempted to help michael find a wife.  he's decided he wants to get married.


he's got a full on fussy list (including she must speak multiple langagues) and he's being fussy period.  sam licks some jam off his finger (his own finger) as they're eating a table and it grosses michael out.


they fix him up with nicole and are convinced she's perfect.  but nicole ... licks food off her finger and he's done with her.  


kirby and sam end up getting michael's mom to talk to him and she tells him he needs to stop being so picky and that if she'd had a list, she never would have gotten together with his father but that getting together with his father was the smartest move she ever made.


at a big party, alexis walks up to adam.  did she break out of jail?  no, she was released after she showed the police the video.  adam can't believe she stabbed him in the back after their deal.  she shows him the full video.  it shows the man lunging at adam but falling off the balcony.  she bluffed adam to get control of the drug.


fallon sees alexis and asks the same question: did she break out of jail?  this is their 1st scene together this season.  at the end of last season (back in may of last year), she was arrested and has been in jail all this season (since it started in the fall).  amanda, adam and dominque were the only 1s who visited her in jail.


alexis tells amanada thank you for all she did.  she tells him there's some 1 else to think and introduces him to the man with the nephew, dex.  alexis already knows him from many years ago.


if you watched the original 'dynasty' then you know dex is the love of alexis' life - not blake (husband number 1) or cecil (husbnad number 2) but dex who - in the original at least - becomes husband number 3.


crystal told beto he wouldn't get away with kidnapping her, that she would be missed. that's when fake crystal showed up and demonstrated how she was able to convince blake and others that she was crystal.


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


Friday, March 18, 2022.  The selling of the latest war sure resembles the selling of the Iraq War.


Starting with Jackson Hinkle.




Jackson exposes the lies of THE OLD SQUIRTY DUKES Ana and Cenk.  Their audience has gone.  Tehir lies continue.    Their friends are less and less and some have found out that they can longer propagandize the way they used to -- for example, TURNER CLASSIC MOVIES is not going to put up with you sneaking your propaganda when you're supposed to be discussing movies -- not only that, they made him actually spend a few bucks on suits so he doesn't look like such a slob.  But Ana and Cenk continue plowing at the street corner.  They're hoping someone's going to come along with a five or a ten who needs a ahlf-and-half or a hand job or something.


And it's good that they can fall back on that because they're lying has been exposed and they have no real power anymore.


They are Joe Biden, in the bathroom, standing at the sink, front of their boxers pulled out as they stare at the withered appendage and cray as they shriek, "Grow!  Grow!"


It's just not happening.


And whilt ehy're paid to deliver the vote to the Democratic Party -- that's what the Katenzberg deal was all about, they're not going to be able to do that.  First off, their audiences has shrivled -- again, like Joe's member.  Secondly, they're not Bette Midler.  


She's the idiot who Tweets photos of selective children to try to promote the war.  She Tweets that she's willing to pay more for gas, et al, because she cares.


She doesn't give a s**t.  This is the woman with ties to Jeffrey Epstein and, sadly, that's the least of her problems when it comes to her personal associates.  Hollywood enever embraced Bette because she's gutter trash.  The music industry out of New York and New Jersey, a roughter crowd, one with more ties to the mafia, embraced her.  The mafia controlled the divers she perfomred in.  Those are her roots.  Do not mistake her for genteel.  She's gutter trash and she always be.


But in the world of reality, people aren't thrilled to be paying for any war.  Let alone a war that should not have been started, a war that involved no attack on the US.  In the roundtable last night for the gina & krista round-robin, we had a person who can't drive due to vision issues explain how he's now -- this week -- paying two dollars more for each cab ride.  Now Bettte may be overjoyed in her mob-palace by the ocean, but those people who worked for their money and didn't consort with organized crime?  They don't have all the spare change Bette does.  


And people are feeling it -- this war and Joe's impotence -- every where -- at the grocery store, at the gas pump.  This is an election year.  


The key question is always: ARe you better off now than you were before?


And, no, Americans are not.  Fiancnially, they are not better off.  


And the Anas and Cenks can lie all they want and try to portray Ukraine as a country populated with faireis and sprites, but the reality is that, in 2014, the US installed neo-nazis.  That's who is being backed in this war.  Some people have such a problem with the reality that the US government backed and empowered the Talbian.  


But they did.


It was 'strategic.'


And it came back to bite the world in the ass after Jimmy Carter was out of office.


For 'stragey' that empowers thugs, you have to have whores who will sell it as 'humanity' and as 'human rights' and as 'a just cause.'


There is no just cause for the US in the issue of Ukraine.


Joe Biden is a failure as a president and Americans feel it every time they go to the gas pump or to the grocery store.


A far-away war is not going to make their lives better.  Backing a neo-nzai group in Ukraine is not going to make life better for Ukrainians.


CBS -didn't punish Charlie D'Agata for his racist remarks on air because that was the talking poitn.  They were all usupposed to sell the war to the American people and one of the talking points was, "They look just like us."  That was supposed to help us identify with Ukraine.  Charlie ran a little further with the talking poitn than some but he wasn't suspended or fired -- he should have been suspended -- for his remarks.


And then you get the Twitter brigade led by Bette and other incomptents.  Ukraine  is not a US issue and certainly not an issue worth pouring millions of US tax dollars into. 


They are trying to enforce a lie.  So they target others.  That's what's going on with the trashing of Tulsi Gabbard and Tucker Carlson.



  

They are trying to hit the two with a 2 v 4 to intimidate everyone.


Viewers of THE VIEW have to wonder what happened to free speech and The Constitution?  I believe Whoopi ate them.


Funding the government of Ukraine and its wars does not beneift Americans.  That's reality.  And when politicians try to explain it, they fail.



