Tuesday, June 09, 2020

Science post -- Hubble Telescope and a radio burst

Are there others out there? Out in space? I would not be surprised if there are other lifeforms out in space. Ashley Strickland (CNN) reports:


 For the second time ever, astronomers have detected a pattern in a mysterious fast radio burst coming from space.
Fast radio bursts, or FRBs, are millisecond-long bursts of radio waves in space, and astronomers have been able to trace some radio bursts back to their home galaxies. They have yet to determine the actual cause of the bursts.
Individual radio bursts emit once and don't repeat. But repeating fast radio bursts are known to send out short, energetic radio waves multiple times.

Reminds me of the movie CONTACT with Jodie Foster. They have a video signal. It's actually plans to build a space ship but it's hidden inside a 'wrapper' which is Hitler making a speech. Michelle Starr (SCIENCE ALERT) adds:


 It's a jaw-dropping discovery, and one that could help to rule out proposed causes for these mysterious signals. But, at the same time, it's a very neat demonstration of how strange and difficult-to-identify these signals really are.
"This is an exciting result as it is only the second system where we believe we see this modulation in burst activity," explained astronomer Kaustubh Rajwade of The University of Manchester.
"Detecting a periodicity provides an important constraint on the origin of the bursts and the activity cycles could argue against a precessing neutron star."

And you have to check out the photo SCI TECH DAILY has from the Hubble Telescope.


This is the photo caption "Hubble Space Telescope catches a passing glimpse of the numerous arm-like structures that sweep around this barred spiral galaxy, known as NGC 2608."  You can also check out the video below.




"Iraq snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):
Tuesday, June 9, 2020.  A US military plane crashes in Iraq, a Moqtada al-Sadr foe gets a prominent position in the new Iraqi government, and much more.



A US military transport plan has crashed in Baghdad leaving at least four service members injured.  The US military says the plane "overshot the runway" while the Iraqi Revolutionary Group states it shot the plane down.










Of the four injured, Stephen Losey (AIR FORCE TIMES) notes, "The service members’ injuries were not life-threatening, and they are being treated at the base’s medical facility, according to a release by Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve."  THE DRIVE adds, "The C-130H, which is assigned to the 386th Air Expeditionary Wing at Ali Al Salem Air Base in Kuwait, crashed at Taji, which is situated approximately 17 miles north of the Iraqi capital Baghdad, at around 10:10 PM local time. "




Holly Johnston (RUDAW) explains, "Taji military base,  located north of Baghdad, hosts US military personnel in the country to advise and train troops in the fight against the Islamic State (ISIS)."

Over the weekend, journalist Mustafa Habib offered his thoughts on a US withdrawal from Iraq:

The US will likely have one main goal, curtail Iran influence. To achieve this, the US should support Iraqi govt with medical & economic crises. The success of govt which is generally not close to Iran influencers, would be one way to enhance Iraqi sovereignty & independence...


The US shouldn’t withdraw all of its soldiers from Iraq, only the combat units that so anger Iran. It should leave advisers & trainers together w members of global coalition, to provide air cover & intelligence that can aid Iraqi anti-terrorism troops in fight against extremists

Should the US troops be forced to withdraw will make a lack of international partners could see the Shiite forces loyal to Iran getting stronger, even in Sunni cities, and it would also jeopardise the new Iraqi govt’s ability to run the country & to hold elections.


The Iraqi people have long favored all US troops leave Iraq.  Some in the Iraqi government agree with that, some do not.  Those who do not tend to realize that the US military presence props up the government in Iraq.  It has not represented the people -- hence the protests -- it has not made life better for the Iraqi people.  It maintains power only because of the US forces on the ground.

When ISIS seized control of Mosul, for example, then-US President Barack Obama didn't really give a damn.  When it was thought that ISIS was about to seize Baghdad, Barack began ordering more US troops into Iraq.

US officials gave lip service to 'democracy' and 'self-rule' but they never meant it.  Nouri al-Maliki was put in place by Bully Boy Bush because his CIA profile noted how paranoid Nouri was and how that could be used to control him.  With no experience at all, Nouri was made prime minister.  He was a disaster.  

In 2010, the Iraqi people went to the polls and voted him out.  But not only would Nouri refuse to step down, the US government also backed the thug up.  Joe Biden went to Iraq to sell a contract (The Erbil Agreement) that overturned the votes and gave Nouri a second term.

This was never about democracy.

Joe's actions would result in Nouri feeling more emboldened and he would become even more of a thug.  ISIS would rise in Iraq as a result.  Joe Biden is the mid-wife to ISIS.  

At some point, the US press might get around to addressing that.  And since Joe is now seeking votes, maybe ask him how he'd feel if he won in November and Iraq's government stepped in and overturned the results?

As for Mustafa Habib, I don't doubt that his intentions are sincere.  But the reality is that the training wheels have to come off at some point.  The alternative is that Iraq is occupied by US forces forever.  Had the governments of Iraq not been so corrupt, they could have taken even small steps that would develop some form of a relationship with the Iraqi people.  They chose not to dot hat.  They have no real roots and they will be knocked over when the Iraqi people are in charge.

US forces should not be used to keep in place a do-nothing government that exploits and attacks its own people.


