sorry. not a fan of amy schumer's atempts at comedy. she's a loud fat woman and people wanted to pretend that she was really funny when she wasn't even mildly funny.
what passes for her humor today is all about her attacking others and drawing divisions and, in the run u to the broadcast, her 'humor' continues to be divisive and annoying.
it's as though the oscars hired andrew dice clay to co-host.
not interested in amy schumer and i will not be watching. i hope a lot of people decide to tune out. serves abc right if that happens because amercians have been tuning out programs due to partisanship passed off as entertainment. and with that as a known problem, abc hires the hideous and divisive amy schumer to be a co-host?
Thursday, March 24, 2022. Moqtada al-Sadr wasnt his inexperienced
relative to be prime minister of Iraq as Mad Maddie Albright slips away
to that special place in hell that she spoke so often of.
We're
live on the Blood Runway, awaiting the latest arrival. Look, there he
is, Mad Maddie! She's sipping throug purgatory as she heads straight to
hell. Mad Maddie! Mad Maddie! Can you stop a moment to speak to
us!!!
Madeleine Albright :Yes, what is it?
Is there anything you'd like to say to our viewing audience?
Madeleine
Albright : Just that I've always believed that hate is eternal and if
you spend your life focused on that, you can do a lot real damage and
kill a lot of innocent people. The only wasted life is a life dovted to
love and peace.
Some people consider you a buthcer.
Madeleine
Albright :: A butcher? No, a utcher does much more honest work. I'm
an excutioner. I am a destroyer. I used my time on earth ensuring
others wuffered and I'm really, really proud of that. My only real
regret is that I couldn't have killed more.
Mad Maddie could you speak up, some people in purgatory are starting to boo.
Madeleine
Albright : Yes, and I hear them. All I can say is you hate me, you
really, really hate me. It makes all I did worth it to feel so much
hate and repulsion.
What are you most grateful for?
Madeleine
Albright : A lifetime of destrution. Probably right after that would
be the press..I've always insisted, ''Give me a whorish press and I can
kill millions." They whored for me while I killed Iraqi children. They
whored for me out of office. Kisses to Katrina vanden Heuvel who ran
Naomi Klein's GUARDIAN report on James Baker profiting off the Iraq War
but refused to let THE NATION run the article about me profiting off the
Iraq War. Katty, you cheap whore, let's bump one last time when you
join me in hell! But seriously, even now the press whores for me, even
in death. They won't hold me accountable. They'll talk about me being
the first -- and theyll shortchange me. "The First and The Worst!" --
that's how I always billed myself. Give me the credit I'm due!!!!
Last question, Mad Maddie, what are you wearing?
Madeleine
Albright :: It's my 100% pure civilian coat, made from the skins of
many of the actual children I condemned to death. All murders matter
but there's something especially soft and warm about knowing that your
kill was a child, you know what I mean? Now excuse me, I have to go.
The Haliburton wing of Hell has a strict check-in policy and I don't
want to lose my suite. Tell Condi [Rice] to keep giving Hank
[Kissinger] all the love that I did and, Dick [Cheney], I know you'll be
joining me soon!
Madeleine Albright has left the
earth. The whorish press is attempting to sweep up and conceal the mess
she left behind. Some will insist don't speak ill of the dead but did
Mad Maddie follow that practice regarding the Iraqi children she
killed?
Madeleine Albright died today. Do not worry about the former Secretary
of State. As she long noted, there is a special place in hell . . . for
people like her.
She infamously said there was a special place in hell for women who
didn't help other women. Since she took pleasure in the deaths of so
many Iraqi girls (and boys) you can be sure her destination is already
booked and they have a room ready.
"We think it was wroth it." That's her infamous remark from 60 MINUTES
when Lesley Stahl asked her about the crushing sanctions she oversaw as
part of Bill Clinton's administration -- sanctions that led
But that was what the figure was thought to be when Mad Maddie was asked. And she said it was worth it.
She was a bloody thirsty War Hawk. Unlike the bulk of the deaths she
caused, she lived to the age of 84. She profited off of the Iraq War.
She was a merchant of death. I hope she will be very warm in her
after-life. Very, very warm.
Former secretary of state Madelyn Albright said killing 500,000 kids was "worth it." I watched the interview and thought she'd find a way not to answer, obfuscate, blame Saddam, or change the subject. Nope. She went all in. Killing kids was ok with her.
Now she's dead. Oh well.
Ajamu Baraka Tweets:
Madeline Albright was a criminal like her boss Bill Clinton. If there was real justice in the world they both would have found themselves in the dock for war crimes and crimes against humanity.
In
Iraq, the political stalemate continues. October 10th elections were
held. The country still waits on a president and prime minister all
these months later. ARB WEKKLY reports:
Partisan and personal loyalties have decided the fate of Iraq's
presidency and premiership, despite all previous vows by populist leader
Moqtada al-Sadr to base his nominations for leadership posts on the
national interest only.
Instead, Iraq seems to be moving away from a system of political
quotas to one based on the accommodation of various players, if not
indeed, plain nepotism.
Sadr chose to nominate Riber Ahmed, the Kurdistan region’s interior
minister and director of the office of party leader Massoud Barzani, for
the position of president of the republic. He has also nominated
Mohammad Jaafar al-Sadr, one of his cousins, to serve as the country’s
prime minister.