They can't explain.  


The selling of this war is not working.  Has--beens like Bette Midler are failing at selling it, the media is failing at selling it, censors like Whoopi and Ana can't sell it, politicians can't sell it.


They've dumbe it down, they've shored it up.  It won't play.  It won't sell.


And as a defense -- the costs of Ukraine -- for Joe's ineptitude won't work as a cover.  It has exposed Joe as not up for the job of president.  A real president would have been making deals with the oil rich countries by now.  Joe has a problem in the Middle East, doesn't he?


The way he betrayed the Kurds non-stop as Vice President may be news to Americans.  It's not to the Middle Est.  They followed it in real time.  They know he betrayed his 'friends.'  Why the hell would they trust him if he betrays even his own friends.  The State Dept is workign voertime right not trying to cme up with deals and it's so hard for them because Joe is the president.  Liar Joe.  


Joe's not doing much better with people in the US.

The start of these misguided efforts?  It's always their high point.  They don't increase in popularity several weeks after.  No, they decrease.  And there is no strong support for what the US is doing.  Poll after poll, if you dig into it, you'll see the support that there is soft support.  And it's already waining.


Whoopi wants to inflict fear in people.  That's why she invoked the Rosenbergs.  That's how trashy and corrupt she is.  Julis and Ethel Rosenberg woere executed.  That's nothing for America to be proud of.  That's a stain ont he country.


If Julius was guilty of passing information to the USSR -- if -- Ethel was not.  And we saw an out of control US government charge her and use her to try to intimidate her husband.  Railroad her and try to force him to do what they wanted.  Mob behavior, 


An innocent woman was put to her death because of hysteria, frenzy and a corrupt US government.  And Whoopi wants to bring that back.

That is outrageous.


I don't believe Julius was guilty.  But we can set that saide for a ,nger discussion.  Ethel was not guilty.  The US government used her as leverage.  And she  was assassinated by the US government.


That's nothing to be proud of.  That's nothing to cheer for or to desire.  But somehow, screwed up, uneducated Whoopi Goldberg went on TV, on the public airwaves, and made a call for that.


It's outrageous.  


And it's outrageous to listen to those politicians trying to sell war.  Nancy Pelosi wants you to know that Russia invaded Ukraine, that it could use chemical weapons, that . . .


The US invaded Iraq.  Nancy damn well knows that.  The US used chemical weapons on Iraq.









We could go on and on.


But Nancy Pelosi thinks she has some ethical ground to stand on.  Every reason she cites -- true or false -- for the US being in this war only serves to remind Americans of what our governent did, a government Nancy is a part of.  There is no push for helping the Iraqi children.


A burn pit may have caused Beau Biden's death.  So Joe cares -- a little -- about burn pits.  At least what they did to his son.  Most of Joe's stands can be traced to Beau.  Again, as I've said repeatedly here, I'm so shocked that Hunter hasn't used the truth to defend himself on personal issues.  There is no defense for his corruption and unethical business dealings.  However, I am surprised that a defense was not made regarding a personal issud.  Some day someone's going to say it, going to out it.  Won't be me today but Joe doesn't do anything, doesn't alter a previous opinion, unless it has to do with Beau.  


Maybe if Beau could have fathered -- or maybe, later on, adopted -- an Iraqi child, Joe would care about the Iraqi children?


At any rate, the US government is no tnoble.  It's deeply corrupt and it's become a threat to people around the world.  Stealing Americans money to fund wars won't whitewash reality about that.  


The US destroyed Iraq.  It's in no position to lecture or finger point.


Today in Iraq, the violence continues.  CGTN notes:


Four Katyusha rockets on Thursday struck the Balad Air Base, Iraq's largest military air base north of the capital Baghdad, a local security source has said.

The rockets landed at the Balad Air Base in Salahudin Province, some 90 kilometers north of Baghdad, causing no casualties, Xinhua reported citing the provincial police Colonel Mohammed al-Bazi.

Three of the rockets hit a building inside the base, causing minor damage, while the fourth landed in an empty area, al-Bazi said, adding that the rockets were fired from the neighboring province of Diyala.


As we wind down, an ethical note on Joe Biden. 



That's Kit on HARD LENS MEDIA discussing Glenn Greenwald's latest report.  Here's an excerpt:

This disinformation campaign about the Biden emails was then used by Big Tech to justify brute censorship of any reporting on or discussion of this story: easily the most severe case of pre-election censorship in modern American political history. Twitter locked The New York Post's Twitter account for close to two weeks due to its refusal to obey Twitter's orders to delete any reference to its reporting. The social media site also blocked any and all references to the reporting by all users; Twitter users were barred even from linking to the story in private chats with one another. Facebook, through its spokesman, the life-long DNC operative Andy Stone, announced that they would algorithmically suppress discussion of the reporting to ensure it did not spread, pending a “fact check[] by Facebook's third-party fact checking partners” which, needless to say, never came — precisely because the archive was indisputably authentic.

The archive's authenticity, as I documented in a video report from September, was clear from the start. Indeed, as I described in that report, I staked my career on its authenticity when I demanded that The Intercept publish my analysis of these revelations, and then resigned when its vehemently anti-Trump editors censored any discussion of those emails precisely because it was indisputable that the archive was authentic (The Intercept's former New York Times reporter James Risen was given the green light by these same editors to spread and endorse the CIA's lie, as he insisted that laptop should be ignored because “a group of former intelligence officials issued a letter saying that the Giuliani laptop story has the classic trademarks of Russian disinformation.") I knew the archive was real because all the relevant journalistic metrics that one evaluates to verify large archives of this type — including the Snowden archive and the Brazil archive which I used to report a series of investigative exposés — left no doubt that it was genuine (that includes documented verification from third parties who were included in the email chains and who showed that the emails they had in their possession matched the ones in the archive word-for-word).

