What a disappointing night and broadcast. Rebecca's "1 of the worst academy awards ever" captured the broadcast early on.
Oppenheimer was the usual overpraised garage from Christopher Nolan. A bad, poorly thought out film that could have said something but that would have required telling the true story -- and that would have required including the story of the Japanese. Instead, i twas another offensively White film. That's all MAGA Nolan ever has to offer.
Yet the garbage won Best Picture and Best Director.
I was okay with Robert Downey Jr.'s win for the film because he's long overdue. Also he didn't have a lot of competition. Robert De Niro in another ridiculous role. Everything since Cape Fear has been an embarrassing career low point.
Best actor, however, did have some strong competition. I was rooting for Colman Domingo, then Jeffrey Wright and the Paul Giamatti. And would have been happy if any one of the three had won. I would have even been okay if Bradley Cooper had won. But an ugly male modle who lost his ooks and we're supposed to pretend that passes for acting? I guess an aged trick needs something to prop up a sad career and maybe the award will do that for Cillian Murphy?
Best Actress? I was rooting for Annette Bening. I was also okay with Emma Stone winning. She did. Good for her. Just glad it wasn't Lily Gladstone. Supporting actresses do not belong in the Best Acress category. Fatty wasn't a lead actress -- not by screen time, not by the focus of the script. Fatty took up a spot that a real actress could have had. Fatty Gladstone took the nomination that should have gone to Fantasia, Halle Baily or Aunjanue Ellis-Taylor -- among others.
Fatty Gladstone played a supporting role in the film. When you're a fatty, the Academy apparently feels sorry for you and pretends you're playing a leading role and that you're playing it well.
Best supporting actress? I was fine with Jodie Foster or Da'Vine Joy Randolph winning so I had no problem when Da'Vine won.
This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
For Joe, pretty damn good.
President Joe Biden’s State of the Union address told transgender Americans, “I have your back.” He also spoke against book-banning and “erasing history,” and told Congress to pass the Equality Act, legislation that would enshrine LGBTQ+ civil rights into federal law.
“Stop denying another core value of America our diversity across American life,” Biden said, about midway through his speech. “Banning books — it’s wrong! Instead of erasing history, let’s make history! I want to protect other fundamental rights! Pass the Equality Act, and my message to transgender Americans: I have your back!”
His speech starkly contrasted the American “core values” of “honesty, decency, dignity, [and] equality” with that of “resentment, revenge, and retribution” held by “some other people my age,” a veiled reference to former President Donald Trump (whom he never mentioned by name).
“I know the American story,” Biden said. “Again and again, I’ve seen the contest between competing forces in the battle for the soul of our nation: between those who want to pull America back to the past and those who want to move America into the future.”
“Not since President Lincoln and the Civil War have freedom and democracy been under assault at home as they are today,” he noted. Then, after mentioning Russian President Vladimir Putin’s continued invasion of Ukraine — something Putin has justified with anti-LGBTQ+ bigotry — Biden then mentioned the January 6, 2001 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol carried out by Trump’s followers.
“Insurrectionists stormed this very Capitol and placed a dagger at the throat of American democracy,” Biden said. “We all saw with our own eyes these insurrectionists were not patriots. They had come to stop the peaceful transfer of power and to overturn the will of the people. “
“January 6th and the lies about the 2020 election, and the plots to steal the election, posed the gravest threat to our democracy since the Civil War,” Biden continued. “But they failed. America stood strong and democracy prevailed.”
Progressive Reps. Rashida Tlaib and Cori Bush raised signs calling on President Joe Biden to "stop sending bombs" to the Israeli military as he pledged during his State of the Union address Thursday night to provide more humanitarian aid to Gazans and decried the war's grisly death toll.
"This war has taken a greater toll on innocent civilians than all previous wars in Gaza combined. More than 30,000 Palestinians have been killed, most of whom are not Hamas," Biden said. "Thousands and thousands of innocents, women and children. Girls and boys also orphaned. Nearly two million more Palestinians under bombardment or displacement."