Iraqi political analysts said that Sadr, who had claimed to be
motivated by a desire to free himself from the yoke of the pro-Iranian
Shia Coordination Framework, has fallen under the control of Massoud
Barzani and accepted his conditions. These included endorsing the
latter’s nominee for the presidency of Iraq, despite the fact that the
candidate is virtually unknown to most Iraqis. Moreover, Ahmed will have
a hard time filling the shoes of a figure of the stature, connections
and overall record of the incumbent Barham Salih.
Analysts said that by agreeing to be swayed by the game of political
accommodation and by choosing a relative with no political record nor
experience as nominee for prime minister, Sadr has shown he is no
different from the rest of the political players who have assumed
leadership positions in the country since the 2003 US invasion. His
opposition to quotas, nepotism and his advocacy of the “national
majority” now ring hollow, they add.
Three days before the appointment of a new president for Iraq, the
tripartite alliance (the Sunni Sovereignty Alliance, the Kurdistan
Democratic Party and the Sadrists) announced the formation of the
largest bloc in parliament under the banner of “Saving the Country”. The
new alliance officially announced the nomination of Riber Ahmed for
president and Mohammad Jaafar al-Sadr as prime minister.
The
buffon the western press called a "kingmaker" is revealed as the fraud
so many of us already knew he was. In fact, the western press itself
was smarter about Moqtada in 2004 than they are now (excepting Paddy
Cockburn who was always an idiot when it came to Moqtada -- then and
now).
March 25th is when Parliament is set to meet
next and they should be voting on the issue of president. There are
dozens of nominees. After the president is voted on, the next step
would be for the new president to name a prime minister-designate. That
person would then have 30 days to form a Cabinet. It's supposed to be a
full Cabinet. No one's ever been held to that. They should be. It's
the only measure you have to meet to move from prime minister designate
to actual prime minister. The point of the test is to demonstrate that
you will be able to govern. And the more empty Cainet spaces a
designate has had, the harder it was for them to govern once they were
prime minister. So the test does serve a prupose.
We'll wind down with a few more Tweets regarding the thankfully dead Mad Maddie:
madeleine albright confronted by an ohio state university student in 1998 on why the US continues to bomb iraq while selling weapons to israel used on palestinians. her response is accusing the students in the room of defending saddam hussein
To you, that was a beloved child, your progeny, the fruit of your loins, the synthesis of you and your beloved spouse, the herald of a brighter future after decades of gloom -- to Madelyn Albright, it was a small price to pay to show Saddam a line in the sand.
no past last night. sorry, internet was out. i called about 30 minutes after midnight and finally got a human and was informed that there was an update taking place and it would last until 6 am. but i tried when i got up and gave up around 9. then we had to go shopping - my daughter and i - so we caught the ferry and went shopping in boston. then it was fashion show when we got home (for her, we were getting her some new clothes). i had hoped to write sooner but oh well.
'dynasty'?
complaint. why are we having fallon dreaming about having a child with liam?
i wouldn't mind that storyline. but it feels like this is something to get us excited about that will then fall apart.
dominique is having a fashion show and wants kirby's help because kirby has modeled and has connections. kirby says she's done with it but agrees to help. (done with modeling.) in the end, she isn't done. dominique's main model is just not carrying out the reveal for the big outfit. so kirby ends up on the runway. at first, dominique's upset and lets her son jeff know. but then kirby pulls it off and dominique is impressed.
amanda let's alexis know that she doesn't trust 2 men. the 1st is her brother adam and she thinks alexis has gone too easy on him. alexis makes a joke about how that's in part because she doesn't want adam coming after her. and the other? dex.
now alexis is amanda's mother and amanda may be feeling extra protective for that reason. or maybe i'm missing something on dex? i just know the original series made dex the love of alexis' life. maybe i'm set up, from the 80s series, to wrongly see the best in dex?
crystal's kidnapping story bores me to tears. don't expect me to recap that. but i will note that the producers and writers must realize that they're boring us because done one scene after another where her brother beto (the kidnapper) is in a tight wife-beater t-shirt.
the actress is playing crystal and her look alike and while she does have two different voices to make the character sound different, there's nothing she does to make the two characters differently physically. remember on 'the bionic woman' when jamie had her double lis? that happened in two different seasons. well lisa was very different physically from jamie and not just because lisa smoked.
liam wants his book made into a movie. the director? it's the woman michael said a loud no to the episode before last (the 1 sammy jo and kirby tried to set him up with). that was a little too pat. i also laughed at the idea that some small time director is so demand that others have to woo her. in real life, she'd be marketing herself to producers for jobs if she wasn't creating her own.
is monica going to be back this season? she was 1 of my favorite characters. she's jeff's sister, dominique's daughter. dominique came back and monica left at the end of that season. i want her back on the show.
Wednesday, March 23, 2022. The cerafully crafted narrative on
Ukraine continues to unravel and a major report is released chornicling
the persecution of the LFBTQ community in Iraq.
