Monday, March 7, 2022

Sabby Sabs, are you trying to be stupid? (NSFW)

I'll note the video.

 


She thinks she can learn from Jesse Ventura about how to win.  Oh, Sabby, are you really that stupid?


He won one term.  He won because the Democrats ran an idiot whose father had turned off many with his pro-Vietnam stance.  That's what it was.  His father ran against Robert F. Kennedy (the anti-war choice) and Eugene McCarthy (the next most anti-war candidate but not really one).  Hubert Humphrey was a joke and a dirty joke at that.  They were not going to elect him governor.  The real challenge was from the right.  Had Jesse not been in the race, the governor would have been a Republican.


How stupid are you, Sabby?


It's like you do no work at all.  You just yammer your mouth with what you think you know.  Just shut up, honest to God, shut the hell up.


Jesse Ventura is a right-winger.  You do know that, right?  You're not so stupid that you don't know that the candidate from H. Ross Perot's party was a right winger, right?


I don't have time for her stupidity or for her attacks on the Green Party.  It's suggested that she have Howie on.  No, she says on the video, she didn't think he should have been the choice.


I'm not in the mood.


You're not a Green and you clearly didn't pay attention.


I don't need another stupid bitch weighing in on politics.  We've got enough stupid bitches already.


In the primary, I highlighted everyone running.  I am a Green.  And I was supporting Dario.  His positions were the closest to my own.  I believed what he said he believed.


I ended up supporting Howie Hawkins.


Why?

He was the only one working for the nomination.  While campaigning or 'campaigning' for the nomination, Dario couldn't even Tweet regularly.  He ran a lousy campaign.  And long before he dropped out I had to do a post here -- check my archives, Sabby  -- where I explained that Dario wasn't running a real campaign and I didn't have time for it, I was throwing my support over to Howie.


He was not my first choice.  But he didn't disappoint me and he's continued to cover Green Politics at least once a week every week since the 2020 election.  The national Green Party can't even post, at their website, something new each week.  But Howie has done that.


Is Howie perfect?

Hell no.  No one is.  But Howie has done better than any other Green presidential nominee we've had in that he's not run off to hide.  He ran a real campaign and he has continued to address the issues that matter each week.  Sometimes twice a week.


So I'm not in the mood, Sabby, for your stupidity.  Learn before you open your damn mouth.


My parents are Greens.  I was raised to be a Green.  I know the party.  You don't know s**t about the Green Party so stop offering your uninformed, uneducated, stupid bitch 'observations.'


I'm about to go off on you  No, bitch, you haven't seen me go off yet.  Get me the vaseline, I'll take this weave out, and we can throw down.  Because I'm not in the damn mood.


You don't know a damn thing about the Green Party.  So just check yourself.


You've already made an ass out of yourself saying that the Green Party should have given Jesse the nomination in 2020.  Given him. He didn't want to run and he didn't run.  But you whore out your supposed beliefs to pimp Jesse.


A 'fiscal conservative.'  That's who you're rooting for.


And we don't need celebrities.  Jesse was a lousy one-term governor.  He could run because he had a name as a wrestler.  


Sabby, you're a stupid idiot who needs to learn about politics.  You need to grasp that Greens are the only ones that are likely to support you and your positions -- we'd probably even consider moving over to your party.  Consider.


But not when you keep attacking our party to pimp a conservative politician who accomplished nothing other than using celebrity to get into office.  And you continue to trash Howie when not only was he the only candidate in the primary to run a real campaign, he's the only candidate we've had as a president who has continued to put forth the effort after the election.


You clearly don't care to take the time required to educate yourself.

 

Read Ava and C.I.'s "TV: A streaming pile of garbage" -- and I'm not impressed with Call Me Kat so if I don't write about last week's episode it's because I'm trying to be kind.

 

 

This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

 

 Monday, March 7, 2022    Black Alliance for Peace issues a statement regarding Russia and Ukraine while Hillary Clinton spews hate at Russia, another woman is murdered in Iraq, the political stalemat continues, and much more.


In 2020, Joe Biden was a candidate for the Democrats Party primary.  Then, still 2020, he became the nominee.  In both cases, he was full of how he was going to take on COVID 19 and how Donald Trump was doing it wrong and how blah blah blah.


He did nothing to address the issues.  In fact, he did far less.  At least people got a tiny bit of money when Donald Trump was president.  (The checks Joe signed upon being sworn in as president were supposed to have gone out weeks prior but Nancy Pelosi stalled them so Donald wouldn't get credit -- that's "We fee them!" Nancy)


A complete and utter failure, Joe Biden is now using war on Russia to distract from his failure to provide leadership on COVID.  All he did was what Donald had done and as proof of the carry over, he kept the idiot and liar Anthony Fauci on in the same position.


Add to that the inflation that so many outside the bubble are dealing with and Joe needs a villain, something to push the hatred off on and distract from his impotecny.  


What better way than to attack the Russian people and whip up hatred towards them.  Enter Hillary Clinton.  What did Dana Milbank calle her in 2008?  Mad dog bitch?  Something like that.  


Well she's living up to that these days.  She can't stop frothing at the mouth about how the Russian people need to suffer as she tries to inflate hatred and stir things up.  She really needs to be retired from public life.  A known liar who used Russia as an excuse for her own failures to campaing properly in 2016, she's never been about women except for those named Hillary Clinton.  In the 90s, she attacked the women who came forward -- just as she had attacked a rape victim on the stand prior to that.  She attacked the women and showing that she didn't know what she was talking about -- a common occurence for Hillary -- she said if she could get those women on the stand, she would rip them apart because their stories had changed.  As we all know -- all of us except Hillary-- victims stories can change.  