Any residual doubts that the Biden archive was genuine — and there should have been none — were shattered when a reporter from Politico, Ben Schreckinger, published a book last September, entitled "The Bidens: Inside the First Family’s Fifty-Year Rise to Power," in which his new reporting proved that the key emails on which The New York Post relied were entirely authentic. Among other things, Schreckinger interviewed several people included in the email chains who provided confirmation that the emails in their possession matched the ones in the Post's archive word for word. He also obtained documents from the Swedish government that were identical to key documents in the archive. His own outlet, Politico, was one of the few to even acknowledge his book. While ignoring the fact that they were the first to spread the lie that the emails were "Russian disinformation,” Politico editors — under the headline “Double Trouble for Biden”— admitted that the book “finds evidence that some of the purported Hunter Biden laptop material is genuine, including two emails at the center of last October’s controversy.”

The vital revelations in Schreckinger's book were almost completely ignored by the very same corporate media outlets that published the CIA's now-debunked lies. They just pretended it never happened. Grappling with it would have forced them to acknowledge a fact quite devastating to whatever remaining credibility they have: namely, that they all ratified and spread a coordinated disinformation campaign in order to elect Joe Biden and defeat Donald Trump. With strength in numbers, and knowing that they speak only to and for liberals who are happy if they lie to help Democrats, they all joined hands in an implicit vow of silence and simply ignored the new proof in Schreckinger's book that, in the days leading up to the 2020 election, they all endorsed a disinformation campaign.

It will now be much harder to avoid confronting the reality of what they did, though it is highly likely that they will continue to do so. This morning, The New York Times published an article about the broad, ongoing FBI criminal investigation into Hunter Biden's international business and tax activities. Prior to the election, the Times, to their credit, was one of the few to apply skepticism to the CIA's pre-election lie, noting on October 22 that “no concrete evidence has emerged that the laptop contains Russian disinformation.” Because the activities of Hunter Biden now under FBI investigation directly pertain to the emails first revealed by The Post, the reporters needed to rely upon the laptop's archive to amplify and inform their reporting. That, in turn, required The New York Times to verify the authenticity of this laptop and its origins — exactly what, according to their reporters, they successfully did:

People familiar with the investigation said prosecutors had examined emails between Mr. Biden, Mr. Archer and others about Burisma and other foreign business activity. Those emails were obtained by The New York Times from a cache of files that appears to have come from a laptop abandoned by Mr. Biden in a Delaware repair shop. The email and others in the cache were authenticated by people familiar with them and with the investigation.

That this cache of emails was authentic was clear from the start. Any doubts were obliterated by publication of Schreckinger's book six months ago. Now the Paper of Record itself explicitly states not only that the emails “were authenticated” but also that the original story from The Post about how they obtained these materials — they “come from a laptop abandoned by Mr. Biden in a Delaware repair shop” — “appears” to be true.

What this means is that, in the crucial days leading up to the 2020 presidential election, most of the corporate media spread an absolute lie about The New York Post's reporting in order to mislead and manipulate the American electorate. It means that Big Tech monopolies, along with Twitter, censored this story based on a lie from “the intelligence community.” It means that Facebook's promise from its DNC operative that it would suppress discussion of the reporting in order to conduct a "fact-check” of these documents was a fraud because if an honest one had been conducted, it would have proven that Facebook’s censorship decree was based on a lie. It means that millions of Americans were denied the ability to hear about reporting on the candidate leading all polls to become the next president, and instead were subjected to a barrage of lies about the provenance (Russia did it) and authenticity (disinformation!) of these documents.

The objections to noting all of this today are drearily predictable. Reporting on Hunter Biden is irrelevant since he was not himself a candidate (what made the reporting relevant was what it revealed about the involvement of Joe Biden in these deals). Given the war in Ukraine, now is not the time to discuss all of this (despite the fact that they are usually ignored, there are always horrific wars being waged even if the victims are not as sympathetic as European Ukrainians and the perpetrators are the film's Good Guys and not the Bad Guys). The real reason most liberals and their media allies do not want to hear about any of this is because they believe that the means they used (deliberately lying to the public with CIA disinformation) are justified by their noble ends (defeating Trump).

Whatever else is true, both the CIA/media disinformation campaign in the weeks before the 2020 election and the resulting regime of brute censorship imposed by Big Tech are of historic significance. Democrats and their new allies in the establishment wing of the Republican Party may be more excited by war in Ukraine than the subversion of their own election by the unholy trinity of the intelligence community, the corporate press, and Big Tech. But today's admission by The New York Times that this archive and the emails in it were real all along proves that a gigantic fraud was perpetrated by the country's most powerful institutions. What matters far more than the interest level of various partisan factions is the core truths about U.S. democracy revealed by this tawdry spectacle.




The following sites updated:


3/17/2022

tweet of the week

i'm going to call this tweet of the week because it says it all.  glenn greenwald:


I'm still not over how repugnant it is that politicians like & devote their lives to demanding wars that other families go fight and die in, then turn around and smear those who risk their lives for their wars -- like -- as *traitors.*
Image



again, it says it all.  


never wonder how we ended up with a red scare and lots of destroyed and damaged in the 20th century.  we got there then the same we're getting there now.  a few people are paying attention right now.  a lot more should be.


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


 Wednesday, March 16, 2022.  So many dangers in the world -- who knew the hideous hosts of THE VIEW would be part of that?