Every
day, JUS President Joe Biden and the White House lose a little more
control of the narrative regarding Ukraine. Every day the action
becomes less popular. Every day, people realize how much they've been
manipulated I said "people," that doesn't include Amy Schumer. After
all, there's a reason we don't let her on the furniture.
Dan Cohen (MPN) reports on how the whole effort has been sold to the public by numerous public relations firms:
Since the Russian offensive inside Ukraine commenced on February 24,
the Ukrainian military has cultivated the image of a plucky little army
standing up to the Russian Goliath. To bolster the perception of
Ukrainian military mettle, Kiev has churned out a steady stream of
sophisticated propaganda aimed at stirring public and official support
from Western countries.
The campaign includes language guides, key messages, and hundreds of
propaganda posters, some of which contain fascist imagery and even
praise Neo-Nazi leaders.
Behind Ukraine’s public relations effort is an army of foreign
political strategists, Washington DC lobbyists, and a network of
intelligence-linked media outlets.
Ukraine’s propaganda strategy earned it praise from a NATO commander who told the Washington Post, “They are really excellent in stratcom — media, info ops, and also psy-ops.” The Post
ultimately conceded that “Western officials say that while they cannot
independently verify much of the information that Kyiv puts out about
the evolving battlefield situation, including casualty figures for both
sides, it nonetheless represents highly effective stratcom.”
Key to the propaganda effort is an international legion of public
relations firms working directly with Ukraine’s Ministry of Foreign
Affairs to wage information warfare.
According to the industry news site PRWeek, the initiative was launched by an anonymous figure who allegedly founded a Ukraine-based public relations firm.
“From the first hour of war, we decided to join the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs to help them distribute the official sources to show the
truth,” the nameless figure told PR Week. “This is a hybrid war:
the mix of bloodily struggling fight with a huge disinformation and
fake campaign lead by Russia [sic].”
According to the anonymous figure, more than 150 public relations firms have joined the propaganda blitz.
The international effort is spearheaded by public relations firm PR Network
co-founder Nicky Regazzoni and Francis Ingham, a top public relations
consultant with close ties to the UK’s government. Ingraham previously
worked for Britain’s Conservative Party, sits on the UK Government
Communication Service Strategy and Evaluation Council, is Chief
Executive of the International Communications Consultancy Organisation,
and leads the membership body for UK local government communicators, LG
Comms.
Everyone sang from the same hymnal for a
reason and it wasn't because they were citing facts. It would be
interesting to know how many celebrity 'influencers' were paid off to
share tehir deeply, held and long standing beliefs that all developed
about six weeks ago.
The man heading the neo-nazi
government in Ukraine continues to step in it and track it all over
their well laid plans. Richard Medhurst reviews how his propaganda has
gone off script.
The
reality is getting out. And that's why you see the Whoopi Goldbergs
losing their s**t on air. The narrative has collapsed. And is
collapsing.
The truth is out there and people are catching on. Be
cute if all the liars who delibertaely lied -- for money, to egg on
war, whatever -- got held accountable. They won't. But we cand ream.
The Ukraine War is now making Russian citizens, at the behest of
various quarters, undertake acts of purification in various foreign
theatres. They are being told to engage in crude demonstrations of
loyalty (or, in some cases, disloyalty). Admit you hate Putin, and you
can attend a tournament to earn your crust.
UK Sports Minister Nigel Huddleston has taken a keen interest in this
daft effort, hoping to encourage the organisers of Wimbledon, the All
England Law Tennis Club (AELTC) to take a more severe approach to
players from “pariah states” as long as they do not include such angelic
wonders as Saudi Arabia. Before a select parliamentary committee,
Huddleston noted
that, “Many countries have agreed that they will not allow
representatives from Russia to compete. There are also visa issues as
well. When it comes to individuals, that is more complex.”
Complexity and Huddleston do not get along. “We need some potential
assurance that they are not supporters of Putin and we are considering
what requirements we may need to try to get some assurances along those
lines.”
Tennis player Daniil Medvedev and his colleagues are facing the
prospect that not engaging in public denouncement of the Kremlin will be
insufficient to enable them to compete. They are already not permitted
to compete under the Russian flag, and they are being told that a
Russian winning Wimbledon would be unpardonable for the glorious British
tournament. Their country has already been banned from competing in team events such as the Davis Cup and Billie Jean King tournaments.
And
The Queen of Lard Amy Schumer is trying to get the Academy to put this
on stage? She doesn't nknow about art, she doesn't know about fitness,
she doesn't know about comedy. All of her commentar sare driving
viewers away. SHe needs to shut her mouth now. She has not been given a
post that tells her she can speak on behalf of the Acadmey. She is
entertaining at the Oscars as a co-host. That is all. Knowing her, she
won't provide much entertainment.
This was a huge
mistake to make her a co-host and everything she's done in the last two
weeks has made that obvious. She is turning off potential viewers and
that's not why she was hired. She was hired. Grasp that. She's
working there. She's not nominated for anything. Probably never will
be. But she thinks she can use this post -- mis-use it -- for her own
personal politics? No.
In February news circulated that a 23-year-old transgender woman, Doski Azad, had been killed
by her brother in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq. I read the news, having
just concluded my research on armed groups’ killings, abductions,
torture, and sexual violence against LGBT people in Iraq, and thought,
how can LGBT people get justice and accountability when they can be
killed and abused with impunity, even in their own homes?