She looks like the man she always wanted to be these days.  Ugly, angry, spewing hate.


She's a failure as a politician and she's a fialure as a woman.  Remember the late Eliabeth Edwards had words about that.  (Before they bit Elizabeth in her ass.)


Where she or Chelsea get off making public statements is amazing.  The only thing we need to hear from either is how do you embrace Bill Clinton when you know he raped Juanita Broaddrick?


Corporate media is to blame as well.  They know she has no humanity, they know she has no decency, yet they put her on the air.  Present her as an expert.  On how to lose an election?  On how to destroy Iraq?  On how to pretend like everyone's not laughing at you over the fact that your husband repeatedly cheats on you -- to this day, cheast on you?


Exactly what is her accomplishment?  Office holder?  SHe certainly never accomplished anything to brag of in any office.


Fat, short and ugly to this day, I guess I can give her credit for taming those awful eye brows after she became First Lady.


Don't see how that makes her an expert on the world, but okay?



She wants people close to Vladimir Putin to step in?  I'm sure that Putin, like Hillary herself, has no friends.


She has lackeys.  She lost a number of them with the 2008 campaing.  First by blaming some women while she was campaigning for the nomination and then by blaming them even more after she lost the nomination.  


Hillary is neither attractive nor smart.  It takes a real idiot to think you can whisper insults to the press and it won't get back to the women that the omments came from Hillary.  Especially when some of the women are married to members of the press.


Her 2016 campaign -- dull and insispid with Hillary trying to out-Barack Barack himself -- was all about the men.  It was doomed before it started.


Now this failure, whose most important 'accomplishement' was taking part in the war on Iraq that destroyed Iraq wants to share what she thinks is insight?


Black Alliance for Peace notes:


Within large sectors of the U.S. left, including many elements of the Black left, there is widespread confusion related to the Ukraine “crisis.” Years of anti-Russia propaganda from the U.S. and its NATO allies, and the tendency to abstract the current Ukrainian situation from its historical and geo-strategic context, have created a climate of confusion. This climate has played into the hands of state propagandists and Democratic Party activists eager to use the Ukraine situation to deflect attention from Biden’s disastrous domestic agenda. 

The situation with Ukraine did not just fall out of the sky in 2021. It has a long history.



Here are some points to frame how we should engage this issue:

  1. Ukraine is a manufactured crisis. That is, the stand-off between the U.S./ NATO forces and the Russian Federation with the Ukrainians, including the Ukrainians in the Eastern portion of Ukraine (that the media refers to as “pro-Russia separatists”), did not evolve organically but was the result of conscious decisions on the part of the Biden Administration. Less than two months after taking office there were indications that the Biden Administration was signaling to the Ukrainian government that it would support efforts to reincorporate the eastern region (Donbas) by force. This is why we reject any obscurantist references to the “both sides are to blame” position that we see in various statements from peace and anti-war groups. To be clear: this is not a “pro-Russia” position, but an objective assessment of the dynamics of the situation. 

  2. The U.S./EU/NATO Axis of Domination. We see NATO as a criminal military structure whose only purpose is providing the military/material basis for the maintenance and extension of the U.S./EU/NATO Axis of Domination (white power). As a structure of white colonial power, NATO was essential in supporting colonial powers in Africa, including the Portuguese in their military struggles to maintain their colonial holdings in Africa during the initial wave of anti-colonial struggles on the continent. The Obama/Biden administration also used NATO for their attack on Libya in 2011, resulting in the destruction of the most prosperous and revolutionary state on the continent. All peace loving people should call for the dismantling of NATO. 

  3. Ukraine and U.S. Doctrine of “Full Spectrum Dominance.” While the focus on Ukraine is of utmost importance, we must also recognize the bipartisan commitment to the U.S. national security strategy of “Full Spectrum Dominance” and its utilization of a “military-first” strategy to achieve continued U.S. global dominance. For example, troops trained by the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) have been involved in nine coups d’etat in the thirteen years that AFRICOM has operated on the continent. Therefore, unlike a number of peace and anti-war groups that abstract Ukraine from that context, we argue that the coup in Ukraine and the attempt to create the conditions for the expansion of NATO into Ukraine must be seen as just one aspect of U.S. imperialist strategy. It is the concrete, material interests of imperialism that drives U.S. policies and is, therefore,  why it must be defined as such and vigorously opposed by all anti-imperialists. 



For African peoples, the U.S./EU/NATO Axis of Domination represents the greatest threat to peace, human rights, and social justice on the planet today. It is absurd for any African to embrace the agenda of empire by giving credence or legitimacy to the crude mobilization of public opinion for conflict on behalf of NATO and the white supremacist, colonial/capitalist project. 



  1. Ukraine reflects the continuous right-wing nature of European and European American politics. In a 2018 article in The Nation, Stephen Cohen detailed the social and political impacts of the 2014 right-wing coup in Ukraine: 

…storm troop-like assaults on gays, Jews, elderly ethnic Russians, and other “impure” citizens are widespread throughout Kiev-ruled Ukraine, along with torchlight marches reminiscent of those that eventually inflamed Germany in the late 1920s and 1930s. And that the police and official legal authorities do virtually nothing to prevent these neofascist acts or to prosecute them. On the contrary, Kiev has officially encouraged them by systematically rehabilitating and even memorializing Ukrainian collaborators with Nazi German extermination pogroms and their leaders during World War II, renaming streets in their honor, building monuments to them, rewriting history to glorify them, and more. 



This is the nature of the government in Ukraine that the Biden Administration along with the corporate press, deranged Black people, and a confused left are supporting.  

Below is an alternative set of facts and analyses related to the Ukraine crisis, a “crisis” deliberately generated to divert attention away from the Biden’s administration inability to provide capitalist stability. 



The unfolding of events in Ukraine that are relevant for Africans



  1. The full responsibility for the dangerous crisis unfolding in Ukraine has its genesis in the illegal policies of the U.S./EU/NATO “Axis of Domination” beginning in 2014. As the Black Alliance for Peace reported, it was clear even from statements attributed to Obama officials that, “During the latter part of 2013 until February 2014, the Obama/Biden administration gave material support and encouragement to anti-democratic right-wing elements in Ukraine to execute ‘regime change.’” Therefore, the U.S. was deeply implicated in the coup of February 2014 that overthrew the democratically elected president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych. 

  2. The coup government was infected with Ukrainian ultra-nationalists and with political ties to literal fascists such as the “Right Sector” and the Azov battalions. The coup plunged Ukraine into crisis because substantial sectors of Ukrainian society did not support it, especially sections of predominantly Russian speaking Ukrainian citizens in the Eastern portions of the nation. Those Ukrainian citizens rejected the legitimacy of the coup government and began to voice support for independence from the neo-Nazi government that took power.  The response from the illegal coup regime was to label its own citizens “terrorists” and attack the Eastern portions of the country militarily. In other words, they attacked their own citizens – a crime that the Obama administration pretended was the excuse for U.S. subversion in Syria. 

  3. The Azov Battalion played a major combat role in the attacks by the coup government against Ukrainian citizens who opposed the coup. The Azov Battalion is avowedly “partially” pro-Nazi, as evidenced by its regalia, slogans, and programmatic statements, and as well-documented as such by several international monitoring organizations. The Azov Battalion was incorporated into the National Guards of Ukraine, the armed forces of the Ukrainian state, and today is reported to be being trained by U.S. Special Forces.

  4. After suffering military defeats at the hands of the peoples in Eastern Ukraine that had subsequently declared themselves independent of the coup government, an agreement between Donbas and the coup government was arrived at that became known as the Minsk II agreement. Terms of the agreement included a commitment to a ceasefire along with relative autonomy for Donbas (Eastern Ukraine). The agreement avoided all-out war and provided a degree of “stability” until the Biden administration came back to power. 

Back in power, Biden and the Democrats who have now reclaimed the mantle of the party of war, began to encourage Ukraine authorities to ignore the Minsk II agreement and to forcefully retake control of Donbas. Even more dangerously, the U.S. and some European powers began to indicate that Ukraine might be invited to become a member of NATO. If Ukraine becomes a member of NATO, this could allow a nuclear armed NATO to be positioned right on the borders of Russia. Russia is rightly concerned about this security risk at its border. 



The Black Radical Position on the Situation in Ukraine 



NATO is an illegitimate aggressive structure in the service of Western imperialism and does not deserve any support from African/Black and colonized people. Moreover, all social forces committed to peace should demand that NATO be dismantled. The Ukrainian crisis is yet another example of the delusional policies being pursued by U.S. rulers unable to accept the changed circumstances in the world today that limit their ability to impose their interests on peoples and nations without consequences. 

As an African people involved in an existential battle in the U.S. against rightist forces, from the Trump/Republican supporters to the warmongering neoliberal Democrats, with both committed to global “Full Spectrum Dominance” (white power), it would be an affront to our history and people to enter this struggle on the side of empire and NATO.  

 

BAP Demands:



1. All parties to the conflict adhere to the provisions reflected in the Minsk agreement

2. Instead of the arbitrary and illegal activities of the United States and NATO, the Ukrainian situation should be moved to the United Nations Security Council, the only body by international law tasked with the responsibility to address international threats to peace.

3. That NATO, a structure for advancing the interests of white supremacy and the U.S. empire be dismantled.

4. The U.S. government renounce its commitment to the doctrine of global “Full Spectrum Dominance.”



Select Resources from BAP and BAP members:



BAP Press Release: Black Alliance For Peace took a strong stance on the escalating situation in Ukraine. “Black Alliance for Peace Condemns the Policies of the U.S./EU/NATO Axis of Domination in Ukraine”

Ajamu Baraka, Ukraine: What Does it Have to Do with Black Folks?

BAP Press Release: Ukraine: Biden Administration’s “Wag the Dog” Diversionary War?:

Interview Ajamu Baraka on Ukraine: Unmasking Imperialism Hosted by Ramiro Sebastián Fúnez. 

Margaret Kimberley: Ukraine and War Propaganda

Ajamu Baraka, National Organizer of the Black Alliance for Peace joined “By Any Means Necessary” to discuss the ongoing issues in Ukraine and its meaning for Black people in the US.

Salifu Mack, Erica Caines, Biden-Harris and the Never-Ending Commitment to War and Terror:

Charisse Burden-Stelly, “Against the Triple Evils: The Biden’s Administrations Affront to Dr. King’s Legacy

 

Pre-2021:



Margaret Kimberley: Russia Wins 

Glen Ford: Hillary and Other Assorted Barbarians at Russia’s Gate

Ajamu Baraka: The Story of Charlottesville Was Written in Blood in The Ukraine

Interview: Ajamu and Phil Wilatyo - A Voice From The Margins - US Foreign Policy in Ukraine and Eastern Europe



Additional Information:  

Estonia and Latvia are NATO member states; they are both on Russia’s border. Estonia would be the closest to Saint Petersburg. See the map here and look at number 24, that is Estonia and the little inlet just north > that is where Saint Petersburg is.
 

US propaganda is inflating the supposed 100,000 troops that Russia has on Ukraine’s border but doesn’t talk about the 3.5 million personnel that NATO has in Europe. 



NATO and Africa: 

In his 1966 book Challenge of the Congo, Kwame Nkrumah writes: “Foreign powers already have military bases in various, strategically important parts of our continent. There are in Africa at present, seventeen air bases owned and operated by individual members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). There are nine naval bases encircling the continent from the north coast of Africa right round the south coast to the east. There are foreign military missions, for example in Kenya, Morocco, Liberia, Libya, South Africa, Senegal and Ivory Coast. Furthermore, they possess three rocket sites, and an atomic testing range in North Africa. There are mines being exploited for the production of raw materials for the manufacture of nuclear weapons. Some of these mines are situated in the Congo, Angola, South Africa, Mozambique and Rhodesia. In the context of of the imperialist plan to prevent Africa from achieving complete political and economic independence and an All-African Union Government, these foreign military bases present a serious threat to the African revolutionary struggle.” (p. xi)

Walter Rodney was even more explicit on how NATO moved into Africa as part of the efforts to shift colonial power from the traditional European powers to the new colonial hegemon - the United States of America. 

Rodney accurately describes the early foundation of colonial Africa’s relationship with NATO which continues today when he said in How Europe Underdeveloped Africa: “Adding to the regular bases in long established colonies, the imperialist powers were able to set up military installations in African territories which fell into their hands during the war. In this context, the USA was particularly important, because it was already the principal buttress of the capitalist defense system in the form of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Thus, after helping to recapture North Africa from the fascist, the United States was able to build major air-force bases in Morocco, and Libya. In Italian Eritrea, the Americans stepped in with modern radar stations; and Ethiopia conceded military bases.” (p. 198)



NATO & AFRICOM

AFRICOM is actually a direct product of NATO via EUCOM (US European command) because EUCOM is a component part of NATO and EUCOM originally included responsibility for 42 African states. In 2003 NATO started expanding; four years later the EUCOM commander proposed the creation of AFRICOM in 2007. James L. Jones Jr. explains how he came to make the proposal for AFRICOM from his position as commander of EUCOM as well as commander of operational forces of NATO here.

As previously mentioned regarding NATO’s relationship with OAU states, the policy of NATO “partnering” with African states to achieve its goals has continued with the establishment of the AU. The AU has partnered with NATO/AFRICOM missions regarding “anti-piracy,” military training, operational support, etc. in Somalia, and spearheaded missions in Sudan & Gulf of Guinea.

The US/NATO role in the destruction of Libya in 2011 is important to highlight because it offers some important lessons. First, US imperialism and its western lackies do not accept any country that decides to be an independent force outside of its sphere of influence. Secondly, it also demonstrates how NATO can work hand in hand with other US/western dominated world structures like the UN. In 2011 the UN (resolution 1973) gave political authorization for a “no Fly zone” and blockade of Libya to reportedly “protect” the citizens which ultimately resulted the destruction of the country. It shows that although US-led NATO often uses the UN for political cover, it has no problem illegally overstepping its UN mandate to commit its crimes against humanity and achieve its regime change goals. Even a few countries that abstained from the UN vote like China said they did so not to offend the reactionary Arab league AND the African Union which approved of the resolution. This shows cooperation between NATO, UN the AU, and the Arab League.

The book The Illegal War on Libya edited by Cynthia McKinney, includes the chapter titled “NATO’s Libya War, A Nuremberg Level Crime” in which Stephen Ledman writes: “The US-led NATO war on Libya will be remembered as one of history’s greatest crimes, violating the letter and spirit of international law and America’s Constitution. The Nuremberg Tribunal’s Chief Justice Robert Jackson (a supreme court justice) called Nazi war crimes ‘the supreme international crime against peace.’ Here are his November 21, 1945 opening remarks:

The wrongs which we seek to condemn and punish have been so calculated, so malignant, and so devastating, that civilization cannot tolerate their being ignored, because it cannot survive their being repeated.”  Jackson called aggressive war “the greatest menace of our times.” International law defines crimes against peace as “planning, preparation, initiation, or waging of wars of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing.

All US post-WWII wars fall under this definition. Since then, America has waged direct and proxy premeditated, aggressive wars worldwide. It has killed millions in East and Central Asia, North and other parts of Africa, the Middle East, and Europe, as well as in Central and South America.” (p. 79)



Some quotations from Horace Campbell’s book Global NATO and the Catastrophic Failure in Libya: Lessons for Africa in the Forging of African Unity are instructive for understanding the expansion of NATO, its aggression toward Russia, and its role in Africa generally, and Libya particularly:



“The NATO operation [in Libya] exposed the reality that in the current depression there will be massive use of force by Western corporations to remain competitive. These corporate entities have decided to go beyond structural adjustment ‘reforms’ and have taken a military stand in Africa. There were also commentators who perceived the Libyan intervention as a proxy war with China. War and revolution in North Africa have opened a new period in the history of Africa.” (p. 30)



“Russia opposed the expansion of NATO, claiming that this was a military alliance to encircle Russia by extending its membership to include former members of the Warsaw Pact… NATO expanded under President Clinton to protect ‘globalized’ capital, and it was in this period of expansion that NATO jumped from twelve members to sixteen, then to nineteen, then to twenty-six by 2004 and to twenty-eight members by 2009. Despite vocal opposition from Russia, the discussion of expanding NATO now proceeded to the idea of Global NATO…” (p. 40)



“Africa remained outside the orbit of this globalized NATO because memories of the anti-apartheid struggles were too fresh in Africa, especially southern Africa. Soon after the end of apartheid, the government of the United States proposed an African Crisis Response initiative. Nelson Mandela was among the first to vigorously oppose this planned military force in Africa. For the next eight years, U.S. diplomatic efforts were geared toward ensnaring individual states into a military network dominated by the United States. Hiding behind the guise of humanitarian relief, in 2004 the United States announced the formation of the African Contingency Operations Training and Assistance program. The ostensive purpose of ACOTA was to train military trainers and equip African national militaries to conduct peace support operations. Less than four years later, the United States launched a new initiative, the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM). This new military force for Africa was rejected by even the most servile allies of the United States. There was only one country that, in public, promised basing privileges for AFRICOM. This was Liberia.” (pp. 40-41)



“Africans could see through the duplicity of the humanitarian imperialism of NATO in the genocide in Rwanda and the NATO operations in the Balkans. In 1994, the United States took the lead in opposing the United Nations intervention to stop the genocide in Rwanda. In 1999, NATO bombed Kosovo for over seventy-nine days as it gave itself a new mission to expand U.S. military power right up to Moscow’s doorstep.” (p. 43)



NATO continues its training of African forces

The July 2018 NATO Summit has solidified the geopolitical climate for a NATO-led training mission to the DRC, aimed at the ‘protection of civilians’ through the development of the DRC security forces. See article “Crisis In The Congo: A New Role For NATO’s Southern Hub 

This is related to the current role of AFRICOM in the DRC today. See article, ”Backed by AFRICOM, corporations plunder DR Congo for “climate-friendly” materials and blame China”



Further reading:




As Secretary of State, Hillary refused to highlight the obstacles for women in Iraq.  She even refused -- begged by friends -- to include them in a major speech she gave on women -- a speech that noted pretty much every country.  Maybe that's why the western press loves her so much?  They enjoy ignoring Iraqi women as well.  The attacks and assaults on women have been increasing and the western media can't find the story as usual.  Layal Shakir (RUDAW) reports:


Another woman was found dead in the Kurdish capital late Sunday night, less than two days before International Women’s Day.

Amid a spike of women killings in the Kurdistan Region, Eman Sami Maghdid, 20, was murdered by unknown assailants on Erbil’s 100 meters street, Erbil’s police department said early Monday.

The police did not disclose any details regarding the perpetrator or perpetrators, or how she was killed.

Known as Mari, Sami was a well-known TikToker with a platform of over 47,000 followers, many of whom have expressed outrage at the news of her death. 

Coming from a conservative society, Mari’s social media photos and videos rebelled against the community’s narratives. She published photos with cigarettes in her hands, videos where she expressed herself out loud, and images wearing crop tops - actions seen as lethal and looked down upon by the majority of the Kurdish community.


Twenty-year-old Eman Sami Maghdid was found dead in Erbil on Sunday, less than two days before International Women’s Day. According to statistics by the Directorate of Combatting Violence against Women, 24 women were killed in the Region in the past year.
rudaw.net
Another woman killed in the Kurdistan Region
ERBIL, Kurdistan Region - Another woman was found dead in the Kurdish capital late Sunday night, less than two days before International Women’s Day.Amid a spike of women killings in the Kurdistan...
7:45 AM · Mar 7, 2022 from Iraq


In other news, ALJAZEERA notes the ongoing corruption in the Iraqi government.



EUROPEAN VIEWS adds:


Bribing public officials, paying kick-backs to fixers, and financing slush funds. What reads like an indictment of some prolific crime syndicate is in reality a summary of the recent allegations of misconduct levelled at telecom giant Ericsson and its actions in Iraq.

For the last few weeks, Ericsson has been hard at work to stem the reputational bleeding. In a recent interview given to the financial publication Dagens Industry, CEO Börje Ekholm appeared to come clean by admitting that payments intended to secure access to transport routes may have gone to “terrorist organisations, including ISIS”.

However, more revelations from an investigation conducted by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) – the ‘Ericsson List’ – have ensured that the spotlight remains firmly on the Swedish telecom firm. Having analysed leaked internal company documents, the ICIJ established that the payments referenced by Mr. Ekholm, amounting to around $171,000, were in reality bribes paid to ISIS militants.

In response to these most recent revelations, the US Department of Justice (DoJ) notified Ericsson on Wednesday that they breached the terms of their Deferred Prosecution Agreement for a second time. News of the DoJ’s move further fanned the flames of the crisis engulfing the company, whose stock value plummeted by around 13% in a single day.


In the corrupt state, the political stalemate continues.  RUDAW reports:


Iraqi parliament voted on Saturday to reopen registration for presidential candidates days after the country’s federal court called off a similar decision by the legislature. 

Iraq held parliamentary elections on October 10 but the political parties failed to elect a president for the country on time due to strong rivalry between Kurdistan Region’s ruling parties over the position. After the Federal Supreme Court removed the Kurdistan Democratic Party’s (KDP) candidate Hoshyar Zebari last month over corruption allegations, the parliament presidency reopened doors for candidates. This time, the KDP fielded the Region’s interior minister Reber Ahmed but the same court ruled on Tuesday the reopening of registration “unconstitutional” on the grounds that the decision was not made by majority of MPs but by the parliamentary speaker.  

The parliament convened on Saturday. The session was attended by 265 MPs, according to a statement by the legislature which added that 203 MPs voted in favour of the reopening of registration for presidential candidates. 

The registration begins on Sunday, lasting for three day, the parliament said later. 


The following sites updated:








on No comments:

Thursday, March 3, 2022

The Mary Tyler Moore Show

 'I liked The Mary Tyler Moore Show.  A lot.  So I found the video above interesting.


It's one of my favorite TV shows.  Among sitcomes, my top ten would be:


The Mary Tyler Moore Show

Will & Grace

Happy Endings

The Golden Girls

The Neighborhood

News Radio

Everybody Hates Chris

The Nanny

Hot In Cleveland

FAWLTY TOWERS


This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"


 Thursday, March 3, 2022.  If a woman says she doesn't want to speak about harassment or an assult, why is a man taking it as his job to speak for her?  And why are we acting like that's okay?



Last Thursday, the snapshot included, "And one of Joni's best known songs has had 24,000.  Pink's "Try" will hit the 500,000,000 mark by the end of March."  Pink didn't need until the end of the month.  Yesterday, she reached 500,000,000 stream mark with the "Try" video posted to her official YOUTUBE channel.

 


You've gotta get up and try, try, try
Gotta get up and try, try, try
You've gotta get up and try, try, try
Gotta get up and try, try, try
Gotta get up and try, try, try
You've gotta get up and try, try, try
Gotta get up and try, try, try
You've gotta get up and try, try, try
Gotta get up and try, try, try


That's what you've got to do.  That's what we've all got to do. 


Yesterday, REVOLUTIONARY BLACKOUT posted this video.



I don't need to see something like that again and Ive lost a great deal of respect for Tony Zenkus as a result of the video.


At this point, I just don't care what happened because i don't give a damn about Madam X.


Stop playing, stop fronting, stop the bulls**t.


If she was harassed or raped or whatever she's telling people at this moment of the hour today, I don't care.  And no one should.  


She has refused to make her comments publicly.  She hasn't made them in a criminal complaint.  She's had every opportunity to tell her side of the story and she's refused.  Sabby Sabs noted, when she interviewed Nick Brana last week, that she had reached out to the woman -- who no one wants to identify despite the fact that Nick's been identified as a creep, a rapist and everything else -- and the woman didn't want to appear.


You're not doing journalism with the video above.  


Tara Reade came forward and I believed her and I still believe her.  That's not because I believe all women because I truly do not.  Not do I believe all who claim they have been harmed.  People lie.  Men lie, women lie, non-binary people lie.  


If you're not coming forward, there's a reason that you're not coming forward.  


Not coming forward doesn't make you a liar.  There's a man who attacked me, tried to force himself on me and we note him from time to time.  Why?  He lives in fear that I'm going to out him and he reads this site.  When he went on my local radio PACIFICA radio station, he trashed me and thought I would respond here.  I waited several years (this year) until I did.  (Elaine ripped him apart in real time.)  I toy with it here.  What he did was awful and vicious -- the attempted assault, not his bitchy remarks on KPFA,  Knowing that he's upset and worried that his name might be blighted in his final years?  I like to toy with that fear and let him feel nervous and fearful of what happens next, the way he did to me when he tried to rape me.


But, honestly, unless I get really mad -- and he's not a part of my life -- I probably won't because I don't want my name connected to his for all eternity.  


But who knows, when he dies and people start lying about how wonderful he supposedly was, what I'll feel then.  So ____, I may out you uet.  And we both know it's only going to take one of us -- one woman -- to come forward and all the others will as well.  For all your applause on the left and all your accolades, you're nothing but a rapist.  


If I wanted to take him to court, I would.  Back then, I did not.  I was shocked, honestly.  He had such a good reputation and he loves that wife, that mother of his children that's been with forever.  And, of course, I was wodnering did I send the wrong signals -- although what signals say when a woman's screaming "no!" and pushing you off them, she's really saying, yes?


That was a few decades back and things have changed.  


Everyone wants to act like the failed MeToo Movement was something new and novel and it wasn't.  There was already an online list of men who were predators.  And before the internet there were other actions.


There was an MSNBC commentator at the turn of the century, for example, who beat and raped a woman.  And thought he could get away with it.  He was confronted by a friend of mine and laughed that no one would believe the surivovr.  (My friend I'm referring to was the survivor's aunt.)  Maybe that was true.  Maybe it was false.  But what was real was he lost his TV appearances.  He lost his upward trajectory.  In the end, he lost everything.  And we didn't need the courts for that nor did we need the internet.  There are various ways to ensure that attackers pay.


Now in the case of the woman raped and beaten by MSNBC analyst, she didn't come forward because he was so sure that he was powerful enough (in the Clinton circle) that he couldn't be touched and that she wouldn't be believed.