As expected, Biden announced that the U.S. military will construct a temporary port on Gaza's coast to facilitate the delivery of food, water, medicine, and other humanitarian assistance as Israel obstructs aid shipments on the ground, fueling the spread of malnutrition and disease. Critics blasted the plan as a PR stunt that wouldn't do nearly enough to relieve one of the worst humanitarian emergencies in modern history.
"A
U.S. port delivering meager amounts of humanitarian aid and empty
rhetoric mean nothing when they are delivered alongside U.S. bombs," said Jewish Voice for Peace Action late Thursday.
The president also called for a six-week cease-fire—far from the "lasting cease-fire" that Tlaib and Bush demanded during Biden's speech.
"The only cease-fire that is morally acceptable is a lasting cease-fire," Bush wrote on social media. "It is inhumane to pause the violence for six weeks and then continue sending bombs right after."
While decrying the immense suffering in Gaza as "heartbreaking," Biden did not acknowledge the critical role that U.S. weapons have played in Israel's monthslong assault. Since the deadly Hamas-led attack on Israel on October 7, the Biden administration has quietly approved more than 100 separate arms sales to the Israeli government, which has used American weaponry to massacre civilians.
Ahead of Biden's speech, hundreds of activists demanding an arms embargo on Israel blocked the route of the president's motorcade as he traveled to the U.S. Capitol.
President Joe Biden cruised to victory in Hawaii’s presidential caucus on Wednesday, receiving 66% of the vote with 99% reporting. However, just over 1,500 residents cast ballots, and “uncommitted” received 29.1% of the vote, the highest percentage in any statewide contest thus far.
While Hawaii Democrats acknowledged that Biden would almost certainly win the party’s nomination, the select handful of voters who took to the polls described the contest as a “referendum.”
Atlanta, GA
[FREE] Come hear Marianne in Atlanta!
When: Saturday, March 9 at 5:00 pm ESTWhere: Joie De Vivre Counseling & Therapy, Calcutta Conference Room (get directions)
Atlanta, GA
[FREE] Join Marianne in Atlanta at Hillside International Truth Center!
When: Sunday, March 10 at 10:00 am EDTWhere: Hillside International Truth Center (get directions)
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Nermeen Shaikh.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Over the past few weeks, the Biden administration has been publicly voicing reservations over the mounting death toll in Gaza, calling on Israel to protect civilians and allow in humanitarian aid. But behind the scenes, the Biden administration has quietly approved and delivered more than 100 separate weapons sales to Israel over the last five months, amounting to thousands of precision-guided munitions, small-diameter bombs, bunker busters and other lethal aid, this according to a new investigation by The Washington Post.
AMY GOODMAN: Only two approved foreign military sales to Israel have been made public since the launch of Israel’s assault on October 7th, amounting to over $250 million worth of tank shells and ammunition, which the administration authorized using emergency authority to bypass Congress. But in the case of the hundred other weapons sales, known as Foreign Military Sales, the arms transfers were made without any public debate, because each fell under a specific dollar amount that requires the executive branch to individually notify Congress.
For more, we’re joined by Josh Paul, a veteran State Department official who worked on arms deals and resigned in protest of a push to increase arms sales to Israel amidst its assault on Gaza. Josh Paul is the former director of congressional and public affairs for the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs in the State Department, where he worked for 11 years. He’s now a nonresident at DAWN — that’s Democracy for the Arab World Now. He’s joining us from New Haven, Connecticut.
Josh, welcome back to Democracy Now! Can you talk about the significance of this Washington Post exposé, what we’ve learned about the U.S. flooding Israel with weapons as President Biden talks about saying he’s putting pressure on Israel to let food aid in?
JOSH PAUL: Thank you, and thank you for having me.
I think what we’ve learned from this story shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone. It is that the president continues to facilitate the flow of arms to Israel despite a change in tone. You know, we have certainly heard the administration call for more humanitarian assistance, for, you know, at least a temporary ceasefire. But at the same time, it continues to provide the arms that enable Israel to continue its operations. So, I think that’s pretty consistent, frankly, with what the White House has said, including John Kirby from the podium this week, that this remains U.S. policy.
I think many of your viewers may be shocked to hear that there have been a hundred sales in the last few months since October 7th. But here, I don’t think anyone in the State Department will be particularly moved by this story. Much of the process does, unfortunately, move like a production line when it comes to cases that do not require, under law, congressional notification. So what we really have here is both a policy problem but also a lack of transparency that is built into the system, and which can only be remedied by a change in law.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, let’s go to what national security communications adviser John Kirby said. He was questioned at the White House by the journalist Andrew Feinberg, a correspondent for The Independent in Britain.
ANDREW FEINBERG: What is preventing the president from communicating to the Israeli government that if they don’t allow aid, we will not continue supplying weapons? Why is that not a fair trade: no aid, no bombs?
JOHN KIRBY: Because the president still believes that it’s important for Israel to have what it needs to defend itself against a still viable Hamas threat. Maybe some people have forgotten what happened on the 7th of October, but President Biden has not.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: So, Josh Paul, your response, both to the question and to Kirby’s response?
JOSH PAUL: I mean, there you have it. And I think the question could also have noted that under U.S. law, under Section 620I of the Foreign Assistance Act, it is actually illegal to provide military assistance to a country that is restricting U.S.-funded humanitarian assistance. And we know that this is the case with Israel, because Jake Sullivan himself, the national security adviser, has said that this is a problem, and, of course, we would not be airdropping aid into Gaza, were we leaning on Israel to open the humanitarian aid routes. So, you know, I think there is a clear case to be made here that we are not in accordance with U.S. law, certainly out of step, I think, with international law. And at the same time, the Biden administration position remains: We will continue to provide arms to Israel, whatever it requests and requires.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, if you could explain, Josh: How much does this differ from the procedure that’s been in place regarding U.S. arms transfers to Ukraine? I mean, in this case, as we’ve said, only two approved foreign military sales to Israel have been made public. What about to Ukraine?
JOSH PAUL: Yeah. So, for the most part, the procedures and processes through which we provide arms to Israel versus Ukraine are different. Ukraine requires an authorization under presidential drawdown authority, as well as new and novel funding to, for example, Department of Defense’s Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative. Those have expired. We are out of, essentially, both of those. And so, without additional funding, we will not be able to provide arms to Ukraine.
Israel, on the other hand, is perfectly capable of using its own money to procure weapons through the Foreign Military Sales system, through the direct promotional sales system, which, by the way, The Washington Post didn’t touch on. And it’s quite possible that there’s a hundred more sales through that other channel to Israel that we don’t know about. And, of course, you know, we are providing Israel with military ground assistance, which it can also tap into and knows that it will be able to tap into, because it has a 10-year commitment from us to continue providing billions of dollars a year, unlike Ukraine. So it’s a slightly different situation and much easier, I think, for Israel to continue to receive weapons even in the absence of a supplemental, unlike Ukraine.
AMY GOODMAN: Democratic Colorado Congressmember Jason Crow told The Washington Post the Biden administration should apply, quote, “existing standards” stipulating that the United States, quote, “shouldn’t transfer arms or equipment to places where it’s reasonably likely that those will be used to inflict civilian casualties, or to harm civilian infrastructure.” Crow, a former Army Ranger who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, told the Post, “I am concerned that the widespread use of artillery and air power in Gaza — and the resulting level of civilian casualties — is both a strategic and moral error.” Now, Crow is not usually a dove on all of these issues, but it’s very interesting to see him talk about his response, his critical response to the U.S. when it comes to Israel.
And this is particularly interesting on the day of President Biden’s State of the Union address tonight. We don’t know exactly what he’s going to say. We know there are a number of Americans who have family members who are being held hostage in Gaza. We don’t know if the Biden family or the administration will be inviting any Palestinians, and that Biden wanted to be able to announce a ceasefire tonight, which is clear, it looks like, will not be happening. But your response to all of this and how these weapons sales, do you feel, perpetuate the war?
JOSH PAUL: Yeah, I mean, I think that people who have served in the military or worked in the Middle East, people like Representative Crow, also, frankly, like Secretary of Defense Austin, understand that what Israel is doing is not going to lead to success on Israel’s own terms, as Secretary of Defense Austin has said. It will lead to strategic failure. And that is why I think the same is true on the Israeli side, where you have former heads of Mossad, for example, saying that this is a dead-end road, that what they are doing is damaging to their own interests.
But I think that is separate from the political question here. And the political question is one in which we have a president and, you know, a set of policies and, frankly, a Congress, as well, for the most part, that remains set on this course, regardless of the harm it is doing to Israeli security and to American global interests and, of course, to so many Palestinians.
AMY GOODMAN: Josh Paul, you were in the State Department for 11 years, and you were involved with these kind of arms deals. You resigned in protest of a push to increase arms to Israel. But I wanted to ask you: How much does protest on the ground affect what’s going on in the State Department, in the White House? How much do you hear it? I mean, there is a massive amount of protest in the United States. And no matter who wants to insulate Biden from it, almost everywhere he goes he is hearing the chants of “ceasefire.” I mean, tonight, one of his guests will be the UAW President Shawn Fain. The UAW was one of the early unions to call for a ceasefire. How much does it matter?
JOSH PAUL: I think protest is very important, I think particularly protest when it manifests at the ballot box, in terms of, for example, the “uncommitted” vote or the “other” vote that we have seen in states and will continue, I hope, to see in the coming days, because that signals to the Biden administration that they really have a political problem here. And that is really one of the only means we have of getting this administration to change course in the time that it has left. So I think that is very important. I think it’s most important when it manifests directly in the political process, and when it comes with organization. I think there is a momentum around this issue now, and we have to maintain that momentum for the, frankly, months and years ahead, because this is not going to be a long-term pole to shift where American policy is and has been for many years.
AMY GOODMAN: Finally, you were inside for years the State Department. Now that you’ve resigned — and we sort of ask you this every time since then — how many people inside the administration have reached out to you? Do you feel that that’s increasing? And how many times do they tell you that they’ve been discussing this with Biden or the inner circle of Biden, and what their views on this are? I mean, Biden was no fan of Netanyahu from the beginning. And so, yet he is embracing him now. What they are saying?
JOSH PAUL: Yeah, I mean, I’m still hearing from people I had not heard from previously, to be clear, who are saying that, you know, “This is not working. I feel sick to my stomach of being involved in this. And, you know, I’m trying to make changes, and it’s just not working.” I had several of those conversations just in the last week with people I’ve not spoken to before on this issue. So I think the internal pressure, the internal disgust, frankly, is still there.
But I think, you know, the White House and the president have surrounded the president with, you know, a council of advisers who are, for the most part, like-minded with him. And I don’t know how much of that dissent is actually breaking through, and, even if it did, how much it would change the president’s decision-making. I think he is where he is. And, you know, absent significant political pressure, that is not going to change, unfortunately.
AMY GOODMAN: Josh Paul, we want to thank you for being with us, veteran State Department official, worked on arms deals, resigned in protest of a push to increase arms sales to Israel and its siege on Gaza. He’s the former director of congressional and public affairs for the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs in the State Department, where he worked for 11 years, now a nonresident fellow with DAWN — that’s Democracy for the Arab World Now.
At least 9,000 women have been killed in Gaza since October 7, the Palestinian Ministry of Health in Gaza said in a statement Friday.
Here's what else the statement said about the conditions of women in Gaza:
- About 60,000 pregnant women in the Gaza Strip suffer from "malnutrition, dehydration, and lack of appropriate health care"
- About 5,000 pregnant women in the Gaza Strip give birth every month in "harsh, unsafe, and unhealthy conditions"
The UN's Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which is the main aid agency in Gaza, also posted a statement on X (formerly Twitter), saying an average of 63 women are killed in the enclave per day. "On #InternationalWomensDay, the women in #Gaza continue to endure the consequences of this brutal war," it said.
UNRWA's Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini said more work is required to support and protect women. "An immediate ceasefire is the minimum," he wrote.
-
Toñita’s Club Fights Erasure3 hours ago
-
-
New Music Friday: The best albums out March 86 hours ago
-
-
-
-
-
No breaks for the crooked7 hours ago
-
Judith Light deserved an Oscar7 hours ago
-
-
Steamed Clams in the Kitchen7 hours ago
-
Some good news and . . .7 hours ago
-
-
No comments:
Post a Comment