Over the past six months, I interviewed 54 LGBT Iraqis who have
survived harrowing violence at the hands of Iraqi armed groups and the
police. Some of them also had intimate knowledge of other LGBT Iraqis
who had been killed or disappeared by armed groups due to their gender
presentation or perceived sexual orientation.
Our new report
documents 8 abductions, 8 attempted murders, 4 extrajudicial killings,
27 instances of sexual violence, 45 threats to rape and kill, and 42
cases of online targeting by armed units within the Popular Mobilization
Forces (PMF), groups nominally under the prime minister’s control since
2016, against LGBT people in Iraq. In eight cases, abuses by armed
groups and police were against children as young as 15. In thirty-nine
cases, the victims were able to identify the armed group behind the
attack against them.
The numbers are most likely much higher. The attackers are known.
Yet, as with so many killings and disappearances in Iraq, the
perpetrators have not been held accountable.
Many of the people I interviewed were young enough to have just
graduated from high school, yet the fear and isolation they described
stretched as far as they could remember. Most had never spoken to anyone
about what had happened to them. I found myself on several occasions
setting aside my interview questions and just talking to them. I
listened to a 27-year-old gay man describe how his boyfriend was
tortured in front of him. “Then they shot him five times,” he said.
From the summary of the report:
The Iraqi government has failed to hold
accountable members of various armed groups who in recent years have
continued to abduct, rape, torture, and kill lesbian, gay, bisexual, and
transgender (LGBT)people,
with impunity. The cyclical nature of abuses against LGBT people,
emanating from the family and stretching into every aspect of their
public life, renders any “suspicion” of
homosexuality or gender variance a cause for potential violence, which
not only results in the death of LGBT people but makes their lives
unlivable.
This report is focused on killings, abductions, torture, and sexual
violence against LGBT people by armed groups in Iraq. It is based on 54
interviews with LGBT Iraqis who have survived violence and
discrimination by state and non-state actors, based primarily on their
gender expression and presumed sexual orientation.
Human Rights Watch, supported by the Iraqi LGBT rights organization
IraQueer, documented eight cases of abductions, eight cases of attempted
murder, four extrajudicial killings, twenty-seven cases of sexual
violence—including gang rape—forty-five cases of threats to rape and
kill, and forty-two cases of online targeting by individuals who
identified themselves as members of armed groups against LGBT people in
Iraq. In eight cases, abuses by armed groups and state actors, including
arbitrary arrest and sexual violence, were against children as young as
15. In thirty-nine cases, individuals were able to identify the armed
group behind the attack against them.
The public nature of the abuses documented, mostly occurring in broad
daylight in the streets, coupled with their chilling intentionality,
signal the climate of impunity afforded to perpetrators. The arbitrary
nature of the attacks demonstrates that individuals are targeted as part
of a larger scheme to intimidate those who do not adhere to normativity
and to punish aberration. The Iraqi state’s failure to tackle the
discriminatory social norms that underpin violence against LGBT people,
as well as its reinforcement of these standards by way of promoting an
anti-LGBT discourse through ‘morality’-based policies, contribute to
fueling violence against individuals perceived as non-normative.
The abuses documented in this report,
including enforced disappearances, arbitrary detention, torture, and
killings, are not unique to LGBT people. Other ordinary Iraqis also face
these forms of violence. But in the case of LGBT people, the violence
emanates from and is exacerbated by their gender expression or perceived
sexual orientation.
LGBT people across Iraq face routine violence from security
officials, who verbally abuse and sexually assault them, arbitrarily
arrest them, and detain them. Security forces also physically, verbally, and sexually harass people at checkpoints whom they perceive to be LGBT.
LGBT people can be arrested under a range of vague provisions of the
penal code aimed at policing morals and public indecency and limiting
free expression. Human Rights Watch documented 15 cases of arrest by
security forces of 13 LGBT people in Iraq. In June 2021, police in the
Kurdistan Region of Iraq (KRI) issued arrest warrants based on article
401 of the penal code which criminalizes “public indecency” against 11
LGBT rights activists who are either current or former employees at
Rasan Organization, a Sulaymaniyah-based human rights group. As of March
2022, the case remained open pending investigation, though authorities
had not detained the activists.
Most of the arrests of LGBT people documented in this report had no
legal basis, even under Iraqi law Individuals stopped at checkpoints and
subsequently arrested were rarely charged or convicted in accordance
with the law. LGBT people arrested reported being forced to sign pledges
stating that they had not been subjected to abuse and being denied
access to a lawyer. The conditions of their detention included being
denied food and water, the right to access family and legal
representation or obtain medical services, as well as being sexually
assaulted and physically abused. One 18-year-old gay man said he was
subjected to a forced anal exam when he was 17 years old. Another
18-year-old gay man said officers attempted the same when he was 17.
Twenty-seven of the fifty-four LGBT people Human Rights Watch and
IraQueer interviewed said they had experienced sexual abuse and violence
by armed groups, including unwanted touching, rape, gang rape, genital
mutilation, and forced anal examinations.