Karwan Faidhi Dri (RUDAW) reports, "A rocket landed late Monday near Baghdad International Airport, according to the Iraqi Security Media Cell. "  AFP notes:

A rocket landed inside Baghdad airport near to where US forces are based in the latest attack on American forces in the country, the Iraqi military said on Monday night.
While a wave of similar attacks that began in October has since slowed, the latest strike came three days ahead of US-Iraqi talks as part of a "strategic dialogue" including on future military co-operation.
A security official told AFP that the attack caused "no casualties or damage".
Baghdad International Airport is closed under coronavirus lockdown measures in Iraq, which has reported some 13,000 cases including 400 deaths from the disease.
Monday's rocket fire was the 29th such attack against American troops or diplomats since October.


Meanwhile, protests continue in Iraq.



That's video from Sunday in Najaf.  MIDDLE EAST MONITOR ONLINE notes: 

Violent clashes between protestors and police in Iraq erupted in front of local government headquarters in the country’s Najaf governorate yesterday, with demands including government reforms and the identification of those who previously killed demonstrators.
According to Iraqi media, the confrontations reached all the way to the home of Najaf’s Governor Luay Al-Yasiri, which was set on fire while several members of the security forces were injured by the protestors.
Among the protestors’ demands was for Al-Yasiri, his deputies, and the directors of the governorate’s districts to be dismissed by the Iraqi government. Witnesses reported that police and security forces fired live bullets and tear gas at the protestors to disperse them, while the governorate’s police department called on the protestors to exercise restraint and to prevent their ranks from being exploited by “infiltrators”.

On Twitter, Sally notes:
serious injuries now could lead to amputation among the demonstrators as a result of violent repression by the repressive forces. And cases of suffocation in the ranks of the demonstrators


Heshmat Alavi explains that "tear gas and live bullets" were used on the protesters.


Angry protesters took to the streets of southern Iraq on Monday to vent their frustration with a lack of public services and employment opportunities, calling for the dismissal of local officials.
Hundreds of demonstrators from the southern cities of Najaf, Muthanna, Diwaniyah and Nasiriyah clashed with Iraqi security forces amid a revival of the anti-government protests that erupted last October.
“The movement, which is now synchronised between the southern governorates, is now demanding the resignation of officials, especially the dismissal of Najaf Governor Louay Al Yasiri,” an Iraqi official told The National.
Riot police gathered in front of government buildings in Najaf late on Sunday to block protesters from entering the building, leading to violent clashes between the two.
The mostly young protesters accuse the political establishment of rampant corruption and are demanding an end to a political system that is divided along sectarian and ethnic lines. 


The mostly young protesters accuse the political establishment of rampant corruption and are demanding an end to a political system that is divided along sectarian and ethnic lines.
The Iraqi Human Rights Commission called on the government to refrain from using violence against protesters.
“This is a constitutional right [for people to protest] and we urge the government to respond to the economic and social rights that protesters are demanding,” Ali Al Bayati, a member of the commission told The National.
“These claims have been made before but have not been implemented although we lost many lives due to months of instability so it’s very important for the new government to provide a main source of livelihood for the public,” Mr Al Bayati said.
We'll note Parliament later in the week but we have to note this from Zhelwan Z. Wali (RUDAW):

The Iraqi Parliament has approved the resignation of prominent Shiite leader and head of the Fatah Alliance Hadi al-Amiri, rumoured to be eyeing the presidency of the Iran-backed Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF).
Amiri sent his letter of resignation to Speaker Mohammed al-Halbousi on June 1, and was officially replaced on Saturday by his assistant Abdulkarim Younis Elan - who is yet to be sworn in.
Though it remains unclear as to what prompted Amiri to resign from the parliament, it is rumored that he is vying for the post of head of the PMF, known as Hashd al-Shaabi in Arabic. 
Hadi al-Amiri is a thug.  If you've never seen photos of him, he's also very ugly.  Very.  Ugly.  And we're noting the above because I can't stop laughing as I survey Arab social media and keep seeing jokes about how he's really resigned from Parliament because he plans to run for Miss Iraq.  

Mustafa Habib notes another political twist:

Wild move, Iraqi PM Al-Kadhimi appoints judge Raed Jouhi as the director of the his office, Jouhi became known as he issued judicial warrant to arrest Muqtada Sadr in 2003 for the murder of Majid al-Khoei, & he the first judge who investigate with Saddam Hussein after his arrest

What message do you suppose that's intended to send to Moqtada al-Sadr?


With a great deal of rhetoric accompanied by a political stunt, the Democratic congressional leadership on Monday released its “Justice in Policing 2020” bill.
Prior to the press conference to present the measure, more than 20 Democratic lawmakers, all wearing African kente cloths, knelt in the Capitol’s Emancipation Hall for eight minutes and 46 seconds, the amount of time fired Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin kept his knee on the neck of George Floyd, killing the 46-year-old African American worker.
The group of Democrats included House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, Black Congressional Caucus Chairwoman Karen Bass and senators Corey Booker and Kamala Harris.
At the press conference, Bass, Pelosi, Schumer and other sponsors of the bill repeatedly cited the nationwide mass demonstrations against the murder of Floyd and touted their bill as a “transformational” and “bold” attack on police violence and systemic racism. But their statements and the token character of the reforms included in the bill make clear that the measure is nothing of the kind.
Rather, it is a political maneuver designed to provide cover for Democratic governors and mayors who have overseen brutal police attacks on protesters, not to mention the pro-police record of the Obama administration. It is also aimed at containing and dissipating social protests by workers and youth against not only racism and the fascistic Trump administration, but also the social inequality, repression and poverty that are embedded in the capitalist system and magnified by the coronavirus pandemic.


