1/26/2021

defriend facebook

important article by andre damon over at 'wsws:'

On Monday, following widespread protests, Facebook restored the page of the International Youth and Students for Social Equality (IYSSE) at the University of Michigan, along with the accounts of leading members of the IYSSE and the Socialist Equality Party (SEP).

In response to inquiries made by the Financial Times in Britain, Facebook claimed the removals were the result of an “automation error,” adding, “We apologise for the error.”

The restoration of service came two days after Facebook disabled these pages without any explanation and without providing any recourse. Among the individual pages deleted were those of IYSSE National Secretary Genevieve Leigh and World Socialist Web Site (WSWS) US Managing Editor Niles Niemuth.

Statements on the WSWS denouncing the political purge were shared thousands of times on social media, in addition to a flood of letters and statements of support from workers, young people, journalists and professionals.

The FT reported the controversy in a front-page article entitled, “Facebook sparks anger after shutting socialist pages.” The newspaper interviewed both David North, the chairman of the WSWS International Editorial Board, and Chris Marsden, the national secretary of the SEP (UK).

“Even though this particular ban has been [reversed], it’s a warning we don’t know what might come next,” the article quoted North as saying. “Social media … is privately owned but to all intents and purposes it’s [become] what used to be the market square,” Marsden said. “They’re using their power in a way that’s completely undemocratic.”

Facebook’s claim that its disabling of the accounts was merely the product of a technical glitch lacks all credibility and is patently dishonest. The social media company had clearly invested time and resources to identifying leading members of the SEP, IYSSE and WSWS.

The claim is belied by the repeated statements of Facebook officials, both in congressional hearings and before military audiences, that Facebook deliberately seeks to combat what it calls “radical” political viewpoints.

is is defriend or unfriend?


whichever, it's time to step away from facebook.

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

 Monday, January 25, 2021.  With or without attention from the US press, the Iraq War drags on still.


The disappointment that is Joe Biden, get used to it.  SOVEREIGN WEALTH FUND INSTITUTE reports of the new president:

Big pharma is smiling big right now. The big three insulin producers are Eli Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk A/S, and Sanofi S.A., in which they dominate more than 90% of the world insulin market by value. After swearing-in, U.S. President Joe Biden’s HHS froze the Trump administration’s December 2020 drug policy that mandates community health centers to pass on all their insulin and epinephrine discount savings to patients.

The rule was finalized in late December 2020. The drug rule was put in place to benefit patients who have a hard time paying for expensive insulin and allergy medication. Former President Trump campaigned on lowering the price of important pharmaceutical drugs like insulin, which is used to treat diabetes, and epinephrine. Diabetes afflicts over a quarter of Medicare beneficiaries and drives billions in Medicare spending every year. More than 20 million Americans have diabetes, in which the body fails to properly use sugar from food due to insufficient insulin, a hormone produced in the pancreas. 


Jackson Hinkle covers it in the video below.



And it is price gouging.  Big Pharma is profiting and Joe Biden's going to help him steal from people even more.  Steal?


It is theft.  They're not paying off some big investment (subsidized by the government) into coming up with insulin.  As Senator Bernie Sanders noted in July of 2019:


The inventors of insulin sold the patent for just $1 so it would be available to all. 97 years later, Americans are dying because drugmakers like Eli Lilly charge $300 for a vial of insulin. Tomorrow I will be joining diabetics to buy insulin in Canada for one-tenth the price.
Image



The patent was sold for one dollar.  Years ago.  And yet Big Pharma wants to rip you off and risk your health and Joe Biden's on board with them.  How very pathetic and telling about how the next four years will go.

When we covered this topic at THIRD, we ran the following photo.



Walmart knew what it was doing and so did the customers who saw the sign in the drug store window -- Walmart was saying to those who can't afford insulin (a huge number of people), 'We'll sell you pet insulin.'  


Joe Biden's addiction to for-profit will be the death of many Americans.