US President Joe Biden continues to persecute journalist Julian ASsange.  For the 'crime' of reporting the truth, Joe wants Julian brought to the US and wants him to stand trial and, understand, the US can be trusted to be fair and to protect him while he is in their custody.  Those laughable claims come as Kevin Reed (WSWS) reports:


A newly declassified 2008 document from the CIA’s inspector general reveals that one of the detainees currently held at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility was used as a living prop at a black site in Afghanistan to teach trainees the infamous enhanced interrogation techniques adopted by the administration of George W. Bush.

Ammar al-Baluchi, a Kuwaiti citizen, was rendered into US detention in 2003 from Pakistani custody and taken to a CIA torture facility known as the Salt Pit north of Kabul. According to the declassified document, the CIA was aware that rendering al-Baluchi was illegal because he was no longer a terrorist threat.

Proving that the Bush-Cheney administration’s pseudo-legal justifications for torture were themselves a sham, Baluchi was initially subjected to two torture techniques that were not on the approved list. The first was the use of a stick behind the knees in a stress position, and the other involved leaning back while kneeling and dousing with ice water.

One of the approved torture techniques being taught by the CIA and used repeatedly on Baluchi was “walling.” The CIA inspector general’s report says the torture trainees lined up to take turns smashing Baluchi head against a plywood wall.


According to the results of an MRI of Baluchi’s head carried out in 2018, a neuropsychologist found “abnormalities indicating moderate to severe brain damage” in areas affecting memory formation and retrieval, as well as behavioral regulation. The analysis found that the “abnormalities observed were consistent with traumatic brain injury.”

The walling of Baluchi involved placing his heels against a specially designed plywood wall “which had flexibility to it” and putting a rolled up towel around his neck. The heavily redacted report states, “The interrogators would then grab the ends of the towel in front of and below the detainees face and shove [Baluchi] backwards into the wall, never letting go of the towel.” While Baluchi was “naked for the proceedings,” the goal of the interrogators was to “bounce” him off the wall.

While the report states that there was no time limit for the walling sessions, “typically a session did not last for more than two hours at a time,” they went for as long as necessary for training purposes.

The declassified report also says that the treatment of Baluchi was not to extract information from him because the trainees were only interested in completing an interrogation course and becoming certified. As a former trainee told the CIA investigators, “all the interrogation students lined up to ‘wall’ Ammar so that [the instructor] could certify them on their ability to use the technique.”

The US government tortured prisoners.  Appalling enough.  But these butchers don't even try to hide behind the nonsense of 'we ignored the law because we needed information' -- no, they did it because they wanted to be 'checked off' on having learned the torture and how to carry it out.


THis is the sort of thing that lands people in prisons in functioning governments.  And should land people in prison in this dysfunctional government.


Why doesn't that happen here?  Because despite Kevin's laughable invocation of Bully Boy Bush and Dick CHeney, the torture was bipartisan.  By January 2007, the Congress -- both houses -- were controlled by the Democrats.    By January 2009, Barack Obama was president.  He came in promising he would close down the gulag at Guantanamo Bay and he never did.  He had two terms to do it and he never did.  Was one of the reasons he refused to shut it down because he was worried what the world would think when they learned how the government had tortured and traumatized?  


This same government is now supposed to be entrusted with protecting Julian Assange if they get him in their clutches?  

Thomas Scripps (WSWS) notes:


Julian Assange was shunted a step closer to his would-be executioners on Monday. The UK Supreme Court issued a one-line decision refusing to hear the WikiLeaks founder’s appeal against an earlier decision ordering his extradition to the United States.

The case will now be returned to the original court as a formality before being passed to the home secretary, Priti Patel, to give the final order. Once Patel receives the case, Assange could be on a plane to the US in just four weeks’ time, except for inevitable further appeals.

The Biden administration intends to prosecute Assange for charges under the Espionage Act with a potential sentence of 175 years in prison. This would be served in barbaric conditions that previous judgements acknowledged could drive him to suicide. His health has already been destroyed by years of incarceration in Britain’s maximum security Belmarsh prison.

Despite the immense danger faced by the most significant journalist of the 21st century, many major newspapers did not cover the Supreme Court decision. Those that did ran entirely perfunctory stories, largely without comment.

Britain’s leading liberal newspaper, the Guardian, did not write a single critical line in its cursory 350-word article, quoting just two sentences from his legal team. The US New York Times managed, “If Mr. Assange were extradited to the United States and faced a trial, the case could raise profound First Amendment issues. His prosecution has alarmed advocates of press freedom.”

These are publications which have spent the last weeks screaming about Russian President Vladimir Putin’s censorship and attacks on free speech and journalistic freedoms. When speaking out about democratic rights lines up with imperialist war aims, they are fervent advocates. In the case of Assange, who exposed the systematic crimes of US and British imperialism, the “democratic principles” they so fiercely defend in Russia whither on the vine.

The NATO-Russia war over Ukraine has not only accelerated Assange’s persecution, but intensified his long and deliberate isolation by the corporate media.

At a briefing with the Foreign Press Association last month, to introduce his new book The Trial of Julian Assange: A Story of Persecution, UN special rapporteur on torture Nils Melzer accused the mainstream media of failing in their duty as the “fourth estate” to hold governments to account. Melzer’s book is based on his three years of efforts to end the illegal mistreatment of the WikiLeaks founder.

In it, he criticises the “too little, too late”, “tame and lame” reporting of the British, American and American press, exposing their cynical pseudo-support for Assange:

“A handful of half-hearted opinion pieces in the Guardian and the New York Times rejecting Assange’s extradition are not bold enough, and so fail to convince. While both papers have timidly declared that convicting Assange of espionage would endanger press freedom, not a single mainstream media outlet protests the blatant violations of due process, human dignity and the rule of law that pervade the entire trial. None holds the involved governments to account for their crimes and corruption; none has the courage to confront political leaders with uncomfortable questions; none feels dutybound to inform and empower the people—a mere shadow of what was once the ‘fourth estate’.”