Human Rights Watch also
documented cases of digital targeting and online harassment on social
media and same-sex dating applications by armed groups against LGBT
people. As evident from the accounts of those interviewed by
Human Rights Watch and IraQueer, the offline consequences of digital
targeting are long-lasting. Individuals targeted reported being forced
to change their residence, delete all social media accounts, change
their phone numbers, and in some cases flee the country for fear of
being monitored, blackmailed, and entrapped by armed groups.
The accounts documented detail a cycle of
abuse, including a pattern of attempting to hunt LGBT people down to
perpetrate harm against them, amounting to structural violence against
them. The combination of hypervulnerability, loosely defined
“morality” clauses, and the absence of domestic violence and
anti-discrimination legislation and reliable complaint systems, are
formidable barriers that impede LGBT people’s ability and willingness to
report abuses they suffer to the police, or file complaints against law
enforcement agents, creating an environment in which police and armed
groups can abuse them with impunity.
Forty out of the fifty-four LGBT people whom Human Rights Watch and
IraQueer interviewed reported experiencing extreme violence at least
once by family members, almost always by male relatives, for their
sexual orientation or gender identity and expression. Such violence
included being locked in a room for extended periods; being denied food
and water; being burnt, beaten, raped, electrocuted, attacked at
gunpoint, subjected to conversion practices, and forced hormone therapy;
being subjected to forced marriages; and being forced to work for long
hours without compensation. Unlike the KRI, Iraq has no domestic
violence legislation, instead its penal code allows for violence against
women and children.
Each of the LGBT people whom Human Rights Watch and IraQueer
interviewed reported experiencing harassment in the streets, ranging
from verbal abuse to being attacked at gun point. Lack of access to
protective mechanisms limits LGBT people’s mobility to a debilitating
extent and deters them from seeking redress for abuses committed against
them. Children facing violence from family members or others may be
completely isolated, with nowhere to turn for safety.
As a result, many LGBT people said they felt they were forced to hide
who they are to stay alive. Those who could not or did not wish to
conceal their identities described a form of self-imposed house arrest,
by which they refrained from leaving their homes at all, due to fear of
harassment and the possibility of being stopped at checkpoints or
targeted by armed groups. Sixteen LGBT people interviewed by Human
Rights Watch and IraQueer said they attempted suicide at least once.
All 54 LGBT people interviewed for this report said that they would
not report a crime committed against them to the authorities, either
because of previous failed attempts where the complaint was dismissed or
no action was taken, or because they felt that the blame will be
redirected at them due to their non-conforming sexual orientations,
gender identities, and expressions.
The Iraqi government is responsible for protecting Iraqis’ right to
life. Iraqi authorities should investigate all reports of armed group or
other violence against people targeted due to their actual or perceived
sexual orientation or gender identity and expression, prosecute, fairly
try, and appropriately punish those found responsible, and publicly and
expressly condemn all such violence. The government should take all
appropriate measures to end torture, disappearances, summary killings,
and other abuses based on sexual orientation and gender expression and
identity, and compensate the families of all victims of unlawful
killings and survivors of serious abuse.
Iraqi security forces should stop harassing and arresting LGBT people
on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender expression and
instead ensure their protection from violence. Iraq should introduce and
implement legislation protecting against discrimination on the grounds
of sexual orientation and gender identity.
Human Rights Watch and IraQueer also call on states providing
military, security, and intelligence assistance to Iraq, including the
United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, and France, to urge Iraqi
authorities to investigate allegations of abuses by armed groups and the
role of their own assistance in these alleged violations. These states
should suspend military, security, and intelligence assistance to units
involved in these violations and explain any suspension or end to
military assistance publicly. These states should continue to suspend
assistance until the government adopts measures to end these serious
human rights violations.
This is ongoing. And
that's why we call it out and that's why we call idiots on our side (the
left) who try to glorify a terrorist who targets LGBTQs in Iraq. Let
CODESTINK go down that road all by their lonesome. I'm not joing them
to walk among the homophobes and mourn their passing. People like the
'poet' and general they publicly mourned over and over have terrorized
the LGBTQ community and we won't mourn trash like that. We'll side with
the people, with the LGBTQ. Not their attackers.
from saturday night, that's Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "We Feed Them."
saturday, i wrote about 'dynasty.' i have streamed the new episode. i'm just not in the mood to write 2 posts in a row about 'dynasty.
it starts turning into homework and i never did my homework. i'm not joking. i could usually bluff my way through in class but if it was something that had to be turned in, as mr. cole, my high school science teacher once said, 'becky, you seem to get your monthly visitor several times a month.' sure do. :D i was always using periods to get out of homework.
One of the most successful disinformation campaigns
in modern American electoral history occurred in the weeks prior to the
2020 presidential election. On October 14, 2020 — less than three weeks
before Americans were set to vote — the nation's oldest newspaper, The New York Post, began publishing a series of reports about the business dealings of the Democratic frontrunner Joe Biden
and his son, Hunter, in countries in which Biden, as Vice President,
wielded considerable influence (including Ukraine and China) and would
again if elected president.
The backlash against this reporting
was immediate and intense, leading to suppression of the story by U.S.
corporate media outlets and censorship of the story by leading Silicon Valley monopolies.