And outside of the US?  Over at THE NATION, they pretend to car about Iraq for a few seconds while pointing fingers.  Please note, they do this by publishing an article already published elsewhere.  They have how many writers on the payroll and not one can write about Iraq.  Telling, isn't it?  Danny SJursen's long article (already published elsewhere) includes this:  


 

It’s increasingly clear that Washington’s legacy wars in the Greater Middle East—Iraq and Afghanistan, in particular—are generally no longer on the public’s radar. Enter an elected old man who’s charged with handling old business that, at least to most civilians, is old news. Odds are that Biden’s ancient tricks will amount to safe bets in a region that past US policies essentially destroyed. Joe is likely to take a middle path in the region between large-scale military intervention of the Bush or Obama kind and more prudent full-scale withdrawal.

As a result, such wars will probably drag on just below the threshold of American public awareness, while avoiding Pentagon or partisan charges that his version of cutting-and-running endangered US security. The prospect of “victory” won’t even factor into the equation (after all, Biden’s squad members aren’t stupid), but political survival certainly will. Here’s what such a Biden-era future might then look like in a few such sub-theaters. 



That's it.  One mention of Iraq in a sentence.  A shared sentence with Afghanistan.  "Generally no longer on the public's radar"?  Well, golly, Danny, doesn't really appear that they're on your radar either.  


The article's disgraceful.  It has nothing about what's going on in Iraq currently.  It has no new information.  It does offer Danny's 'hot take' on Iraq that he could have written last year . . . or the year before . . . or the year before.


Thinks for keeping us uninformed, Danny, and thank you also to THE NATION for proving yet again to be a garbage dump of time and money.


While Danny's so 'circumspect,'  Dirk Adriaensens can and does cover Iraq (GLOBAL RESEARCH via COUNTERINFORMATION):


Is it the oil-resource curse that has brought the Iraqi people to this deplorable condition? Or, have the US-installed political system and after them the Iranian influence over Iraqi politics, been the main reasons behind mischiefs such as the case of “an estimated $239.7 billion has left the country illegally since 2003”, currently being inquired by the Iraqi parliament. Most of this money was indeed oil money, meaning that both oil and revenue have been conveniently syphoned away from Iraq, leaving its people in harrowing dearth.” [1]

Transparency International report, published March 16, 2005, states that: “The reconstruction of post-war Iraq is in danger of becoming ‘the biggest corruption scandal in history.”[2]

The analysis underneath tries to give an overview – although incomplete – of the rampant corruption imported by the US invaders and optimized by its installed Quisling government. It is only one aspect of the total destruction of the Iraqi state. This is the story of a country that was targeted to become a failed state, by design of the imperialist and neoliberal US/UK elites, or should we call them “the organized-crime world syndicate”. The sectarian political and neoliberal economic system they installed is totally broken, beyond repair. The Iraqis call the period after the withdrawal of US combat troops “the second face of the occupation”, leaving in place all the neoliberal sectarian laws the occupiers enacted.

The criminal activities of the occupiers are well documented, many times reported and analysed, but the US still refuses to accept responsibility and accountability for its gross violations of International Humanitarian Law. It’s very important that the true story of Iraq is repeatedly told, until it becomes part of humanity’s collective memory, because Iraq serves as a template for the nefarious consequences of what “humanitarian” imperial interventions really mean, as is the case for other “humanitarian” war zones, from Afghanistan to Libya. “Bringing democracy” is always the official narrative, the harsh reality however is destruction, plunder, submission, exploitation and oppression. The truths about corruption have to be documented, explained and repeated over and over again. Hence this article.

This is well formulated in the message that novelist, painter and poet John Berger (+ 02.01.2017) wrote on 18 June 2003 in support of the World Tribunal on Iraq initiative, the greatest achievement of the global peace movement ever:

“The records have to be kept and, by definition, the perpetrators, far from keeping records, try to destroy them. They are killers of the innocent and of memory. The records are required to inspire still further the mounting opposition to the new global tyranny. The new tyrants, incomparably over-armed, can win every war – both military and economic. Yet they are losing the war (this is how they call it) of communication. They are not winning the support of world public opinion. More and more people are saying NO. Finally this will be the tyranny’s undoing. But after how many more tragedies, invasions and collateral disasters? After how much more of the new poverty the tyranny engenders? Hence the urgency of keeping records, of remembering, of assembling the evidence, so that the accusations become unforgettable, and proverbial on every continent. More and more people are going to say NO, for this is the precondition today for saying YES to all we are determined to save and everything we love.”[3]

[. . .]