New content at THIRD:



The following sites updated:








Posted by at

Monday, June 08, 2020

Julie Plec and Martha Kauffman take accountability

Did you see this:



 During a powerful panel discussion with female showrunners, “Friends” and “Grace and Frankie” creator Marta Kauffman teared up when asked about what she wished she’d known when she started her career.
“I wish I knew then what I know today,” Kauffman, 63, said during an ATX TV…from the Couch panel, as she apologized for tearing up. “Sorry, I just wish I knew then what I know now. I would’ve made very different decisions.”
She continued, “I mean we’ve always encouraged people of diversity in our company, but I didn’t do enough and now all I can think about is what can I do? What can I do differently? How can I run my show in a new way? And that’s something I not only wish I knew when I started showrunning, but I wish I knew all the way up through last year.”

FRIENDS was not all Anglo White. Ross provided diversity by dating Julie and Charlie, for example.

Equally true, Ross, Monica, Rachel and Chandler were all Jewish.

I wish it had been more diverse and I did criticize in real time. I think it's important that we did make that criticism. I'm glad that Martha Kaufmann spoke to this issue.

But I'm much more bothered by GIRLS, for example, which came a decade after FRIENDS and still revolved around an all White main cast. FRIENDS was from a pre-woke period.

Thank you to Julie Plec for her statements in the article as well. However, she had important characters of color on THE ORIGINALS. Marcel was an equal, not a sidekick. Along with him, a Black vampire, there was Vincent who was a witch (and his wife who is on several episodes -- mainly in flashback). Vincent was a major character as well. If she had anything to apologize to me personally for it would be Rebekkah. The blond actress thought she was going to get the lead in the SUPERGIRL series so she left the show -- claiming/lying that she had a family member who was ill back in Australia. Then Masie Richardson-Sellers became Rebekkah -- a Black actress. And she was wonderful in the role, amazing. Then they brought the bland blond back.

Now we also had a villainess in season four, Tracy Ifeachor playing Aya. Now that's not a perfect score, by any means. But Julie Plec did not just cast actors of color, she cast them in important roles.

Could she do better today? I'm sure. But while THE ORIGINALS was still making new episodes, she led. She led on THE CW and she led compared to other networks as well.

I'm glad Julie and Martha want to do more and I applaud them for that.


"Iraq snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):
Monday, June 8, 2020.  The Iraq War continues because War Mongers like Joe Biden reach out only to other War Criminals.




          
Sir Keir Starmer’s links to Britain’s national security establishment are being questioned. But in reality they illustrate that normal service has been resumed in UK ‘democracy’ and that Labour can again be ‘trusted’ to govern.
The investigative journalist Matt Kennard has written an open letter to the new Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer, asking five questions about his relationship to the national security establishment.  
They involve meetings Starmer had with the head of the domestic security service, MI5; his membership of the intelligence-linked Trilateral Commission; his discussions with the US attorney general at a time when Starmer was handling the case of Julian Assange; his role in the Assange case as the public prosecutor; and his relationship with the neocon Times newspaper.
The suggestion is clear: Starmer has been very close to that establishment.
No doubt some will be shocked by the information Kennard has managed to unearth, but if we consider how UK ‘democracy’ is supposed to function, it is really not too surprising. Parties are allowed to argue about the details of domestic policy, but there is meant to be no real disagreement on matters pertaining to foreign policy and national security. In other words, UK politics should be just like America’s. 
For a long time, that was indeed the case.

History of bombing

It was a Labour government which took Britain into Afghanistan and Iraq in 2001 and 2003, and a Republican administration that did the same for the US. It was a Conservative government which bombed Libya in 2011 – and a Democratic one in the US. A bi-partisan approach to bombing countries: a bi-partisan approach to ‘regime-change’ ops. Elections won’t disrupt this: the more things change, the more they stay the same.  
But in 2013, there was a wobble. To the horror of the endless war lobby, Labour, under Ed Miliband, voted against bombing Syria. Two years later, even worse for Rupert Murdoch and the ‘Deep State,’ a veteran Stop the War activist called Jeremy Corbyn became Labour leader.
Corbyn’s back catalogue was decidedly problematic. He had spoken out against every Western military intervention. He was very pro-Palestinian. He didn’t like nukes. He had praised Venezuela. Worse still, Corbyn appointed as his director of strategy and communications one Seumas Milne, a former Guardian journalist well-known for his fluent denunciations of Western foreign policy. 
Operation Stop Corbyn was launched. Many Corbynistas believed it was Jezza’s economic policies which provoked the onslaught, but it was where he stood, or had stood, on foreign policy issues and ‘national security’ which meant he was in for the political equivalent of ‘Shock and Awe.’

Establishment agenda

The smart thing for Corbyn to have done would have been to go on the front foot and articulate how the national security establishment’s agenda of promoting ‘regime-change’ conflicts against secular Middle Eastern countries was actually endangering the security of British citizens.
When quizzed by Andrew Neil in 2017 about his earlier comments that NATO was a danger to world peace, the Labour leader could have mentioned how the bombardment of Libya had turned the country into a jihadist training camp on the shores of the Mediterranean – which had deadly consequences for British tourists holidaying in Tunisia in 2015.
Instead he muttered, rather tamely, that he wanted to work within NATO to ‘promote a human rights democracy.’ 

Short of dressing up in combat fatigues and calling for a full-scale military invasion of Syria, while waving a copy of the Times in one hand and John McCain’s memoirs in the other, Corbyn was never going to convince the national security establishment that he could be trusted to follow the neocon agenda. 
His attempts to edge away from his previously espoused views didn’t work, and his acceptance of a second EU referendum policy – pushed on him by his opponents – proved disastrous.

Starmer brings relief

But as soon as he was replaced by Sir Keir Starmer, a man with a very different resume, the pressure on Labour relented.

That's in England.  Are we so deluded we don't see similar actions in the US?  Corbyn?  Bernie Sanders was his stand-in here in the United States.  Bernie watched as his campaign was circumvented by the media (overtly) and by Barack Obama and others behind the scenes.

Instead of standing up for the values he espoused while running, he now offers meek little criticisms while telling everyone to rally around War Hawk Joe Biden.

There was a movement behind Bernie Sanders.  How very sad that he betrayed.  Even more sad, only Jimmy Dore appears to be comfortable telling that truth.

John Stauber offers:

I am hoping that Crazy Joe picks ⁦
@CondoleezzaRice
⁩ for VP! All the despicable #WeaponsOfMassDeception gang on one ticket!

It's very telling who Joe Biden's constituency is.  Neocons like Bill Kristol. Liars like David Frum. Trash like War Criminal Colin Powell.  Collie lied to the United Nations in order to help start the Iraq War.  (See Ava and my "TV Review: Barbara and Colin remake The Way We Were.")  He was part of a team of liars that also included Dick Cheney, Condi Rice, John Bolton and Bully Boy Bush among others.  He's gone on to lie about his lies.  And yet today he wanted to whine about Donald Trump lying.  Sarah Abdallah observes:

Colin Powell, who lied to the entire world about WMDs in Iraq, paving the way for an illegal war that killed and displaced millions of innocents, gave rise to ISIS, and destabilized the Middle East, is actually out here today lecturing us about lies.


Why did CNN put that piece of trash on to begin with?  He's a known liar.  He's never helped anyone but himself.  He lied about Vietnam, he lied his whole life.  His hands are soaked in blood.  He's never apologized for that.  Jeffrey St. Clair points out:

Now that Powell is back in the news & being feted for his courage in calling Trump a liar, it might seem rude to remind liberals that Powell whitewashed the My Lai massacre, a service to the Empire that helped launch the upward trajectory of his career...

He's also the person who refused to allow openly gay people to serve in the military.  That was what Bill Clinton had promised voters while he campaigned in 1992.  Colin wasn't having it.  That's why Bill proposed Don't Ask, Don't Tell.  In 2010, he was finally for repealing it.  He has never been forced to apologize, nor has he ever faced serious questions about his homophobia.  

Jake Tapper brought him on CNN Sunday as 'wise' Colin Powell, everybody's friend.  Jake did everything but shove his hand down the front of Colin's pants and give the liar a happy ending.  Jake should be ashamed of himself and so should CNN.  


Colin Powell’s lies led to the murder of millions in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East. Colin Powell has as much blood on his hands as George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. Colin Powell is not a paragon of morality. Colin Powell is a war criminal.


We have endless wars today and not only are we not, as a country, trying to end them, we're now enshrining the crooks responsible for them.

Why?

To prepare for a Biden presidency.  Derek Davison and Alex Thurston (JACOBIN) offer:


To the consternation of many on the Left, Joe Biden formally secured the Democratic Party’s nomination yesterday. And if polling both nationally and in several key battleground states is accurate, he stands a reasonable chance of defeating Donald Trump to become the 46th president of the United States. As voters consider their options this fall, and as leftists prepare to navigate the next four years, it is reasonable to fast forward a bit to examine what a potential Biden administration might look like.
There is perhaps no more critical area in which to start strategizing for a future Biden administration than foreign policy. For one thing, the almost unchecked growth of the “imperial presidency” has left the executive branch unchallenged in its control over this arena. Even under Trump, a president whose foreign policy decisions routinely alarm his own political allies, congressional attempts to reclaim some role in foreign affairs have been feeble and easily defeated. If there is any part of a Biden agenda that is likely to be enacted, regardless of the makeup of Congress, it is this one. 