The disinformation campaign against this reporting was led by the CIA's
all-but-official spokesperson Natasha Bertrand (then of Politico, now with CNN), whose article on October 19 appeared under this headline: “Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say.”
These "former intel officials" did not actually say that the “Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo." Indeed, they stressed in their letter the opposite: namely, that they had no evidence
to suggest the emails were falsified or that Russia had anything to do
them, but, instead, they had merely intuited this "suspicion" based on
their experience:
We want to emphasize that we
do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President
Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we
do not have evidence of Russian involvement -- just that our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case.
But
a media that was overwhelmingly desperate to ensure Trump's defeat had
no time for facts or annoying details such as what these former
officials actually said or whether it was in fact true. They had an
election to manipulate. As a result, that these emails were "Russian
disinformation” — meaning that they were fake and that Russia
manufactured them — became an article of faith among the U.S.'s justifiably despised class of media employees.
Very
few even included the crucial caveat that the intelligence officials
themselves stressed: namely, that they had no evidence at all to
corroborate this claim. Instead, as I noted last September, “virtually every media outlet — CNN, NBC News, PBS, Huffington Post, The Intercept, and too many others to count
— began completely ignoring the substance of the reporting and instead
spread the lie over and over that these documents were the by-product of
Russian disinformation.” The Huffington Post even published a must-be-seen-to-be-believed campaign ad for Joe Biden, masquerading as “reporting,” that spread this lie that the emails were "Russian disinformation.”
all that mattered to our so-called news media was defeating donald trump. the truth did not matter. they lied over and over. i could care less who won that election - not a huge difference between trump and biden - but i do care that the media report truthfully, i do care that they tell the truth. i am appalled when they knowingly lie.
i think they trashed their own reputations and they've done nothing to win back the trust.
Monday, March 21, 2022. JACOBIN whores for the IRaq War.
Over
the weekend, the Iraq War hit the 19th mark, 19 years and still going.
Will US troops ever leave Iraq? At this rate, no. And we know how the
corporate media in the US did their part to start the illegal war and
to keep it going. We address that fact constatly. We've also noted,
over the years, how Pandhandle Media -- the beggar media -- send money,
send money -- also keeps the illegal war going. This anniversary?
Silence from the beggar media for the most part.
To
be clear, when we don't get silence from them on Iraq, we don't get
much of anything. They do af, "It's 19 years old" statement and then
rush to offer what everone knew back when Bully Boy Bush occupied the
White House. Nothing as recent as two years prior is ever offered
because they don't pay attention to Iraq. They can show up to do their
useless segments and writing that would be the same if they wrote it ten
years ago but they can't talk about Iraq today -- the political
stalemate, the protests (more and more over rising costs), the large
number of women being murdered (Juare is apparently the furthest US
'feminists' will allow their minds to wonder when women are being
targeted), etc.
Enter JACOBIN
and Saif Ansari -- the latter of whom bill shimself as "Philosopher,
lawyer and writer. Indian American/Muslim atheist." SOmeone break it to
the idiot that Muslim isn't a race, it's a religion so, if you bill
yourself as an aehist, you're not a Mulsim. Basics are hard for Saif as
he makes clear when writing about Iraq for Jacobin -- a place he
doesn't normally cover but apparently someone at JACOBIN felt that the
piece was needed and theyf armed it out to Saif as one of the non-White
guys they actually have working at JACOBIN. Isn't that just another
form of colinialism?
At any rate, Saif starts out his piece
slamming US President Joe Biden which is more than fair. Joe is
president and the war continues under his watch. Joe supported the war
in the US Senate. And then, the whole thing quickly falls apart. The
first section with huge pro lems:
And yet not even during the heated final debate of the primaries in
2020 did Bernie Sanders (who had voted against the invasion in 2002 as a
representative of Vermont) make the case — which he had alluded to on
the campaign trail more than once — that Biden was unfit to serve as president because of what was, in Sanders’s view, “the worst foreign policy blunder in the modern history of the United States.”
Elizabeth Warren, another candidate who had called the Iraq War a mistake, also failed to challenge Biden’s historical defense of the invasion — from denying that he had ever believed Hussein possessed WMDs to lamenting
that the only mistake he had made was to trust the Bush administration.
When asked whether Biden was to blame, Warren — a legal academic who
had begun her political career taking on the president over the 2005 bankruptcy bill — demurred.
In fact, the most strenuous criticism against Biden’s role in the
Iraq War was leveled in March 2020 by an air force veteran who accused Biden of having the blood of fellow service members on his hands. But despite his overtures that he had come to regret his support for the war — which became increasingly unpopular in the upper echelons of the Democratic Party in subsequent years — Biden never learned from his mistake.
Eleven years after the intervention in Libya’s [. . .]
Tulsi
Gabbard? Isn't that the name that belongs in the above? Yes, it is.
Caling Tulsi out for fake assery isn't a popular move. We don't worry
about popularity here. We worry about the truth. SO we won't just be
Abby Martin saying her name on a JaACOBIN podcast and then laughing.
No, we'll actually go there as we did in real time. In the final debate
that candidate Tulsi made the stage for, we were all expecting the big
showdown. This was anti-war Tulsi. She'd played that anti-war arm
chair zealot over and over. And the war, she'd tell voters over and
over, was her biggest issue. It effected everything -- including how
much money we had to spend on other issues -- needed issues.
Bill
de Blasio and others had confronted Joe during the debqtes of the
candidates for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination. Tulsi
hadn't. And she had an excuse, she wasn't on the stage with him. The
field was so crowded back then that they had to divide them up into
groups.
So she'd go on MSNBC, for example, on June 26,
2019 and slam Joe for his actions regarding Iraq but she wasn't on
stage with him.
But Wednesay, July 31st,
she was finally on stage with Joe Biden. And big talking Tulsi, whose
big issue was the war, was on stage with Joe Biden who voted for the
IRaq, War, who did a pre-war hearing that was stakced with war
supporters though Joe tried to pretend it was fair and balanced, the man
who voted over and over to keep funding the war, the man whod efended
it over and over (despite his 2019 lie that he had turned on the wr the
minute bombs started ropping). Here was Tulsi's chance to finally take
the fight to Joe.
It was going to be an epic throwdown, right?
Wrong.
We recounted it at lenght and repeatedly over and over. For example, see the next day's snapshot.
Joe
Biden was on the ropes. He was struggling and he could have been
eliminated that night. If Tulsi had done the job she should have, he
could have been out of the primary.
But
instead, she decided to take out Kamala Harris. Jimmy Dore rightly
points out that Kamala ended up without any support at all. Throughout
the entire thing, the long process, no one was flacking to her. He's
right. But he is someone who has some allegience to Tulsi that is
greater than his allegiance to the truth. Now I'll overlook that on
Jimmy. He speaks out on many important topics. And I'll defend her
from the lunatic attacks from WHoopi Goldberg and others.
But I'm not going to pretend that we saw Tulsi was a whore at the debates.
Read
the transcript -- or read the snapshot -- because Tulsi went after
Kamala and Kamala was no threat. She was never going to get the
nomination. She had no large base of support. Most women did not rally
to her. African-Americans in the south did not relate to her.
But Tulsi used her time and her ammo on Kamala. Not on Joe.
Her
defenders -- and, sadly, that included BLACK AGENDA REPORT -- would
make excuses for her. There was no excuse. Joe Biden was the choice of
the establishment and he was being carried by the corporate meid and
covered and pimped by them.
She should have taken out Joe.
Sher refused to do so.
If
you missed that debate, you may join the liars and insist that she was
making statements and -- B.S. That's a damn lie. Jake Tapper was a
moderator. He specifically called on her regarding Joe Biden and he was
puzzled -- watch his face -- by her remarks which were rescuing Joe and
excusing his actions.
He looks like he's
wondering if she understood the question. SO he then goes back to her
for a second time and is more specific. And Tulsi again takes a pass.
That
night, the next day and through the weekend, Tulsi shows up where ever
she could on TV and repeatedly insisted that Joe said his vote was wrong
and that was good enough for her.
His actions
wnet far beyond just his initial vote but Tulsi buried that in hre
comments and buried Joe's Iraq issues for the press. When the
self-promoted anti-war candidate told the American people and the press
that Joe had nothing to apologize for or make amends for that everything
was fine? There was no longer a story there. The media wants
conflict. And it wants conflict is can hide behind to pretend to be
objective. Had Tulsi held Joe accountable on the stage, the issue of
the Iraq War would have been forced itno the conversation by the
national press.
My allegiance is not to any politician.
Tulsi
is one of the reasons Joe Biden is in the White House. She had the
chance to tak ehim out and instead aimed her fire at Kamala. People
like pig Michael Tracey were overjoyed.
What
they refuse to admit now is that Tulsi gave the nomination to Joe on
that night in July of 2019. They refuse to also admit that the woman
Tulsi 'destroyed' on stage is now Vice President of the United States.
So exactly how badly did Tulsi destroy Kamala?
It was pure fake assery.
Dennis
Kucinich left people in tears in Boston back in 2004 at the DNC
convention. I didn't defend him. I told the young teenagers who were
crying in the open -- especially one young woman -- that Dennis didn't
deserve them. That they had more integrity and more ethics than he ever
would.
I don't whore for a politician. I hold them accountable.
It's
a shame that no one wants to hold Tulsi accountable. It's how we will
get another Bernie Fake Ass SAnders to divert us all and we will pour
energies into him and risk our own health to try to deliver the
nomination to him and he will sell us out and try to use us as his fan
clubm.
JACOBIN trets Tulsi as an aside because
they get vicious feedback. I don't care what the e-mails to the public
account are like. I will defend her right to speak. I will defend her
from vicious attacks on her patritoism. I will not, however, pretend
that she's anti-war or that she will speak with an anti-war voice.
She betrayed everyone and she needs to be held accountable.
Saif writes:
American voters used to give a damn about the Iraq War. In 2008, Barack Obama leveraged
widespread discontent with the war to secure the Democratic nomination,
courting progressives and young people alike. In fact, it’s widely
believed that Hillary Clinton lost
to the senator from Illinois not just because she had voted for the war
— and was instrumental in rallying ambivalent Democrats to the cause —
but because Obama had decried the invasion from the start.
Where do you start with that garbage.
American voters used to give a damn about the Iraq War?
The voters are the ones who walked away?
I
don't remember the voters issuing a statement the week after the
November 2008 election stating that they were shutting down. No, that
was United for Peace and Justice which made a ton of money off the war.
But they then used their organization to shelter elected Democrats and
theywhore to get Barack into the White House. Leslie Cagan is a grown
ass woman and then some -- the whiskers on her chin prove that. But the
woman who's too cowardly to tell a board meeting that she's a Community
-- she is one -- is the same woman who whored for Barack and didn't
want to be around to hold him accoutnable.
They lied. They lied to the voters and told them Barack was an anti-war candidate.
He wasn't. He never was.
The
media stuck in on Iraq just a little bit longer. As 2008 drew to a
close, newspapers and networks in the US announced that they were
closing BAghdad desks ABC announced that anything that happened in Iraq
could be covered by their using BBC coverage of the war.
So the 'leaders' deserted and then the US news deserted all before Janaury 2009 and yet the person JACOBIN blames is voters?
When
we do our Zooms there are always students who will say they showed up
thinking this was going to be historical, a look at what had been done
to Iraq. They didn't realize that it was still being done. I don't
them blame them or attack them. I understand why they don't know about
Iraq, the corporate media doesn't cover it and the so-calleldl
politicians who care (Barbara Lee) won't mention it.
Saif
writes tht ''some believe'' Barack used Iraq to destroy Hillary's
chances. Some believe that? It was his whole argument advanced by his
suppoters. as well as by himself. It demonstrated his supposed superior
judgment.
We heard tht over and over. And
we saw CODESTINK bird dog Hillary while avoid him despite the fact that
hew as voting for the Iraq War once he was in office.
No, he did not vote for the 2002 authorization of the war. He was not in the US Senate at the time so he could not vote for it.
Patricia
J. Williamson was a typical whore for Barack. Despite being a law
professor, and presumably understanding what ethics are, she wnet on
KPFA and lied on THE MORNING SHOW about how Barack, in 2002, had voted
against the Iraq War. When confronted with her lie by a caller, Patty
refused to admit the truth.
Saif wants you to know that Barack was agains the war from the start.
But he wasn't.
He
was against it enough to give a tiny speech. It was so smallt hat iwas
insignificant. Footage existed of it -- I'm still friends with the
person who asked Barack tp speak in Chicago that day. But the turnout
was small. So 2008 campaign decided to 'recrete' it and the press let
them do that. I've seen the original. It's not inspiring, the voice
doesn't soar. Hes not impressive in his remarks or in his delivery. So
they shot it several years later and the press let him get away with
it.
Why dods it matter?
I
mentioned Boston 2004, remember. I was there. I was there when he
gave that lousy speech at the convention. Matthew Rothschild called it
out in THE PROGRESSIVE. It was a war speech. And then, three years
later, Matty wants to whore for Barack and begins praising the speech.
That's what a whore does, erase the past.
And that's what JACOBIN's doing.
It
was in Boston that THE NEW YORK TIMES asked Barack -- anti-war Barack
-- about he Iraq War and noted that the top of the ticket, John Kerry
had voted for it. Barack pointed out that he wasn't in Congress and
said he didn't know how he would have voted if he had been in Congress.
When Bill Clinton raised this point, he was smeared as a racist. We've repeatedly noted Bill's criticue over the years
But since you raised the judgment issue, let's go over this
again. That is the central argument for his campaign. 'It doesn't
matter that I started running for president less a year after I got to
the Senate from the Illinois State Senate. I am a great speaker and a
charismatic figure and I'm the only one who had the judgment to oppose
this war from the beginning. Always, always, always.' " "First it
is factually not true that everybody that supported that resolution
supported Bush attacking Iraq before the UN inspectors were through.
Chuck Hagel was one of the co-authors of that resolution. The only
Republican Senator that always opposed the war. Every day from the
get-go. He authored the resolution to say that Bush could go to war
only if they didn't co-operate with the inspectors and he was assured
personally by Condi Rice as many of the other Senators were. So, first
the case is wrong that way." "Second, it is wrong
that Senator Obama got to go through 15 debates trumpeting his superior
judgment and how he had been against the war in every year, numerating
the years, and never got asked one time, not once, 'Well, how could
you say, that when you said in 2004 you didn't know how you would have voted on the resolution? You said in 2004 there was no difference between you and George Bush on the war and you took that speech you're now running on off your website in 2004*
and there's no difference in your voting record and Hillary's ever
since?' Give me a break."This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale
I've ever seen...
I
dictate the snapshots. I am not looking at the above. I mention that
because as we repeatedly returned to that quote, we would add more links
to it to back up what Bill was saying. My friend's pulled that from a piece I did with Ava back in 2011.
I steered him to that because I'm hopning it has all the links in it.
If it doesn't do the research yourself. I'd also recommend the piece
for THIRD entitled "The Temple Prostitutes in the Cult of St. Barack."
JACOBIN fits in that same temple with the other prostitues when they publish garbage like this.
And I'm not even at the half-way mark on that awful article.
How does the Iraq War continue? Be cause of whoring like what JAOCBIN posted that never hodls anyone acountable.
Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "We Feed Them" went up Saturday night.
And you can pair that with this video from Jimmy Dore.