From the first days after the invasion, the US and its coalition partners created a wasteful, opaque and corrupt system in Iraq. Massive theft, fraud, bribery and crimes of all kinds have failed reconstruction, infecting the government and wider society. There are hundreds of fraudulent, incomplete, failed or useless projects that have cost Iraq tens of billions of dollars. Judging from the final results, the projects have delivered surprisingly little lasting benefit to the Iraqis. These corrupt acts are a clear violation of the occupier’s responsibilities under the Geneva Conventions, the UN Convention against Corruption (2003) and Security Council resolutions.



On corruption, Joel Wing Tweets:


Iraqi parliament wanted to question head of Communications Comm over questionable deals & corruption He claimed he had COVID but really he left Iraq for Lebanon A very Iraqi story



The vast corruption is one of the things that has fueled the 15-month and counting protests in Iraq.  THE NEW ARAB Tweets:

The southern Iraqi city of Nasiriyah has witnessed renewed protests calling for the release of activists and detainees.


The protesters are also forming political alliances.  IRAQ SOLIDARITY NEWS notes:


A new party aimed at challenging Iraq's political class and representing the country's youth has been launched by the activists who fronted a mass protest movement in 2019. 

A prominent leader of the "October Revolution," Dr Alaa al-Rikabi, announced at a press conference on Friday that the new Imtidad Movement would "confront the corruption of the current regime" in parliamentary elections in June. 

He said the name referred to the party being an "extension" of the protest movement, which began in October 2019 and encouraged mass protests around the country until the coronavirus pandemic limited their ability to mobilise. 

The Voice of Iraq publication reported that Rikabi announced the new party in nearby Samawah, instead of Nasriyah city, where he is based, because of fears about attacks from rival parties. 

Tensions flared in Nasiriyah recently when security forces opened fire on protesters who had occupied a square in the city's centre, in which they had previously camped out until November, when they were removed and eight people were killed in clashes. 

Protesters reoccupied the square a week ago, demanding the release of peers arrested in recent weeks. A policeman was killed in resulting clashes. On the same day, a senior lawyer and activist in Nasiriyah was killed during a raid on his home. 


Kaamil Ahmed (MIDDLE EAST EYE) covers the same story.  They're alsod emanding the release of those who are missing.





MEHR NEWS reports this morning, "The Saberin news channel reported in a breaking news item that a logistics convoy of the American occupiers had been targeted on the Basra-Nasiriyah highway on Monday."  They note there were six strikes on US military convoys on Friday.

 


In other news of Joe Biden and Iraq, Yasmine Mosimann (RUDAW) reports:


The United States on Friday suspended a program that granted Iraqis refuge in the US in exchange for aiding American troops in Iraq, according to a statement from the state department.

“Effective January 22, 2021, the United States is suspending the Direct Access Program for the U.S.-Affiliated Iraqis for 90 days,” reads the statement from Daniel B. Smith, the acting secretary of state.

He justified the temporary halt to the program, which incentivized Iraqis to work with the US military, by saying they have identified individuals stealing documents from the state department’s Worldwide Refugee Admissions Processing System “to take advantage” of the program. 


A new day dawning?  Feels a great deal like past horrible days.




1/24/2021

there's a reason why they don't help us

c.i.'s 'On circle jerks, sell outs and censorship' and marcia's 'Paul Jay's bad Gore Vidal 'book'' went up tonight.  here's a video i wanted to note.