That's one reason not to come forward.  There are many reasons not to come forward.  Long before the truth was told in print about Harvey Weinstein -- while various left groups were taking his money and doing his bidding -- we were calling him out because I knew what he had done to so many.  And I knew that so many were not able to come forward for various reasons.  


There will always be reasons to come forward.  And we will always be protetive of our friends and our family.  


So I can undertand's Tony' s impulse in the above video and I can even say he has good intentions.


But it needs to stop.


If you're not going to come forward, your case does not deserve a video.  There are certainly more important things to focus on.  But equally true, I'm not believing you.


I have no reason to.  I haven't heard you and I cannot determine whether you are telling the truth.  


At the end of the day, that's what we base things are.  Is the person convincing?  


That doesn't mean: Was she a nun?  That means when I see her (or him) speak, do I buy it?


Tony was not there, Sabby was not there. 


Whatever took place in private is now being spoken of in the public square -- and not as gossip or as an aside but as a topic to debate.  Tony wants to.


I don't.


I'm not staking my reputation on someone who won't come forward. 


Jamie Leigh Jones.  I believed her.  When she lost her case in court, I didn't stop believing her.  I still believe her.  Telling the truth doesn't mean you get to win and justice is awarded.  


It does mean you get to share publicly and people can decide on their own.  With Jamie, I found her truthful.  She came forward and she told her story and I believe she told the truth.  I know the trash whores of MOTHER JONES don't and didn't it take two fat and ugly non-feminist women to go after Jamie?  


Never forget that the two bitches running and ruining MOTHER JONES decided to do a hit piece on the woman standing up to the KBR corporation.  That's how they defined their role.


I have no regrets about standing with Jamie.  I still believe her.  I think she told the truth and at a later date -- maybe after we're all dead and gone -- it will be known.  She did a brave thing.  I supported her and I support her to this day.


As Pink sings, "You've got to try."


Madam X is not trying.  She's hiding and that alone makes me doubt her.  Nick is not all powerful.  He's not really connected to a power structure.  I have never met him personally.   I am not a champion of his movement.


He wants to create a new party.  I'd have to go back in my ind to remember all this but we noted some of their stuff ahead of their convention but not all of it and I remember at one point telling Martha and Shirley not to even bother opening the stuff being sent about it.  It had reached the point of, "They just don't get what they're trying to do."


Didn't mean I hated them or disliked them, but did mean that they didn't understand the task they were trying to accomplish.  That doesn't mean, "It's futile o they shouldn't try!"  No one knows the outcome  of anything.  We're all just guessing.  But there are certain mistakes you make that doom you and they were already doing that.  Yesterday's snapshot noted how idiotic the Green Party was for doing a 'response' to Joe Biden's State of the Union Address on Tuesday night -- a live response -- and it was stupid because Wednesday morning, when the speech was at its high water mark in terms of interest, the Green Party hadn't posted the video (or even a written statement in response) online.  You're just jerking off and wasting everyone's time.  And when you're wating my time, you're pissing me off.


I'm not a Green.  I note Green things here when I can because we should be noting everyone in a democracy, all parties.  But when I'm making the effort to help your party and you're not even making the effort to help your party, then I'm pissed because that's time I've wasted that I am not getting back.


Jamie Leigh Jones?  The time I spent in snapshots here covering what was done to her and what she survived was not wasted time.  She came forward, she did everything she could.  I applaud her.


Madam X wants to make claims about Nick but doesn't want to make them herself so she sends Tony out to do it for her or Tony takes it upon himself to do it for her (he recently came into contact with her he insists in the video).


Hey, Tony, what's Nick's cock like?  Is it big?  Is it thick?  I picture it really skinny but long.  The base, where it meets the nuts, I picture that it's highly populated with wispy, long black hairs.  Is that what it's like, Tony?


What's that?  You don't know?


That's because you don't know s**t.  


You need to stay the f**k out of it.


If Madam  wants to go public, we can evaluate her story.  I'm not trusting you.


F**k you.  I hope that's clear: F**k you.


If she wants to make a case, she needs to make it herself.


When the lunatic claims against Bob Dylan were made by that psycho woman, I didn't just note that they were impossible chronologically.  I also pointed out that she's claiming to be a teen in the 60s who was assaulted then and it's decades later.  If you're going to amke the charges, you should come forward but she wants to pretend like she's eight years old and hide behind an attorney.


No.  I don't believe her.  She comes off like a greedy,d eceptive hustler who wants to extort money.  


Could she be a victim?  She could be.  If she is, she's victimizing herself.


Same with Madam X.  She needs to tell her story or we need to move on.


I have no idea what happened.  


If you'd asked me about Nick a month or two back, I would've told you I had no idea, I didn't know him and that he struck me as a gay bottom -- and not a power bottom at that.  I was honsetly surprised when we watched Sabby (Ava and I covered it here) to learn he wasn't gay.  I don't mean that in a mean way as anyone who knows me would know.  I thought he was a cute guy and I thought he was gay.  I thought the coolest thing about him was that he was gay.  The only cool thing. So the interview stripped that away. 


I believed Anita Hill when she came forward.    A lot of time has passed sinc ethen so some may not know or may have forgotten but Anita was not as widely believed back then.  But she came forward and she told her story and her truth grew as a result.  It made a difference in real time but it made an even bigger difference as the years passed.


Tony playing telephone isn't helping anyone.  BAck when Larry King had his CNN show and someone would go on and speak for someone else, it was obvious they were liars.  That's why they couldn't speak for themselves.  Bill clinton raped Juanita Broaddrick and that's why he has hid behind his attorneys and never spoken of the issue on his own.  


I don't want to hear Madam X's story from Tony.  I want to hear it from her.  I want to judge her credibility myself and determine whether or not I believe her.  I'll need to watch how she speaks as well as what she says.  Tony can't give me that.  And sicne Tony wasn't there and Madam X refuses to speak publicly, Tony needs to shut up.


With Sabby, I saw Nick nearly lose it repeatedly.  He didn't alsh out, he didn't get mad, the typical behaviors of men who assault.  And, yes, criers can rape.  


But one person told their story publicly.  Nick told it to Sabby.  He also spoke to Jimmy Dore (whic I only saw days after I'd seen the Sabby interview).  I saw a scared man who was trying to answer questions -- and do a victory lap on Jimmy Dore's show.  


That's not meant as an insult.  He has every right to want to do a victory lap.  Someone tried to destroy him and a body did not agree that her claims had merit.  It had to be a relief to him.


Sabby didn't pull punches and she didn't give him an easy interview.  (Should the woman go on air with Sabby, I'd expet her to be as tough with that woman as she was with Nick.)


I don't believe all victims because people lie.


I saw Nick was deeply hurt by the whole matter.  I know that he came fowrad and spoke to the issue.  Madam  X hasn't and I don't really give a damn what she and Tony whisper about and I'm surprised that he thinks he can get away with going around and doing itnerviews like that.  It cheapens him and it harms his reputation.  


If she doesn't want to talk, MAN Tony, don't talk for 'the little lady.'  She's a grown up and she can speak for herself.  I don't need you MANsplaining what happened when you weren't even there.


You're a good person, Tony, but sometimes your gender entitlement is just too much and leads you to take steps you shouldn't be taking.


Which is the other thing about that interview.  Two men, discussing a woman's supposed assault.  Two men.  


Men can be assaulted, yes.


Were either of the two men assaulted in the past.  Is there a reason that time and again we don't get women even in segments that demand their presence?


"So, Tony, what was it like when Nick grabbed your hand and stuck it down the front of his pants?"


"Well, Compton Jay, it was scary.  I didn't know what was going on.  I thought, at first, maybe Nick had a hernia and he needed a second opinion.  But then my hand grazed something hard, I later realized it was the tip of his penis, and it was leaking something, I thought it was blood at the time and my eyes were darting around for a first aid kit . . ."


"Did you -- did you think maybe he just had a blackhead on his glans?"


"Yeah, Compton, I honestly did.  Back in college, that happened to me once and it too me about 15 minutes before I squeed it the right way to get the blackhead to pop so --"


It's nonsense (and the above parody has more value than anything offered in that long bideo).  


Madam X does not want to speak on camera.  Fine.  Let's all move on.  It's not fair or right for Tony to be presented as Madam X.  He's not Madam X.  He wasn't there.  He doesn't know anything other than what she told him and he's only recently encountered her and only over the phone.  


He doesn't even make a good character witness at this point.  


And he betrays his training and his reputation by personalizing this case.  He really needs to take a look at his actions.  He's not helping actual victims by going out on this limb for a woman who won't go out on it herself.


More to the point, Madam X is saying case closed by refusing to speak publicly.  The last thing women need is another man taking it upon himself to speak for us.  Fiand another way to get on camera, Tony.


Iraq.  A number of e-mails to the public account about two 'big' stories.  Covered a lot does not make them big.  The oil issue?  We're not interested.  That the Baghdad-based court would rule in favor of the Baghdad-based government against the Kurdistan is not surprising.  It's a historical pattern.  Where have you been?  Second, it's not surprising that Kurdistan is rejecting the verdict.  It's not suprsiging because it's happened over and over and is one of the flashpoints that Brookings long ago identfied as an issue that had to be resolved or conflict would continue.  And Brookings made that identification when?  Back when Bully Boy Bush occupied the White House.  That long ago.


A company may have helped ISIS! Or been in business!  Or something!  We covered that.  We didn't obsess over it and because there's nothing new to it we haven't covered it since the snapshot we made it the main thrust of.  When details, not opinions, emerge, new details, we'll probably revisit the topic.  


We've repeatedly noted (since Saturday) western media remarks about how Urkanians are 'our kind of people' -- unlike those  in Iraq and Afghanistan who just aren't this or that.


We've noted it because it's racism that needs to be called out.


We've noted it because it's racism that impacted the coverage.  The march to war/?  Absolutely.  But even more so, the coverage that happened after the war started, the coverage that rendered Iraqis invisible and refused to tell their stories.  


The racims involved resulted in selling the war and it resulted in continuing the war.  That CBS NEWS has not announced they have broken off with an employee goes to how they tolerate racism in the news department.  It was rank and it was offensive.  And, no, a Tweet of 'woopise' does not make everything all right.


It's a serious issue and we will continue to note it.  Here's Richard Medhurst addressing it.



For those who don't know, CBS NEWS is currently attempting to contain yet another sexual abuse scandal of their own.  Now is really not the time for their failure to address their correspondent's on-air remarks.  At the very least, Charlie should be having some sort of remedial training and be assigned a what-I've-learned essay to write and post to CBS' website.  

On videos, an e-mail to the public account feels we should have noted this video.



We have noted that video.  We haven't noted it in a snapshot but we have noted it.   It's important so we will note it again.


And here's Sabby's interview with Nick Brana from last week.




The following sites updated:

on No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)