Joe Bidens going to protect Julian?  Joe had taken an oath to uphold the Constitution and yet he didn't do that as Guantanamo Bay makes very clear.  He was a US senator and he knew what was going on and elected to look the other way.  He didn't even muster faux tears the way a certain Illinois senator loves to do.  Joe didn't protect anyone then and he won't protect them now.  The UK turning Julian over to the US is turning him over to torture and that's very clear to everyone paying attention at this point.


Andrea Germanos writes:


The case has sparked global concern from press freedom and human rights groups who warn that prosecution of Assange would have far-reaching impacts on journalists and publishers who dare to challenge powerful governments by exposing their most closely-guarded secrets.

In a statement, Assange’s solicitors lamented that the request for appeal was denied, saying that “the court had found that there was a real risk of prohibited treatment in the event of his onward extradition.”

The legal team also said that they would be able to submit documents to Patel’s office for the next four weeks ahead of her decision and that Assange could still appeal on other grounds.

The high court ruled in December that Assange can be extradited, overturning an earlier ruling by the Westminster Magistrates’ Court that found extradition would endanger Assange’s life.

In a January statement, Committee to Protect Journalists deputy executive director Robert Mahoney warned that “the prosecution of the WikiLeaks founder in the United States would set a deeply harmful legal precedent that would allow the prosecution of reporters for news gathering activities and must be stopped.”

Mahoney, like other defenders of free speech and journalism, additionally called on the U.S. Justice Department to stop the extradition proceedings and drop its charges against Assange.


He exposed the War Crimes of the United States -- War Crimes carried out in Iraq and Afghanistan.  In what world is it plausible to then turn him over to the government that carried out the War Crimes?


Richard Medhurst addressed the latest developments on his YOUTUBE program.



Richard Medhurst attempts to accomplish something.  I have no idea what THE VIW attemtps to do thse days but broadcast an hour of hate speech with a bunch of overweight and under educated women braying incessently.


Ana Navarro came to this country as a young child but apparently never bothered to learn the Constitution -- she was apparently using her entire school day to go through the lunch line repeatedly which would explain the gifth.  The right-wing zealot loves US empire because her disgusting father wouldn't have had wealth without the US empire and she loathed those who argued for equality.  That's how she ended up in the US.  How she ended up on TV is another issue.  She's unattractive and her voice annoys.  She shouldn't be on TV or radi o for those reasons alone.  But there she is as Whoopi Goldberg's wingman. You now Whoopi, the failed actress.  Won an Academy Award and couldn't doa d amn thing with it because she never had the taste or sense to tell what qualified as drama resulting in one bad film after another.  


She's undereducated, obviously.  You can tell that when she speaks, you can tell that when she 'writes' (that laughable ghost0written bio).  She's not informed and she's not a thinker despite all the gas baggery she puts over the airwaves.  


She's an ugly person with an even uglier soul and in the '00s we called her out at THIRD for her embrace of torture -- no one else seemed too concerned about that.  Maybe they're still not concerned about what she's doing?


Here's RISING.



i really wish that RISING was a left show.  It's not.  


A left show might be calling out Whoopi for her comments -- especially when she starts with, "They used to arrest people for doing stuff like this.  . . .'' She's speaking of journalist Tucker Carlson and former Congress member Tulsi Gabbard.  But she's speaking of two other people as well.


Julius Rosenberg and Ethel Rosenberg.


They were executed.


Why is she speaking of them?  She didn't get enough of a backlash for antisemitism last month?


Because she's a blood thristy whore who uses the public airwaves to celebrate witch hutns and executions?


Her remarks are appalling.  You'd expect that sort of crap fro m the ghost of William F. Buckley but not from a so-called fun show broadcast by DISNEY.  It's outrageous.  It's offensive.  


She's lamenting the end of the Red Scare and she's calling for a new one while explaining that nothing cheers her on like the execution of Ethel and Julius?


Unifnormed and uneducated minds do not belong on the ariwaves as hosts for political discussions.  Anything beyond food and bitchy is clearly beyond the hosts.  


Barbara Walters had a vision.  She deserves credit for that.  But what THE VIEW is today is not what she envisioned and it's appalling to watch this garbage.  (I don't.  I've included RISIN because that's where I saw Whoopi and Ana frothing at the mouth.)


It's outrageous and its shameful and it's so far beyond celebrating humanity that we really ned to rethink Whoopi Goldberg.  She's no longer just an idiot who manages to pull off a comedy line somebody else wrote, she's not a rabid person addicted to hate who wants to invoke the executions of the Rosenbergs as a good thing and something that our country is missing.


In Iraq, the political stalemate continues.  THE NEW ARAB notes:


The Iraqi parliament on Tuesday scheduled a March 26 session for deputies to hold a delayed vote on the country's president.

Parliament also released a final list of 40 candidates for the post, a largely ceremonial role reserved for the Kurds.

Among the frontrunners are Barham Saleh, the incumbent and member of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, and Rebar Ahmed of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, the PUK's rival.




New content at THIRD:


The following sites updated:







3/16/2022

the cleaning lady

i wanted to say 'wow' about 'the cleaning lady.'


it wrapped up season 1 on fox monday night.


and it was a good episode.  it was not a great episode and it was not the stunner the ads promised.


thony (the cleaning lady) got arman on board to work with the f.b.i. garrett (fbi agent) didn't want him and called him a killer and thony pointed out that she was there when the man died (episode 1) and that arman tried to save the man and it was arman's boss who had killed (the boss' brother carried out the hit).  


arman did not trust the f.b.i.  no 1 should.  so he came up with a method to ensure he had money.


thony helped him.  the sting went down more or less as planned and the fbi arrested every 1.  but they didn't get the money.  it was crypto currency and arman had it on a thumb drive and got it onto a maid's cart - the 1 thony's sister-in-law fi had (fi was part of the plan).


the boss has no idea that arman was the 1 who set him up.  he wants to get arman out of prison to have arman run the syndicate.


arman gave thony the code to the money and she gave some - as promised - to arman's wife who was rude and told her nothing has changed, even though thony had control of the money, she was still working for them.


thony and fi - and by this point, i was wondering where the explosive finale was that we were promised - ended up outside some building with thony explaining this was going to be their business and they would run it.


then they finally get home and that awful marco (thony's husband) had run off with their son lucas.


that was about the whole episode except for a tender moment between thony and arman when she visited him in prison and they held hands until the guard made them stop.


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


 Tuesday, March 15, 2022.  As the war goes on, the persecution of Julian Asange continues with a new ruling from a Biritsh court, the fable of the 'good nazis' begins to unravel, and so much more.


Starting with the Ausrlaian journalist that US President Joe Biden continues to persecute.  Juilian Assange committed the 'crime' of exposing US War Crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Joe Biden wants him to stand trial in the US for practicing journalism.  Blustering, bigoted Biden wants Julian to pay for telling the world the truth.  Joe most recently -- his State of the Union address -- was caught lying again about how many times he himself had visited Iraq and Afghanistan (doubling the total) so, you understand, Joe will always be on the side of liars and always want to punish those who tell the truth.  


He is demanding that the United Kingdom turn over Julian who remains in a British prison because, well, they have no reason to hold him in the UK but like good little serfs, they do what the US government tells them.  

Victoria Lindrea (BBC NEWS) reports:

The Supreme Court has refused to allow Julian Assange his latest appeal against extradition to the US.

A court spokesman said Mr Assange's application did not raise "an arguable point of law". The decision is a major blow to his hopes to avoid extradition.

The Wikileaks founder, 50, is wanted in the US over the publication of thousands of classified documents in 2010 and 2011.

His lawyers said he had not ruled out launching a final appeal.

The case will now go back down to District Judge Vanessa Baraitser, the original judge who assessed the US's extradition request. 



Assange’s lawyers will have four weeks to make submissions to the home secretary before her decision. There also remain other routes to fight his extradition, for instance by mounting a challenge on other issues of law raised at first instance that he lost on and have not yet been subject to appeal.

The attempted appeal to the supreme court was specifically on the issue of the US assurances.

In January last year, district judge Vanessa Baraitser blocked extradition on the basis that procedures in prisons in the US would not prevent Assange from potentially taking his own life.

But that decision was overturned by two senior judges, Lord Burnett of Maldon, the lord chief justice, and Lord Justice Holroyde, at the high court. Burnett said the risk of Assange being held in highly restrictive US prison conditions was “excluded by the assurances which are offered. It follows that we are satisfied that, if the assurances had been before the judge, she would have answered the relevant question differently.”

Responding to the supreme court’s decision, a spokesperson for Assange’s solicitors, Birnberg Peirce, said: “We regret that the opportunity has not been taken to consider the troubling circumstances in which requesting states can provide caveated guarantees after the conclusion of a full evidential hearing. In Mr Assange’s case, the court had found that there was a real risk of prohibited treatment in the event of his onward extradition.”


Thomas Scripps (WSWS) observes:


Assange’s life is in grave danger. Neither appeal is likely to be granted and not even such formal legal rights and processes to proceed should be considered a certainty.Assange’s prosecution has always been the “legal” continuation of a lawless assassination-cum-rendition operation organised by the CIA, seeking to silence Assange for good, one way or another.

The timeline has now been dramatically accelerated. The Supreme Court’s decision came suddenly, without any prior announcement. That it refused even to hear Assange’s case is highly unusual. The lower High Court certified on January 24 that a “point of law of public importance” had been raised by Assange, normally prompting the Supreme Court to consider the appeal.

The point of law in question was, “In what circumstances can an appellate court receive assurances from a requesting state which were not before the court of first instance.” Even on these limited grounds, the case was considered worth examining by the High Court and legal experts in the field.

Last month, WikiLeaks cited a report of the case by the highly regarded London law firm Bindmans which noted, “Extradition practitioners largely welcome Supreme Court guidance on this point as late assurances designed to alleviate the court’s concerns about human rights violations following extradition have become a highly contentious issue, especially when provided by States with a poor record in human rights themselves.”

However, having been given the option to go through the motions and apply the Supreme Court’s legal imprimatur to Assange’s effective rendition, the justices instead delivered a one-line rejection: “The court ordered that permission to appeal be refused because the application does not raise an arguable point of law.”

The meaning is clear: the time for charades is over, Assange must be dealt with quickly.

This was a decision reached at the highest levels of the British state, delivered by the President of the Supreme Court Lord Reed and the Deputy President Lord Hodge, alongside Lord Briggs. The NATO-Russia war being waged through the proxy conflict in Ukraine, moving ever closer to a direct military confrontation between nuclear armed powers, has doubtless come as a powerful spur to action, underscoring for the ruling class why Assange must be silenced.


Binoy Kampmark (DISSIDENT VOICE) observes:


Dismay at the decision was expressed by Amnesty International’s Deputy Research Director for Europe, Julia Hall.  “The Supreme Court has missed an opportunity to clarify the UK’s acceptance of deeply flawed diplomatic assurances against torture.  Such assurances are inherently unreliable and leave people at risk of severe abuse upon extradition or other transfer.”

The next stage in this diabolical torment of the WikiLeaks founder involves remitting the case to Westminster Magistrates’ Court, which will only serve a ceremonial role in referring the decision to the Home Secretary, Priti Patel.  Only the most starry-eyed optimists will expect extradition to be barred.  (Patel is fixated with proposed changes to the UK Official Secrets Act that will expansively criminalise journalists and whistleblowers who publish classified information.)  The defence will do their best in submissions to Patel ahead of the decision, but it is likely that they will have to seek judicial review.

In the likely event of Patel’s approval, the defence may make a freedom of press argument, though this is by no means a clear run thing.  It will still be up to the higher courts as to whether they would be willing to grant leave to hear further arguments.  Whichever way the cards fall, this momentous, torturous journey of paperwork, briefs, lawyers, and prison will continue to sap life and cause grief.


The persecution of Julian is a threat to the press and not just members of the US press.  Julian is not an American citien.  He cannot be guilty of treason.  No foreigner can be.  His actions did not take place on US soil.  He published the truth and that, according to Joe Biden, is not a defense.  A foreign journalist published the truth and now the US government attempts to destroy the journalist.  It sends a dark and disturbing message to journalists around the world.  And the US makes clear that for all its pretense about caring for a free press and being appalled by the way other governments attempt to supress journalists is just a pretense.  I wonder what 'high tonal' remarks Harvey Weinstein's whore Meryl STreep will have to make about the press now?  While she had that bad film to promote she pretended to care about journalism and support a free press.  But note that the whore hasn't said a word about Julian.  Not surprising when we know her response to the truth about Harvey coming out was to insist to Ronana Farrow that he msut not expose Harvey because Harvey donates to Democratic Party causes.


Whore.


Rose McGowan called it and Rose was right.


Julian's life is in danger.  Joe Biden is using the full weight of the US government -- and our tax dollars -- to persecute Julian.  It's interesting to note who can speak out and who has made the decision to be silent.  


Journalist John Pilger Tweets:


The UK Supreme Court says the case of Julian #Assange fails to raise "an arguable point of law" and he can be extradited. This insults our intelligence and tells us there is no credible justice system. Julian Assange has committed no crime. Period.


We'll note this Tweet:


If wars can be started by lies, peace can be started by truth. ~Julian Assange
Image


That must have always scared Joe Biden and it must scare him especially now as his victory lap war is falling apart and the American people are beginning to question many of the lies he and his surrogates have pimped to turn a neo nazi government into  the best friends the US could ever have and as cute and cuddly as a newborn puppy.


The US government getting into bed with nazis is notthing new as Mickey Z reminds at DISSIDENT VOICE:


Reminder: When attempting to unravel the behaviors of today’s ruling class, it helps to educate yourself about their actions in the past. For example, the U.S. and the CIA rescued and recruited Nazi war criminals after World War II to bolster their intelligence, military, and space program efforts.

The most well-known of these men was Wernher von Braun — a man described as the “leading figure in the development of rocket technology in Nazi Germany and a pioneer of rocket and space technology in the United States.” His career — from exploiting Jewish slave labor to becoming a decorated NASA architect — is well-documented here. For the purposes of this article, I’ll focus on some of the other, lesser-known Nazis who were assimilated into America’s “Greatest Generation.”

“I am a general and chief of the intelligence department of the High Command of the German Army. I have information of the highest importance for your Supreme Commander and the American government, and I must be taken immediately to your senior commander.”

It was with these words that General Reinhard Gehlen, Hitler’s notorious eastern front espionage chief, began his relationship with the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) and the budding U.S. intelligence community. As the OSS was transformed into the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), yet another of many dark alliances emerged.

After surrendering on May 22, 1945, Gehlen, or “Reinhard the Fox,” was eventually interviewed by OSS founders “Wild” Bill Donovan and Allen Dulles after flying to Washington — in the uniform of a U.S. general. According to his biographer, Leonard Mosley, Dulles recommended that the Nazi super-spy be given a budget of $3,500,000 and “set up in business as the supplier of Russian and East European intelligence.”

But the shrewd Gehlen had some conditions:

  1. His organization would not be regarded as part of the American intelligence services but as an autonomous apparatus under his exclusive management. Liaison with American intelligence would be maintained by a U.S. officer whose selection Gehlen would approve.
  2. The Gehlen Organization would be used solely to procure intelligence on the Soviet Union and the satellite countries of the communist bloc.
  3. Upon the establishment of a German government, the organization would be transferred to it and all previous agreements and arrangements canceled, subject to discussions between the new sovereign authority and the United States.
  4. Nothing detrimental or contrary to German interests must be required or expected from the organization, nor must it be called upon for security activities against Germans in West Germany.

Considering that Gehlen was essentially a prisoner of war who could have been brought up on charges of war crimes, these demands were remarkable. Even more remarkable, at first blush, is the fact that the U.S. complied. However, when viewed through the prism of the rapidly escalating Cold War, a Nazi-CIA alliance becomes rather predictable.

With German defeat imminent, Gehlen instructed several members of his staff to begin microfilming intelligence on the USSR beginning in March 1945. After secretly burying this material throughout the Austrian Alps, Gehlen and his men sought a deal.


At INFORMATION CLEARING HOUSE, Mike Whitney reports on the naxis in the government of Ukraine:


The United States has been arming and training far-right militants that are the ideological descendants of Nazi war criminals that were directly involved in the mass-extermination of Jews, Slavs and Gypsies during the Second World War. These Ukrainian storm troopers are among the most vicious and malignant combatants Washington has ever employed to implement its foreign policy agenda. Naturally, Washington sees these fascist-zealots as mere pawns in its proxy war on Russia. Even so, the ‘alliance of convenience’ does not diminish the fact that Uncle Sam is now in bed with right-wing militants whose spiritual leader, Adolph Hitler, was responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of people as well as the destruction of large parts of Europe and Russia. Check out this clip from an article titled “Can Ukraine have a ‘Nazi problem’ with a Jewish president?:

“Ukraine really does have a far-right problem, and it’s not a fiction of Kremlin propaganda. And it’s well past time to talk about it,” explained journalist and expert on the Ukrainian far right, Michael Colborne.

The most known neo-Nazi group on Ukraine’s far right is the Azov movement. The movement grew out of the Azov Regiment (originally a Battalion), formed in the chaos of war in early 2014.

It was formed by a “ragtag group of far-right thugs, football hooligans and international hangers-on, including dozens of Russian citizens,” said Colborne, who wrote a book on the movement.”(“Can Ukraine have a ‘Nazi problem’ with a Jewish president?”, Jewish Unpacked)


Chris Hedges (SCHEER POST) observes:


The Ukrainian war has silenced the last vestiges of the Left. Nearly everyone has giddily signed on for the great crusade against the latest embodiment of evil, Vladimir Putin, who, like all our enemies, has become the new Hitler. The United States will give $13.6 billion in military and humanitarian assistance to Ukraine, with the Biden administration authorizing on Saturday an additional $200 million in military assistance. The 5,000-strong EU rapid deployment force, the recruitment of all Eastern Europe, including Ukraine, into NATO, the reconfiguration of former Soviet Bloc militaries to NATO weapons and technology have all been fast tracked. Germany, for the first time since World War II, is massively rearming. It has lifted its ban on exporting weapons. Its new military budget is twice the amount of the old budget, with promises to raise the budget to more than 2 percent of GDP, which would move its military from the seventh largest in the world to the third-, behind China and the United States. NATO battlegroups are being doubled in size in the Baltic states to more than 6,000 troops. Battlegroups will be sent to Romania and Slovakia. Washington will double the number of U.S. troops stationed in Poland to 9,000. Sweden and Finland are considering dropping their neutral status to integrate with NATO.

This is a recipe for global war. History, as well as all the conflicts I covered as a war correspondent, have demonstrated that when military posturing begins, it often takes little to set the funeral pyre alight. One mistake. One overreach. One military gamble too many. One too many provocations. One act of desperation. 


For a very brief time, Joe and his angry surrogates had control of the narrative and pimped their propaganda.  People have woken up and trush have been revealed.  Patrick Martin (WSWS) observes:


There is an obvious element of racism in the selective outrage of imperialist governments and the corporate media, expressed in saturation coverage of the suffering of the Ukrainian people, accompanied by virtual silence over the equally terrible suffering of the population of Yemen.

This was summed up in the comment by CBS correspondent Charlie D’Agata, who blurted out that victims who “look like us” are more likely to evoke a sympathetic response. He was only one of many. Daniel Hannan of Britain’s Daily Telegraph remarked, “They seem so like us. That’s it. That is what makes it so shocking. Ukraine is a European country. Its people watch Netflix and have Instagram accounts, vote in free elections and read uncensored newspapers. War is no longer something visited upon impoverished and remote populations.”

Government officials followed suit. Ukraine’s chief prosecutor, David Sakvarelidze, told the BBC, “It’s really emotional for me because I see European people with blue eyes and blonde hair being killed, children being killed every day with Putin’s missiles.” Kiril Petkov, prime minister of Bulgaria said, “These are not the refugees we are used to. They are Europeans, intelligent, educated people, some are IT programmers ... this is not the usual refugee wave of people with an unknown past. No European country is afraid of them.” Retired British general Richard Barrons, former assistant chief of the general staff, said, “I think one of the issues … is how does public opinion in the UK and other countries react to seeing people who look and live like us being slaughtered.”

The Arab and Middle Eastern Journalists Association (AMEJA) issued a statement condemning this racist double standard. “AMEJA stands in full solidarity with all civilians under military assault in any part of the world, and we deplore the difference in news coverage of people in one country versus another,” the organization said. “This type of commentary reflects the pervasive mentality in Western journalism of normalizing tragedy in parts of the world such as the Middle East, Africa, South Asia, and Latin America. It dehumanizes and renders their experience with war as somehow normal and expected ... “

Race is, of course, not the determining factor. There were tears aplenty in the imperialist media for Syrian victims of repression by the Assad regime. The decisive issue is whether the government carrying out the slaughter is allied with American imperialism. Hence the silence over atrocities in Saudi Arabia, Colombia, India and the Philippines—to say nothing of the millions of victims of the Pentagon and CIA in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and across North Africa—in sharp contrast to the screaming headlines and nonstop coverage of the victims of Putin’s reactionary invasion of Ukraine.

The working class should not be swayed by any of the campaigns in the capitalist media, aimed at mobilizing public opinion in support of the foreign policy of American imperialism and its European allies.


In other news, yesterday RUDAW reported:


Rival Shiite leaders are expected to meet on Monday to discuss the formation of a new government, following months of political deadlock, though they are unlikely to decide on the nominee for prime minister, an Iraqi MP told Rudaw on Monday.

The meeting is set to take place between the leader of the Sadrist Movement Muqtada al-Sadr and State of Law Coalition leader Nouri al-Maliki, according to the Iraqi MP, though the exact time was not mentioned. 

“The nominee for prime minister will not be decided on during this meeting,” State of Law Coalition MP Faisal al-Naili told Rudaw on Monday. 

“Even if the two sides agree on a nominee, they still need to consult with their allies,” Naili added.

A phone call between the two political rivals was held earlier this week, sparking speculation that the topic of discussion was Sadr’s intention to nominate his cousin, Iraq's ambassador to the United Kingdom, Mohammad Jaafar al-Sadr, as the next prime minister.

There has been no official confirmation of these rumors surrounding Jaafar. 


The political stalemate continues.