'why politicians won't fight for you?'  because they're part of a decaying nation-state that turned its back on the people when harry truman followed fdr's empire path.  could fdr have pulled off empire?  maybe.  but harry truman was an idiot.  and he needed to sell empire on fear.  that's all he knew.  


and we've been sold fear ever since.


that's how they control us.


and they've poured all of our money into the war and 'security' industries so we've suffered non-stop and repeatedly.  

that's why the won't fight for us - their job hasn't been to help us in decades and decades.  

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

Friday, January 22, 2021.  Silencing of dissent led to many things, including the Iraq War.  Today, we focus on the efforts to silence dissent further in the US.


Starting in the US.  In Shirley MacLaine's book WHAT IF . . . A LIFETIME OF QUESTIONS, SPECULATIONS, REASONABLE GUESSES AND A FEW THINGS I KNOW FOR SURE, Shirley writes:


What if a state of war and terror is used to make populations change their sense of democratic freedom without their ever recognizing that it's happening?  Can fear of terrorism make an entire population embrace values it would normally reject?  Would a population even realize it was becoming more and more entrenched in and comfortable with institutions that ignore the Constitution in favor of the rule of law?

Just go to an airport and stand in line at the security checkpoint.  Make people afraid enough, they will submit to anything.


The passage above from Shirley is even more pertinent as US lawmakers push for more 'terror' laws to 'protect' the United States.  Caitlin Johnstone notes:


The US political/media class have been pushing hard for more authoritarian policies to stave off the threat of “domestic terrorism” in the wake of the Capitol riot. President Biden, who was already working on rolling out new domestic terror policies well before January sixth, confirmed after the riot that he is making these new measures a priority. Political internet censorship is becoming increasingly normalized, anti-protest bills are being passed, and now we’re seeing liberals encouraged to form “digital armies” to spy on Trump supporters to report them to the authorities.

And an amazingly large percentage of the US population seems to have no problem with any of this, even in sectors of the political spectrum that should really know better by now.

“What else can we do?” they reason. “What other solution could there possibly be to the threat of dangerous fascists and conspiracy theorists continuing to gain power and influence?”

Well there’s a whole lot that can be done, and none of it includes consenting to sweeping new Patriot Act-like authoritarian measures or encouraging monopolistic Silicon Valley plutocrats to censor worldwide political speech. There’s just a whole lot of mass-scale narrative manipulation going on to keep it from being obvious to everyone.


Many religions feature a belief in 'treat others as you would like them to treat you.'  And if you were lucky to grow up with some form of a caring parental figure, you heard variations on this.  The reason is because when you do something nasty or rude to someone else, you don't have much right to complain when, as Cher sang in "My Song (Too Far Gone)," "what I did to many men was finally . . .  done to . . . me."


That is what happens.  And when laws are created to penalize those you disagree with, you better grasp that those same laws will, sooner or later, come after you.


The golden rule.  We'd hope everyone would follow the treat others as you'd like to be treated maxim out of kindness but, if nothing else, let's hope that they'll follow it for their own self-interest.   Again, to quote Cher, "What I did to many men was finally done to me."


It's already starting, the censorship.  Katie Halper Tweeted two days ago:


The Livestream That Youtube won't let me post is here with the controversial content cut out. But I'm going to keep contesting it.
@youtube
@NHKWORLD_News
@cspan
patreon.com/posts/46458646
Image


Yesterday, Jimmy Dore noted the way the corporate media is promoting censorship.



And he did another segment.  This one was with Jordan Chariton.  




File it under Cher's "what I did to many men was finally done to me," in Jordan's case.  As the comments note, Jordan's been calling for the censorship of people for years.  And he's not noted here for his program due to his attacks on THE CONVO COUCH.  Maybe Jordan will learn a lesson from this?  Probably not.  But standing up for freedom of speech often means standing up for speech you don't like or speakers you don't like.  


You do that because you grasp the Constitution and you grasp the importance of freedom of speech.  Instead of re-programming centers for people AOC doesn't like, maybe we should be advocating to send the woefully undereducated AOC back to college to learn about the Constitution?