For another thing, it is on the global front where the greatest challenges of the next presidency will lie. The COVID-19 pandemic has run rampant across Asia, Europe, and the Americas, and continues to pose a threat in places like sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia. Moreover, as in past pandemics the threat of a second wave — perhaps even deadlier than the first — will continue to loom unless and until scientists develop a safe and effective treatment and/or vaccine. Perhaps more seriously, recovering from the economic damage the pandemic has wrought will likely take years, and in the meantime that devastation will undoubtedly contribute to escalating instability around the world. This crisis has exposed weaknesses in international institutions and the global economy that must be addressed, lest the world go through it all again the next time it’s confronted with a new and virulent pathogen.
Lingering in the background of this crisis is the less immediate but more critical threat of climate change. A President Biden will have a profound opportunity either to help reshape global structures in ways that reduce injustice and prepare us for the massive challenges ahead, or to simply restore what has been shown to be a deeply inadequate status quo. In order to do that, he’ll have to rethink the two major driving forces behind US foreign policy: the presumption — whether justified or not — of a “great power competition” between the United States and China, and the never-ending — and increasingly unjustifiable — “war on terror.” Would Joe Biden, who often seems to have been drawn from Central Casting to play the role of “Generic Democrat,” really be willing to break with conventional DC wisdom to solve these international challenges?
Dishearteningly from a leftist perspective, foreign policy is likely to be one of the areas in which a President Biden would be least susceptible to external pressure. Throughout his lengthy career in the Senate, Joe Biden compiled a sizable and, it must be said, frequently distasteful record on a wide array of issues. But foreign policy was a consistent area of focus for him, and he appears to be particularly confident in his own presumed expertise. Biden served for many years on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, rising to become its ranking member in 1997 and serving as chair from 2001 through 2003 and again from 2007 through his inauguration as vice president in 2009.
In these roles, Biden built a substantial foreign policy record, and very little of it should offer hope to leftists. Hillary Clinton’s vote to authorize the Iraq War was rightly seen as a mark against her presidential candidacies in 2008 and 2016, but Biden not only voted to authorize that war, he was instrumental in helping to sell the conflict to his Democratic colleagues as well as to the American public. His proposal to impose a “soft partition” on Iraq is another mark against his judgment. As vice president, he was a key part of the Obama administration’s foreign policy team, which expanded the drone war, intensified the futile war in Afghanistan, and involved the United States in disastrous conflicts in Libya, Syria, and Yemen.
To be fair, Biden reportedly opposed the 2009 “surge” into Afghanistan and the 2011 intervention in Libya’s civil war. Yet the different stances Biden took at different times do not suggest that his views evolved in a coherent direction; rather, he appears to lack an overarching vision for foreign policy, and to propose ad hoc solutions to problems as they arise. More often than not, his stances fit within the sort of “liberal interventionism” that has defined mainstream Democratic Party foreign policy since the end of the Cold War. His feel-good talk of adopting a more progressive approach and headlining an “FDR-size presidency” notwithstanding, it’s likely with such an established record on international affairs that he will prefer to keep his own counsel and to surround himself with familiar advisers on the subject.
Moreover, any attempt to predict how a Biden administration will approach foreign policy must contend with one overarching truth: foreign policy is as much reactive as it is proactive. We can predict a few challenges that Biden would encounter immediately; he’d likely push to rejoin the Paris Climate Agreement, for example, and would probably move to restore and/or renegotiate the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran. By the same token, we can imagine where he’d be likely to continue Trump policies — he’s already said he’ll maintain Trump’s decision to move the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, for example, a theme we return to below.
With this in mind, what might a Biden presidency foreign-policy agenda look like? Certainly, his campaign’s vague promises of “restoring dignified leadership” and “leading the democratic world” give us few meaningful clues, and various Biden foreign policy think pieces from the liberal establishment should be taken more as wish lists than as firm agendas.
There’s a frequently used saying in Washington that “personnel is policy.” That may not be entirely true in the Trump administration, where personnel are shuffled in and out subject to the capricious whims of an unstable president. But a glance at the names that filled important foreign policy positions under Barack Obama or George W. Bush does indeed speak powerfully to the foreign policy approaches those administrations took.
And so we can begin to approximate how a Biden-led foreign policy agenda might look, by looking at those people most likely to formulate and implement it. By this approach, those who are hoping for a new era in America’s approach toward the rest of the world are likely to be disappointed. Indeed, if anything it would appear that the DC foreign policy establishment — the “Blob,” as former Obama adviser Ben Rhodes once put it — would be poised to maintain or even strengthen its hold on power under a President Biden.

This is a major story and one much more important than the daily distraction the press chooses to offer of who-is-Joe-going-to-give-his-rose-to?  This is about life and death and it's clearly beyond the tiny capabilities of the corporate press which is why they bring on Colin Powell and hail him as a hero.  He's a murderer.  He's not the only one being rehabbed.  James Bovard (COUNTERPUNCH) explains:




Former president George W. Bush has returned to the spotlight to give moral guidance to America in these troubled times. In a statement released on Tuesday, Bush announced that he was “anguished” by the “brutal suffocation” of George Floyd and declared that “lasting peace in our communities requires truly equal justice. The rule of law ultimately depends on the fairness and legitimacy of the legal system. And achieving justice for all is the duty of all.”
Bush’s declaration was greeted with thunderous applause by the usual suspects who portray him as the Virtuous Republican in contrast to Trump. A CNN headline proclaimed: “George W. Bush finally steps onto the right side of history.” The Washington Post chimed in with this headline: “George W. Bush calls out racial injustices and celebrates protestors.”
While the media portrays Bush’s pious piffle as visionary triumphs of principle, Americans need to vividly recall the lies and atrocities that permeated Bush’s eight years as president.
In an October 2017 speech in a “national forum on liberty” at the George W. Bush Institute in New York City, Bush bemoaned: “Our politics seems more vulnerable to conspiracy theories and outright fabrication.” Coming from Bush, this had as much credibility as former president Bill Clinton bewailing the decline of chastity.
Most media coverage of Bush nowadays either ignores the falsehoods he used to take America to war in Iraq or portrays him as a good man who received incorrect information. But Bush was lying from the get-go on Iraq and was determined to drag the nation into another Middle East war. From January 2003 onwards, Bush constantly portrayed the U.S. as an innocent victim of Saddam Hussein’s imminent aggression and repeatedly claimed that war was being “forced upon us.” That was never the case. Bush made “232 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and another 28 false statements about Iraq’s links to Al Qaeda,” as the Center for Public Integrity reported. As the lies by which he sold the Iraq war unraveled, Bush resorted to vilifying critics as traitors in a 2006 speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars.

A comedian makes a joke and we start screaming for a political campaign to draw a line between themselves and the candidate -- think John Kerry's campaign and Whoopi Goldberg in 2004.  But we're okay with these war criminals?  Why aren't we demanding that Joe Biden disavow Bully Boy Bush, Collie Powell and the rest?

Maybe because we know he won't.  Joe will always curry their favor.  He loves War Criminals the same way he loves segregationists.  By the way, beggar media, you think you can follow more than one story?  What's going on with the War Hawks backing Joe is a story, a major one.  You might might want to try paying attention.  








Posted by at

Saturday, June 06, 2020

Corey Hart -- he's got a new recording

I was not going to post about Corey Hart tonight.  I read Kat's "Quarterflash" and Elaine's "The 80s - Madonna, Cyndi Lauper and Billy Idol" and then Kat's "Jazz: Miles Davis, Ornette Coleman, Sarah Vaughan, Dakota Staton, Doris Day" and thought I should do a music post. 

I was going to write about a one hit wonder who was not a one hit wonder -- despite her image, she had several hits -- especially on the R&B side.  But I was playing videos while I was getting ready to write and it went from Allure's "All Cried Out" to Corey's "Never Surrender."

Only not the "Never Surrender" that I know and I bet you know.  It went to this one.



He had retired.  I thought he called it quits two or three years ago.

First off, Corey is a hot guy.  He was hot then and he is hot now -- especially with the hair cut.  I don't like him with long hair, sorry.  Thin eyebrows and long hair do not go together.

Corey is also Kat's favorite one night stand.  I forget where it was but she met him at a casino.  He wasn't the only celebrity there -- this wasn't in the US.  Was it one of the islands in the Virgin Islands?  I can't remember.  And I'm not telling tales out of school, she's written about it before and how Carly Simon was at the same casino.  Anyway.

Corey Hart is a singer-songwriter.  He's from Canada.  He first hit with "Sunglasses At Night."  He followed that with "It Ain't Enough" which was also a hit.  Then came his second album (BOY IN THE BOX) and his biggest hit "Never Surrender."

The original was a great recording.  But I do like the new version a lot. 

And I like Corey.  He experimented.  Bryan Adams churned out the same album about 10 times.  Every album found Corey exploring.  BOY IN THE BOX was nothing like his self-titled debut.  His third album FIELDS OF FIRE (with the hits "I Am By Your Side," "Dancing With My Mirror" and his cover of "Can't Help Falling In Love") was nothing like what came before.

YOUNG MAN RUNNING, his fourth album, was another variation and remains my favorite of his albums so far.  In fact, let me note two great songs from that album.  "Spot You In A Coal Mine."




I love that song.  And I love the guitar, Corey's vocal, Ruby Turner's vocal, the melody and the lyrics.
You, you've got the market on my heart
I declare right now that it belongs to you
And the whole world is witness too
So take the bad days from here
'Cause I never get what I want
Never want what I get
I'm spoiled rotten to the core
Baby, there is something more
And let me tell you that
I may be blindfolded, turn around
Spit on like a dog in the earth
Spot you in a coalmine
Yes it's true
I can spot you in a coalmine
And I, think of an old Dylan song
When I'm with my buddy Matt
And we're travelin' down the road
The light we never knowed

No I can't bite my lip no more
I've heard this heartbreak story before
I can stand here and watch you with my eyes close tight
Hey, mister baby I know you alright


And "In Your Soul."




I love that song.  And, again, the lyrics. 

Ever since I was a little kid
I have always thought
I could run faster than the wind
Stare up to the sky with open spaces
I could live and die
Well man you can't find that in no book
Never find that in no book
Someone will drag you down
And try to knock you under
Hey mama said with her words of wonder
Don't matter 'cause, 'cause it's in your soul

I have always felt
That I had to prove it to myself
No salvation from the firin' line
A million dreams won't set you free
God I know there's something trapped in me
There's no refuge from the ride
No shelter ever saved a man his pride
Give you pain and never feed your hunger
I won't close my eyes when it rain and thunders
Don't matter 'cause, 'cause it's in your soul

Corey is a great songwriter. 





"Iraq snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):
Friday, June 5, 2020.  Iraq continues to face many issues, Joe Biden continues to get a pass on all of them. 



Like elsewhere in the world, Iraq is grappling with the coronavirus.  THE NAMIBIAN reported on that issue earlier this week.



REUTERS offers a video report here of the cemetery in Najaf where those who have died from coronavirus are being buried.  On that cemetery where only the victims of coronavirus are being buried, REUTERS reports:

Established after an edict from Iraq’s top Shia cleric Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, it is dwarfed by the nearby Wadi al-Salam cemetery, the largest in the world, but is expanding.
More than 200 people have died since the outbreak began in Iraq in February and the volunteers say they receive two to four corpses each day. The country’s confirmed coronavirus infections have doubled from around 3,000 to more than 6,000 in the space of just over two weeks, according to health ministry figures.
Ibrahim and his comrades joined the brigade part of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) paramilitary umbrella grouping, to fight Islamic State several years ago.
While this enemy is very different, the work is both physically and emotionally draining.
Bodies often arrive at night. The volunteers, in full protective suits, wash and wrap the corpses in black burial shrouds before putting them back in the coffins. They carry the coffins to the graves under the headlights of their vehicles.




Iraq’s Health Ministry on Wednesday said that the total number of COVID-19 cases jumped to 8,168 after setting a new record of daily increase with 781 infections.

The new cases included 437 in the capital Baghdad, 52 in Duhok, 46 in Sulaimaniyah, 41 in Basra, 35 in each Maysan and Kirkuk, 33 in Babil, 28 in Dhi Qar, 19 in Najaf, 18 in Muthanna, 11 in Karbala, eight in Diyala, seven in Diwaniyah, six in Erbil and five in Anbar, the ministry said in a statement.

It also said that 21 people died from the coronavirus during the day, in the highest single-day rise, bringing the death toll in the country to 256, while 4,095 patients have recovered.
Any government count in Iraq is an under-count.  When REUTERS attempted to report on the actual count, an estimate, the Iraqi government briefly suspended them from reporting from Iraq.  Mina Aldroubi (THE NATIONAL) offers:

Iraq’s health care is on the verge of collapse, officials warned on Thursday, as the number of new coronavirus cases increased this week.
“We have concerns about the increase of daily cases. We anticipate the number will double which might result in the collapse of the system as it cannot manage the influx of cases,” director of the public health department, Riyad Abdel Amir, said in a statement.
The country recorded 672 new cases on Thursday, bringing the total number of infections to 8,840, with the majority of infections in Baghdad.
Authorities said 15 people died from the virus, eight of them in the capital, taking the total death toll in the country to 271.
Wednesday was the highest single-day jump in cases as health authorities recorded 781 cases and 21 fatalities. 

The coronavirus is only one major issue facing the Iraqi government.  May 7th, Mustafa al-Kadhimi became Iraq's latest prime minister.  That should not have happened.  Per the Constitution, he is supposed to form a Cabinet to move from prime minister-designate to prime minister -- not a partial Cabinet, not a sort-of Cabinet, a full Cabinet.  No one has followed the post-invasion Constitution with regards to that provision even though it's the only thing a candidate has to do to become prime minister.  The point of the Constitutional article is that it will show that the candidate can work with others, can make deals and can function.  Iraq's dysfunctional administrations since 2003 have demonstrated that the article is important.  But no one bothers to follow it.

May 7th, he became prime minister and Iraq still doesn't have a full Cabinet.  Lawk Ghafuri (RUDAW) reports:

Iraqi parliament has received the names of the seven remaining ministerial nominees for the vacant positions in Prime Minister Mustafa Kadhimi’s cabinet, the Office of Speaker of the Parliament announced on Thursday via Twitter.

Kurdish parties were granted their top pick Fuad Hussein, Iraq’s former finance minister, for the coveted foreign minister position, said Hamadamin Faris, Kurdish MP in Iraqi parliament.

“The KDP candidate for the foreign minister seat is Fuad Hussein,” Faris told Rudaw English. “While, the PUK’s candidate for the justice minister is Judge Salar,” referring to Salar Abdul Satar, a former judge in Kirkuk and Baghdad. 

The Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) is the second largest political party in the Kurdistan Region and has 18 seats in Iraqi parliament.
A parliamentary session to approve or reject the nominated ministerial candidates is scheduled to be held on Saturday, June 6.


Again, a failure to form a full Cabinet has repeatedly led to an administration that struggles to govern.  Repeatedly.  Mustafa Habib (AL-MENESA) observed last month:

It really does feel as though Iraq is on the verge of another crisis – yet again.
“History is repeating itself,” says Samer al-Jibouri, a police officer in Tikrit, the capital of the province of Salahaddin.  “What’s happening now feels so similar to what happened in 2014 [when the security crisis sparked by the extremist Islamic State group began]. We only lack an insane caliph to declare an Islamic state!,” he jokes. “Although we won’t let that happen,” he said staunchly.
The last month has been tough though, al-Jibouri told Al Menasa. “We have been subjected to numerous attacks and ambushes by the terrorists,” he explained. “They’re happening almost daily now. The extremists come at night from remote villages in the desert, places we can’t go after dark. Then they disappear from there in the mornings when our forces enter the villages looking for them.”
From the beginning of April until May 4, security sources estimate that there have been around 50 attacks by armed extremists.
This has coincided with the arrival of the new leader of the Islamic State, or IS, group to Iraq. The man, known as Abu Ibrahim al-Qurashi – whose real name is thought to be Amir Mohammed Sa’id Abdul Rahman al-Mawli al-Salbi – apparently came back to Iraq from Syria because of the deterioration in security in Iraq. Al-Qurashi apparently comes from the town of Tal Afar and is one of the extremist IS group’s founding members.
The map of recent attacks and ambushes runs through the cities previously occupied by the IS group, starting from the west of the province of Diyala, passing through northern Salahaddin, over to the top of Ninewa and Kirkuk, and then through to the bottom of Anbar province. Dozens of Iraqi security forces, including members of the so-called Popular Mobilization Forces, or PMF,  have been killed or injured in these attacks.


No, ISIS is not vanquished or gone -- despite the declaration of an Iraqi military spokesperson two weeks ago.  ISIS remains active in Iraq.  Khrush Najari (KURDISTAN 24) notes, "In recent months, the extremist organization appears to have taken advantage of several current crises Iraq now faces, including the coronavirus pandemic. The group also exploits the long-standing security gap between Peshmerga and Iraqi forces in the disputed areas to carry out attacks against civilians and members of the security forces."

May 26th, Iraqi politician Ayad Allawi Tweeted:

No public tribunal has yet been formed to try protestors’ killers; and neither have martyrs’ families, those wounded and made handicapped been compensated. In addition, there must be a fixed date for fair and early elections; a new electoral law; and an independent commission.



The Iraqi National Accord (INA) bloc accused the Ministry of Defence of circumventing a previous government decision to ban the installation of US Patriot systems, and put forward several principles for any negotiation with Washington.
The parliamentary bloc led by Iyad Allawi announced in a statement published on Thursday, that the Iraqi National Security Council (INSC) decided during the era of former Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi to reject the installation and purchase of Patriot missile systems with the accompanying rockets from the US.
The statement added that the decision was taken: “By majority, not by consensus, and some of the current leaders voted to abstain,” wondering: “How can we respond today to the statements of the current defence minister that the missiles were installed in two bases in Iraq?”
The statement clarified the INA’s position regarding what is being discussed in the strategic dialogue with the US, stressing that the INA’s bloc: “Is not ready to participate in the strategic dialogue with the US or even be part of the negotiation committee now.”


Allawi led the Iraqiya coalition in the 2010 elections.  They were a new group and the US press -- following the dictates of the US State Dept -- wrote them off.  Quil Lawrence and others would tell the country that Nouri al-Maliki had a lock on the votes of the Iraqi people.  Right after the election, Quil would even falsely 'report' on NPR that Nouri had won -- before the votes were counted. 

Nouri did not win in 2010.  Iraqiya won.  And that was a major moment if anyone had bothered to care.  Iraqiya was a rejection of sectarian politics.  It was about forming an Iraqi identity.  It promoted all sects, all faiths, women as well as men, it was about a united Iraq.

And that's how it came to beat the incumbent Nouri al-Maliki.

This was an amazing moment in political history for any country.

But the US press didn't want to talk about that.

Nouri lost.  He stamped his feet and the UN did a recount and tossed him a few more votes but he still lost.

Nouri then refused to step down, creating a political stalemate in the country that would last for a little over eight months.  He was able to do that because the US government backed him.  That was the incompetent ambassador Chris Hill and that was Samantha Power, Susan Rice and, the man tasked with overseeing the whole thing, Joe Biden.

Supposedly, the US wanted Iraq to have a democracy.  But instead of backing up the voters -- and re-enforcing democratic impulses -- the US government backed Nouri al-Maliki for a second term.  He was a known thug at this point.  The world knew of his secret prisons and torture cells.  

But that's who the US backed.  And Joe Biden led that effort, pushing The Erbil Agreement, a contract that overturned the votes of the Iraqi people and gave Nouri a second term.

That second term led to the rise of ISIS.  At what point will Joe Biden and others be held accountable for that?  More importantly, as Joe himself runs around trying to earn votes, why isn't he asked about overturning the votes of the Iraqi people in 2010?


We'll come back to Joe, before we do, let's note that the Baghdad government is also facing the issue of how to get along with the Kurdish government.  Currency 365 discusses some issues between Erbil and Baghdad.



Joe wasn't once the US telephone line to Kurdistan.  He angered the Kurds and betrayed them so he no longer has their ear.  That's another issue that the US press doesn't seem capable of exploring.



Joe has been accused by Tara Reade of assaulting her in 1993.  Mary Margaret Olohan (DAILY CALLER) reports:


Joseph Backholm is at least the eighth person to corroborate aspects of Reade’s claims, following her mother, brother, ex-husband, former neighbor, former coworker and at least of her two friends.
[. . .]
According to Backholm, the two were sitting with other law students on a hotel patio by the water chatting late at night during one of these conferences. Eventually everyone went to bed except Backholm and Reade, who continued discussing Reade’s plans to become a domestic violence advocate.
“She said, ‘When I was in Washington, D.C. I was sexually assaulted by someone you would know,’ and that’s how she phrased it, ‘someone you would know’ and she didn’t give a name,” Backholm said. “I didn’t ask for a name.”

Tara's assertion is credible.  Attacks on her finances have nothing to do with the assault she is claiming.  She has been bullied and smeared because it's just too uncomfortable for some to address assault.  The continued refusal to take this allegation seriously is harming all who are victimized and sending a message that you shouldn't come forward.

Joe Biden is disgusting.  Publicly, he's pretended to support a place for victims to come forward.  Privately, he's unleashed the hideous Anita Dunn on Tara.  
 

I have lost everything my job, my housing and my reputation I have been called every vile name imaginable & presented as a monster by the media for daring to speak about Joe Biden and what happened in 1993. I have lost all that & more but I am free.


A lot of people have things to answer for with regards to their refusal to address the allegations seriously.  Partisanship does not allow you to ignore this issue.






The following sites updated:


Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)