The politicians are not defenders of free speech.  The tech giants are not defenders of free speech, as Jimmy Dore and others note.  This is surprisingly to you only if you're new to this topic.  The week of August 12th, 2013, this was noted on LAW AND DISORDER RADIO:


Michael Smith:  The subtitle of your new book Spying on Democracy: Government Surveillance, Corporate Power and Public Resistance  -- talk to me for a minute about corporate power.

Heidi Boghosian:  We know that 70% of the government's intelligence operations are conducted by private business.  They have a very co-dependent relationship in which Boeing, a lot of other military operations develop equipment specifically to conduct surveillance.  And the US government actually depends on them for analysis of data that is gathered and for setting up the internal communications system, for example, at the Pentagon.  So it behooves business, it helps their bottom line to create more sophisticated and intricate technology that the government depends on.  You must also realize that business is immune from Constitutional stricture so that they can in many cases spy free from liability and the government has given the telecommunications industry immunity from lawsuits so it really shows the extent that not only do we give them latitude but President Obama has a panel of corporate CEOs who advise him on policy. 


Heidi also addressed the issue on an August 16, 2013 broadcast of COUNTERSPIN:


Peter Hart:  Now we're talking about government spying and that's been the focus of so much one of the Snowden coverage.  One of the lessons of the book is that private companies are very much involved in this on a number of levels.  They're contractors with the federal government.  They're also hired guns on activist groups -- things that the government probably couldn't do legally but you can hire a private company to do these things.  Talk a little about the role of private companies and how they blur the distinction between government surveillance

Heidi Boghosian:  In many ways, private corporations have become the long arm of the government, doing -- as you say -- things that the government could not legally do because they're bound by the strictures of the US Constitution.  Our officials take an oath to protect the Constitution.  And, as we mentioned, some protections were set in place.  They've eroded over time but I think most Americans would be offended if they knew the level of surveillance and they're getting a hint of that now.  Corporations conduct approximately 70% of the US government's intelligence functions. We've seen a shift so that, in many cases, well trained staff move from the public sector into private jobs because they're much more lucrative.  What happens, however, is that there is no oversight and no accountability in a lot of these actions so that even members of Congress are largely in the dark about how these corporations act.  And, as you mentioned with activists, a large part of what corporations do is guard against any outside criticism of their policies so that, for example, in addition to entering into contracts with the government, they may have their own internal intelligence units that collect data, photographs, they spy on activists who are outspoken -- many times, successful activists who've actually changed policies of, say, Burger King or, you know, work that the group PETA has done to raise awareness about how we treat animals.  So environmental activists, animal rights have been deemed top domestic terrorist threats by the government and really, I think, playing into fears people have about another terrorist attack unfortunately by branding US citizens and other people who are merely exercising in most cases their First Amendment right to free speech and free activities, the right to assemble and take grievances to the government, they're being punished, labeled as terrorists, vilified and this has what we call a chilling effect on the exercise of free speech.



And as Lily Tomlin long ago noted in the seventies, big business protects big business.  Some very dangerous things are being proposed.


Glenn Greenwald (SUBSTACK) points out:

The last two weeks have ushered in a wave of new domestic police powers and rhetoric in the name of fighting “terrorism” that are carbon copies of many of the worst excesses of the first War on Terror that began nearly twenty years ago. This trend shows no sign of receding as we move farther from the January 6 Capitol riot. The opposite is true: it is intensifying.

We have witnessed an orgy of censorship from Silicon Valley monopolies with calls for far more aggressive speech policing, a visibly militarized Washington, D.C. featuring a non-ironically named “Green Zone,” vows from the incoming president and his key allies for a new anti-domestic terrorism bill, and frequent accusations of “sedition,” “treason,” and “terrorism” against members of Congress and citizens. This is all driven by a radical expansion of the meaning of “incitement to violence.” It is accompanied by viral-on-social-media pleas that one work with the FBI to turn in one’s fellow citizens (See Something, Say Something!) and demands for a new system of domestic surveillance.

Underlying all of this are immediate insinuations that anyone questioning any of this must, by virtue of these doubts, harbor sympathy for the Terrorists and their neo-Nazi, white supremacist ideology. Liberals have spent so many years now in a tight alliance with neocons and the CIA that they are making the 2002 version of John Ashcroft look like the President of the (old-school) ACLU.

The more honest proponents of this new domestic War on Terror are explicitly admitting that they want to model it on the first one. A New York Times reporter noted on Monday that a “former intelligence official on PBS NewsHour” said “that the US should think about a ‘9/11 Commission’ for domestic extremism and consider applying some of the lessons from the fight against Al Qaeda here at home.” More amazingly, Gen. Stanley McChrystal — for years head of Joint Special Operations Command in Iraq and the commander of the war in Afghanistan — explicitly compared that war to this new one, speaking to Yahoo News:

I did see a similar dynamic in the evolution of al-Qaida in Iraq, where a whole generation of angry Arab youth with very poor prospects followed a powerful leader who promised to take them back in time to a better place, and he led them to embrace an ideology that justified their violence. This is now happening in America….I think we’re much further along in this radicalization process, and facing a much deeper problem as a country, than most Americans realize.”

Anyone who, despite all this, still harbors lingering doubts that the Capitol riot is and will be the neoliberal 9/11, and that a new War on Terror is being implemented in its name, need only watch the two short video clips below, which will clear their doubts for good. It is like being catapulted by an unholy time machine back to Paul Wolfowitz’s 2002 messaging lab.



We stand up to efforts to curtail our rights or we accept what is imposed on us.  The PATRIOT Act was never overturned despite various politicians -- liars all of them -- insisting they were opposed to it.  Remember when Barack Obama was a candidate for president and he'd grand stand on the issue but then he went along renewing it over and over.  And don't pretend like the PATRIOT Act was a surprise or that it took years to realize the harm it was doing.  In 2002, the Center for Constitutional Rights' Nancy Chang's SILENCING POLITICAL DISSENT: HOW POST-SEPTEMBER 11 ANTI-TERRORISM MEASURES THREATEN OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES.  She wrote:


 

The antiterrosim measures discussed in this book have placed our civil liberties in jeopardy.  And because the "war on terrorism" -- of which these measures form a part -- is likely to become a permanent feature of American life, the task of reclaiming our civil liberties in the post-September 11 world will not be an easy one.  We must exercise our constitutionally protected rights of free speech and political association to protest antiterrorism measures that infringe on political and personal freedoms, organize public education campaigns, engage in grassroots, organizing, build broad coalitions, reach out to people of faith and immigrant communities, participate in voter education and registration drives, alert the mainstream and alternative press to our concerns, write letter to the editor for publiciation in our local newspapers, and seek information from the government under the Freedom of Information Act.  In addition, we must call upon the judiciary to serve as a check against executive and lesgislative measures that violate the Constitution.  And we must call upon Congress to play an oversight role over the executive branch, pass corrective legislation where needed, and appoint judges who are sensitive to the Bill of Rights.  

Our efforts must be directed not only at the federal level but at state and local governments as well.  Since September 11, more than a thousand antiterrorism measures have been proposed in state and local jurisdictions across the nation, and already a number of them have become law.  These measures threaten to criminalize speech and protest activities, limit the availability of public records, expand government surveillance powers, and promote participation in acts the legislature deems patriotic.  


People like Chip Pitts helped organize local efforts where We The People would attend city council meetings and attempt to get resolutions passed to oppose the government's seizure of your private information from public libraries.  There were many ways to fight back.  Few chose to fight.  This is an important issue and that's why we are focusing on it right now.  Before they pass more laws that destroy our rights, we need to be focusing on what's going on.


In her book WHAT IF, Shirley MacLaine notes:



More important than any of the aforementioned, what if the ''security'' measures have never been predominantly about security, but more about the purposeful dumbing-down of Americans, making us subservient to control and authority?  What if the point of amplifying fear is to render the population cooperative with its own individual captivity?  Fear breeds handing over control, and handing over control breeds cooperative dumbing-down/  In the name of protecting freeom and democracy, we've become prisoners of our own induced obedience.



The following sites updated: