Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills): 5/24/20

Saturday, May 30, 2020

Ricky Martin, Blogger, George Floyd, Stevie Nicks

Okay, I just posted a music review at THE COMMON ILLS, "Kat's Korner: Ricky Martin re-emerges."

I wasn't planning on it.

I was toying with reviewing two albums for Sunday -- still toying with that. I went to visit C.I. and she had music playing and it was Ricky's new album PAUSA. It was wonderful and I fell in love with it immediately.

But, as we talked, C.I. was explaining that Blogger's about to go through a new switch and we'll all be required to switch. She was explaining the problems she was having -- she switched last night because she wanted to get a hand on it. By the end of June, everyone will have to switch. The problems include currently no more HTML. Now I can't do HTML but there are so many times when I'll hand C.I. my laptop and say, "It won't work." Some video or link I'm trying to include won't work or I've been flagged for something in the post -- usually something is 'open' in the code and it needs to be closed, whatever that means. C.I. will go in and do HTML and fix it.

So that's not going to be possible now.

That's also going to change how we do videos. I don't think, under the current new changes, I'll be able to post more than one video in a post.

Anyway, all of that got me in a panic and I thought, "You better get an album review up today." And since we were listening to Ricky's new album and since I loved it, I thought, "Write about this."

Normally, I try to post my reviews on Sundays. Sorry for the Saturday one but that's what's going on.

I will try to do at least one more review but you know I'm lazy so don't put any money down on seeing another review tomorrow.

Two more things.

News I hope you're following.

Video I hope you've seen.

"Sara" is one of my all time favorite songs by Stevie Nicks.

Closing with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Friday, May 29, 2020. ISIS remains active in Iraq (don't tell the Iraqi government spokesperson), Tara Reade's allegation remains credible, Michelle Goldberg sports classism and racism as though they are the new colors for the summer, and much more.

In the US, attacks on Tara Reade continue. She is the woman who came forward to accuse Joe Biden of assault. It's no longer just that the assault is not the issue the corporate whores won't address, it's no longer just the embrace of rape culture, it is now the stereotypes that they are re-enforcing.

Meet the Ultimate Karen: Michelle Goldberg.

The whore for THE NEW YORK TIMES participated in a podcast for the paper this week and we don't link to rape culture. In that podcast, she put out a thought -- if you can call it that -- that is especially illuminating.

She's trying to run with pig boy Michael Tracey's attack which is that Tara Reade never should have been covered in the first place. Michelle wants you to know that the press didn't do their job when the covered her without vetting her.

This really isn't an avenue that she or anyone else should pursue.

First, their goal is to elect Joe Biden. All this argument does it remind everyone that blessed Beau Biden wasn't a saint either -- not even compared to hustler bro Hunter. All it reminds people of is Larry Sinclair. Larry claimed he did cocaine with Barack Obama, he claims they had sessions in limo where they performed oral sex. He even wrote about it in a book entitled LARRY SINCLAIR AND BARACK OBAMA: COCAINE, SEX, LIES AND MURDER?

Whether you believed Sinclair or not, he was suddenly becoming interesting to the press when all the sudden he got arrested. Why? Trumped up charges by Beau Biden, who was the Attorney General of Delaware at the time.

The charges fell apart but not before Sinclair was arrested in DC for charges in Delaware and the press ran away from the story.

I have no idea whether Sinclair was telling the truth or not. I didn't follow the story, it wasn't about assault or rape -- he was claiming a consensual relationship. But even not following it, it was clear that Beau was abusing his powers of office to stop the press from covering the story.

So it's probably not a good idea to remind the American voters that the only member of the Biden family whose hands are considered clean are, in fact, probably dirty.

But for the media itself?

If you're a person of color and/or anyone who cares about fairness with regards to the treatment of all human people, then you do remember The Days Of The Missing Blonds. Matt Lauer was one of those who made a career out of that genre. To a lot of the country, it looked like every time a blond girl or woman went missing, the whole news industry came to a stop. It was the sole focus day after day after damn day. Now let a child of color go missing and it wouldn't make THE TODAY SHOW or GOOD MORNING AMERICA or . . .

The media has never owned up to what they did. They have never taken accountability for it or made a pledge to pursue fairness.

So it's telling that Michelle Goldberg is re-enforcing that classist and racist standard.

Tara Reade, she insists, was allowed to speak without being vetted.

Why does she need to be vetted? Because Joe Biden says so? When does he get vetted? His behaviors are well known -- even if Michelle's paper edits out a sentence on the Biden's campaign's behalf noting his history of harassing women. Yes, boys and girls, sniffing hair, groping from behind, kissing women you don't know -- all of that is harassment.

Tara Reade doesn't deserve to tell her story -- Michelle Goldberg wants you to know.

That is the mentality of the press that led to the never-ending Days Of The Missing Blonds coverage. Again, while they covered blond women and blond girls, they ignored children of color that went missing, African-American women that were killed. It was only a certain group that the media felt had a right to tell their story.

Tara Reade has made a credible accusation and has what we have always considered corroborating evidence (her mother's 1993 call to LARRY KING LIVE, the 1996 court documents where her husband notes her harassment, people who remember her telling them about it in real time when it happened as well as years and years ago). No one who has come forward to the people and the press has ever had that amount of corroborating evidence for a rape.

Those are the issues. And those are the issues that the media runs from because they want to protect Joe Biden. Good little whores, that's all they are.

Imagine that every awful thing that has been said about Tara is true. For one minute, let's pretend that's true.

So what?

She can't be raped because a landlord doesn't like her or someone who claims to have been her friend didn't get back a set of law books?

Michelle Goldberg is not a feminist. She's not about truth or journalism either. She's just a little whore who is going to smear a woman because it's the thing the Joe Biden campaign needs her to do. Twenty years from now, when she whispers, "I believe Tara Reade," people should throw food at her. She's useless and she's a whore.

If she truly believed the lies she repeats, that would only be more reason for her to defend Tara Reade and to try to educate people on how there is no perfect victim.

Michelle is not about feminism and never will be. She is the Ultimate Karen -- a white woman of a certain class (not a high class, mind you, she's still got dirty face pressed against the glass hoping to get in) looking down on everyone else as she pretends to be superior.

Fred Tippett (NORTH BY NORTHWESTERN) wonders if Joe Biden really wants to be elected president:

First of all, he gave voters a direct reason not to vote for him. Last week, in an MSNBC interview, Biden again denied Tara Reade’s, a Senate staffer for him in the 90s, allegation that Biden sexually assaulted her in 1993, maintaining the stance his campaign has held since Reade’s accusation. But then, Biden kept talking.
The former Vice President said, “If they [voters] believe Tara Reade, they probably shouldn’t vote for me,” and even went as far as to say, “I wouldn’t vote for me if I believed Tara Reade.” Now, first of all, I believe it was very honorable of Biden to acknowledge and state his understanding of the seriousness of this allegation to some voters. But from a political standpoint, this was a very strange choice. Reade’s allegation had already shaken Biden’s support from women and young people and Biden, rather than trying to win them back, opened the door for them to walk away. Not to say it would’ve been better for Biden to do the opposite and completely discredit Reade and those who believe her but … I don’t know — he just really put himself into a proper Catch 22 situation.
Secondly, there is, of course, the story of the week: Joe Biden’s interview with Charlamagne tha God on “The Breakfast Club.” On the show, as I’m sure you all know, Biden said, “I tell you what, if you have a problem figuring out whether you're for me or Trump, then you ain't Black." The quote spread quickly, becoming the most viral comment from a bizarrely casual interview. Critique was swift but light. Most notably, Representative Clyburn of South Carolina said he cringed at Biden’s comment, while simultaneously reiterating his support of the former Vice President. It’s unclear how the comment will affect Biden’s support among Black voters, but I think it’s safe to say Biden will not get away with it without ruffling a few feathers.

The editorial board of AMERICAN MAGAZINE: THE JESUIT REVIEW argues:

Yet even if American voters do not have sufficient evidence to determine what Mr. Biden did or did not do in the past, there are standards by which the public can judge his present conduct. One such standard is whether Mr. Biden has made every effort to be transparent and to provide access to potentially relevant archival materials. Unlike in the hearings for Justice Kavanaugh's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court, when Senate Republicans chose to press ahead to a vote as close as possible to their original schedule, there is still sufficient time to resolve the question of whether any documents relevant to the present case exist and to do so well in advance of the election.
The former vice president has asked the National Archives to search for any relevant documents or other evidence, and he has made a similar request of the U.S. Senate. But he has thus far not allowed access to his personal papers at the University of Delaware, saying that those archives do not contain personnel records.
That may be true, but Mr. Biden should open those archives anyway. He could commission an impartial, professional archivist or archival firm to conduct a narrow search for any material related to Ms. Reade’s allegations. This would go a long way toward proving to a wary electorate that he is taking every possible step to be transparent.

In other Biden news, Jacob Crosse (WSWS) reports:

In an attempt to reassure the Democratic Party establishment, the Biden campaign, and the corporate bosses they represent that she is a “team player,” Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, a former Biden rival, ended any pretense last week of championing reform to the US health care system should she become vice president in a Joe Biden administration.
During a May 19 Zoom meeting hosted by the University of Chicago Institute of Politics, Warren fielded softball questions from students and the host for nearly an hour. Responding to a query regarding the “receptivity” of a “universal or hybrid” health care system posed by David Axelrod, a longtime Democratic Party consultant and former senior adviser to Barack Obama, Warren replied, “I think right now people want to see improvements in our health care system, and that means strengthening the Affordable Care Act.”

In dropping any mention of her signature campaign proposal known as “Medicare for All,” Warren is demonstrating that there is no “pushing” the Democratic party, the oldest capitalist party in the world, to the left, nor is there a constituency in the ruling class for any “reforms” that might impact the profits of insurance companies or drug manufacturers.
Warren’s campaign pledge, which was a copy of the legislation she had previously cosponsored with Bernie Sanders, had already been dialed back by the senator last year in the face of open hostility from corporate America. Within three weeks after the release of her “bold” plan during the fall primary, Warren released a “backup” plan that still preserved the private insurance market, while offering the “option” of Medicare for people under 65.
In dropping her (by now largely rhetorical) support for universal health care coverage, Warren showed impeccable timing, since nearly 40 million workers have applied for unemployment benefits in the US as a result of coronavirus-related layoffs, and millions of those have lost, or are on the verge of losing, their employer-based health care coverage. The objective necessity for a universal health care system could not be posed more clearly, yet according to Warren, “people” aren’t yet “comfortable” with that.
The opposition to providing health care to all as a basic right is not, of course, the reluctance of the “people” to embrace such a plan, as Warren suggests. It is the ferocious, last-ditch opposition of the insurance companies, drug monopolies and for-profit hospital and health care corporations, which would lose billions, and the overall opposition of Wall Street, which reviles all forms of social spending as a deduction from profit.
Warren went on to articulate the kind of proposal one can expect from a self-proclaimed “capitalist to the bone.” Remarking that the pandemic had revealed who is “essential” in society, Warren floated legislation for an “essential workers bill of rights,” so limited that it would guarantee “hand sanitizer” and “if they get sick, full health care coverage.”

This is an insult to workers and their families that would do nothing to protect them from COVID-19. What good is hand sanitizer to a meatpacker forced to work with a contaminated mask or without personal protective equipment? Warren declined to elaborate what “full health care coverage” entailed, or what workers would be expected to pay for it but, given her full-throated endorsement of the Affordable Care Act, one can expect that the cost for workers will not be cheap.

Elizabeth Warren? Supposedly, she's the only thing that can save Joe now. Mike addressed that last night:

No, Joe's not getting the votes or providing any excitement. This is hilarious. The top of the ticket is not generating enough excitement and we're not screaming to replace him? Instead, we're trying to find the running mate that would provide 'excitement'? Tell me again about how electable Joe is. What a joke. Joe is a joke. He needs to be dumped before he takes down the whole ticket.

Give us anyone but Joe. Let us be excited and passionate. We can't get excited as we wait to see if his dentures are going to slip out again like they did in one debate or if a blood vessel in one eye is going to pop like happened in one debate. What exactly is Joe's slogan going to be? "I'm at death's door, vote for me"?

Dump him. He's not helping anyone but Donald Trump. We need a nominee that can serve a full term. One that could even run for a second term would be even better. We don't need Joe and we don't want Joe.

Can the DNC not buy a clue? He's a loser. We need better. If you want to stop Donald Trump from having a second term, you need to be calling for Biden to step aside.

He's not up to the job. He's senile. He's a habitual liar. He's a war monger. He's a rapist.

This is our alternative to Donald Trump?

Even more ridiculous? The press reports that Joe plans to drag this out -- vp choice -- until August 1st. He has nothing else of interest to the press. This is the most embarrassing campaign in our lifetime.

Let's turn to Iraq . . .

Last yesterday, Gayle Tzemach Lemmon offered an essay at NBC NEWS regarding the coronavirus and the Islamic State:

"What you are witnessing these days are only signs of big changes in the region that’ll offer greater opportunities than we had previously in the past decade” read an online message on Thursday from new ISIS leader Abu Ibrahim al-Qurashi, translated by Hassan Hassan, director of the Non-State Actors in Fragile Environments Program at the Center for Global Policy and a co-author of "ISIS: Inside the Army of Terror."

The message comes as those who have been fighting ISIS for more than a half-decade have spoken publicly and in plain terms about the group‘s increasing strength.

“The Islamic State group has been moving the fighting from Syria to Iraq ... (and) is strengthening, both financially and militarily,” said Lt. Col. Stein Grongstad, head of Norway’s forces in Iraq, there to advise and assist the Iraqi military. He called it a “paradox” that just as COVID-19 was weakening nations, ISIS was regaining strength.

And that's why, in yesterday's snapshot, we were calling out the Iraqi military spokesperson Yahya Rasoul who was insisting that ISIS was "vanquished" and "no longer poses a threat to Iraq." The biggest security threat to Iraq right now might just be the stupidity of Yahya Rasoul.

The following sites updated:

Thursday, May 28, 2020

Everything Joni's said about Bob is true

Little boys like Joe Taysom can't handle the real world. They have their heroes and any truth about their heroes makes them cry and wilt. Their hero might by Joe Biden or Kobe Bryant or whomever. Joe Taysom's hero is Bob Dylan. So at FAR OUT MAG, Joe plays conspiracy theorist.

Joni Mitchell, he insists, said mean things about Bob Dylan because, way back in 1974, back when Cher was dating David Geffen, their was a listening party at David's home. Bob was releasing his hideous PLANET WAVES not on COLUMBIA RECORDS as usual but on Geffen's ASYLUM. And everyone was raving over Bob's album. Then Joni's new album COURT AND SPARK took it's turn on the playlist and Bob either fell asleep (or as Joni has said over the years, pretended to fall asleep). Because of this, Joe wants to theorize, that's why Joni said mean things about Bob.

From Joe Taysmon's jack-off journal:

Contrarily, during an interview with the LA Times in 2010, the interviewer compared the two of them, which the report claimed that Mitchell fiercely refuted this comparison and stated: “We are like night and day, [Dylan] and I,” she said. “Bob is not authentic at all. He’s a plagiarist, and his name and voice are fake. Everything about Bob is a deception.”

Nothing she said is wrong.

Let's do it one by one.

His name. He was born Robert Zimmerman.

Oh! People change their names all the time!

Yes, they do. But he lied about it. He made up this whole back story for Bob Dylan and then none of it matched the true story of Robert Zimmerman. That was the point of John Lennon's "I don't believe in . . ." song ("God"). That's why he used Robert Zimmerman and not "Bob Dylan."

John criticized Dylan on that as well. It's a story that goes back to before he was a legend and a lot of people don't know it.

His voice is fake.

Yes, it is. He's stuck with the voice he has right now -- it's an awful voice. But he faked it to begin with and then, briefly (NASHVILLE SKYLINE), tried to actually sing (claimed the difference was he quit smoking, no he was trying to use his resonators the way a real singer would).

Third: He's a plgiarist.

Yes, he is. Most 'songwriters' are. They take, as Dylan has, melodies from others. "Blowing In The Wind"? Bob did not come up with the melody.

From WIKIPEDIA:

In his sleeve notes for The Bootleg Series Volumes 1–3 (Rare & Unreleased) 1961–1991, John Bauldie wrote that Pete Seeger first identified the melody of "Blowin' in the Wind" as an adaptation of the old African-American spiritual "No More Auction Block/We Shall Overcome". According to Alan Lomax's The Folk Songs of North America, the song originated in Canada and was sung by former slaves who fled there after Britain abolished slavery in 1833. In 1978, Dylan acknowledged the source when he told journalist Marc Rowland: "'Blowin' in the Wind' has always been a spiritual. I took it off a song called 'No More Auction Block' – that's a spiritual and 'Blowin' in the Wind' follows the same feeling."^[7] Dylan's performance of "No More Auction Block" was recorded at the Gaslight Cafe in October 1962, and appeared on The Bootleg Series Volumes 1–3 (Rare & Unreleased) 1961–1991.

Bob stole it. That's all there is to it.

I was in college when I first found out that happened. A friend was a real songwriter. He came up with his own lyrics and his own melodies and great arrangements. Another friend also 'wrote' songs. I thought she was talented. One day, I got them both to play their songs to some of our friends. And she was playing one that was beautiful and it turned out it was one that was centuries old. It was public domain so she stole it, borrowed it, put lyrics to it and called it her song.

Joni, like my male friend, doesn't do that. She's never done it. Her melodies are her own.

So, yes, Bob's 'beautiful' songs from his early days tend to be music he ripped off from the public domain.

Joni's critique stands.

Joni also praises Bob. But she's one of those people who can't take b.s. or hype and she'll be honest when the nonsense gets too much.

Closing with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Thursday, May 28, 2020. Joe Biden remains disgusting, Tara Reade's allegations of assault stand and Michelle Goldberg offers new lies and new attacks on Tara.

Joe Biden wants to be the president of the United States. He doesn't want to do anything for the American people -- no Medicare For All, nothing to meet the needs of the people -- so I guess he just wants the title. He could put it next to his name right beside War Monger (he destroyed Iraq -- and we're just talking about his 2002 vote) and rapist.

Yeah, Tara Reade's not going away. He is spearheading a trashing of Tara's name using his friends in the corporate media. The goal was to make Tara toxic so people would walk away from her -- as I noted in a snapshot last week, the campaign was sure they had won this.

They haven't won. And they won't win. This is now Joe's legacy forever more. He can be elected president and he can even serve two terms. Doesn't matter. He's a rapist. And for every whore who stands with him now, there will be ten in a decade calling him out. That's how it works and that's what the campaign never understood and never cared to understand.

I was accused this morning by a member of Biden's senior staff of being behind an editorial. I'm not behind it. I had nothing to do with it. I love the editorial, it's wonderful. But it was written by the editorial board of THE GEORGETOWN VOICE:

In early March, Tara Reade accused former vice-president and likely Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden of sexually assaulting her in the spring of 1993, when she worked as a staff assistant in his Senate office. Two months after Reade first made the allegation, and one month after she filed a criminal complaint against Biden on April 10, a consensus seems to have been reached by Democratic politicians: do not ask more questions, do not press further, and do not elevate Reade’s voice. This contradicts the heart of the fight against sexual assault and is the exact opposite of how women who come forward should be treated. Whether or not Biden is guilty, Reade deserves to be heard.
A slew of staunch supporters of the #MeToo movement, including Democratic politicians Stacy Abrams and Kirsten Gillibrand, have quickly voiced their continued support for Biden, tacitly stating they believe his denial. Media investigations continually fail to mention all available evidence, and often seem predisposed to find the allegations not to be credible, urging their audience to come to a certain conclusion. In all this, Reade has been left behind and has not been given even a semblance of the investigation her accusation merits.
The response to Reade, like every response to women who accuse powerful men of sexual assault or harassment, tells survivors in this country how society will treat them. Reade’s accusations have garnered disbelief, disdain, and nonchalance. There is almost a consensus that women will only be fiercely defended when it is politically convenient, as can be seen in the different responses to Reade’s accusations of Biden and Christine Blasey Ford’s accusations against Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Reade, who has received little support from the media and prominent Democratic officials, deserves to have her claims investigated and taken with the utmost seriousness.
Reade first made her allegation in a podcast on March 25. It took over two weeks for major outlets, including the Associated Press, the New York Times, and the Washington Post to write articles on the allegations. In contrast, the Intercept reported on Ford’s allegations before her initial letter detailing the allegations to Sen. Dianne Feinstein was made public, and CNN, the New Yorker, and the Post all published stories within four days on the revelation. Meanwhile, Reade was discredited on social media, with a tacit understanding by much of the public that the lack of articles was a direct reflection of the accuracy of Reade’s claims. In recent days, articles about other aspects of Reade’s life have been used to create doubt of the veracity of her claims.
The stories that were then released often took a dismissive or critical tone, and focused on Biden’s response rather than the allegations themselves. A particularly egregious “investigation” by the New York Times asserted the Times had found no corroboration of her claims and “no pattern of sexual misconduct by Mr. Biden,” effectively making a judgment on the veracity of Reade’s claims for readers. In the days after the article was released, multiple pieces of evidence that supported Reade’s claim and had been overlooked by the Times came to light.

We cannot expect reporters to examine claims of sexual assault to the extent of a criminal investigation. We should, however, expect them to be honest about when they fall short, and to allow their readers to make their own judgments. We can expect them to treat women who come forward with far more dignity and respect than Reade has been afforded, and we can expect them to report on women’s claims regardless of the political party of the accused.

It's a brilliant editorial, please read it in full.

I said here last week and over the phone to my friend with the campaign that they were wrong to think that they picked the right time re: campus life to attack Tara.

I said they were wrong.

That wasn't because I was calling students and saying, "Write about Tara!"

I said they were wrong because I've been speaking to college and high school groups (as well as women's groups, veterans groups and labor groups) since February 2003. That's why I knew in September of 2016 that Hillary was going to lose. She didn't have the enthusiasm needed among voters.

The young are the future. They're not middle aged whores who will vote for just anyone. They're not middle aged whores who looked the other way as James Carville, Gene Lyons, Bob Somerby and so many others smeared and attacked women who spoke of harassment and assault carried out by Bill Clinton.

They are 'woke' -- which really just means that they have heightened awareness. They have that especially when contrasted with the beaten down and overly used whores who are middle aged and elderly. They'll look the other way. They'll say, "I believe Tara but I'm voting for Joe." Because that's what whores do, they settle.

They should be insisting the DNC get another nominee. It could be Bernie Sanders, it could be Andrew Cuomo, it could be Gavin Newsom, it could be . . . I'd vote for any of them. I don't want a rapist who voted for the Iraq War and then went on to destroy that country as vice president (including by overturning the votes of the Iraqi people in 2010 in order to give thug Nouri al-Maliki a second term that the people of Iraq did not want him to have -- a term that led to the rise of ISIS in Iraq). I'm not asking for perfection as this point just someone who isn't a rapist now going senile.

People have seen what Joe's done to Tara. The corporate press has done everything they can to keep Joe's hands clean but he's the one feeding the press the smears and he's the one who okayed the whole operation. History will not judge Joe or his supporters well.

More to the point, it will be seen as 'goes to pattern' after Bill Clinton. That'll be the face of the DNC in a decade? That's what they're willing to risk to save a candidate who can't even speak coherently and utters something offensive every time he does speak -- not to mention at least one lie in every interview.

It's as though the DNC's real goal is to re-elect Donald Trump.

Marisa Ozbat Tweets:

There are no inconsistencies in her story corroborated by court docs from the 90’s, 5+ witnesses, interns. She elaborated, let’s not act like we have amnesia on victim shame and self blame. These sad rape culture op-Ed’s are just that.

Does anyone not grasp rape culture? Or do they just pretend not to? If someone's confused, actually confused, Anthony Zenkus (COMMON DREAMS) explains:

Rape culture holds victims to a higher standard than it does abusers. Rape culture allows us to turn a victim’s life upside down, looking at every tweet, post, public or private statement, for any inconsistencies, even when it has nothing to do with the crime perpetrated against them. Especially when it has nothing to do with that crime. Rape culture does this while making sure we’re never allowed to ask the same things of the alleged perpetrator. We don’t turn their lives upside down. We ask them for a denial, they give it, and then we move on. Nancy Pelosi, in a recent CNN interview, said she was done talking about the Tara Reade allegations. Case closed. Nothing to see here. Move along. Rape culture.
In the case of Tara Reade, Joe Biden’s documented history of public lying is never looked at. His fantastic and completely false claim of being arrested in South Africa while visiting Nelson Mandela goes unmentioned by politicians and the media. His years of lies about having been involved in the civil rights movement go unnoticed. We’re not allowed to talk about why he had to drop out of a presidential race because he plagiarized and then lied about it multiple times on the campaign trail. We only seem to have permission to deconstruct his victim, Tara Reade. We question the timing of her disclosure. We say she changed her story. We look for inconsistencies in her claims about filing a complaint after she was sexually harassed while working for then Senator Biden. We share hit pieces on social media which paint her as a “manipulative, deceitful user” because she may have been late on her rent and owed people money. We attempt to look into every nook and cranny of her life, and while doing so, make sure we keep the spotlight off of the man accused of victimizing her. It’s hot under those lights, best we keep them turned on the victim.
In rape culture, we say the alleged perpetrator is a “good man”. That’s what we’re saying about Biden now. He passed the Violence Against Women Act. He was Obama’s VP. Sure, he gets a little handsy sometimes, but he doesn’t mean anything by it. He didn’t mean to offend or harm women when he sniffed their hair, planted long kisses on their heads while touching their waists from behind, touched their thighs or caressed them – all without their consent. Joe Biden is Joe Biden. Move along.

Senator Dianne Feinstein waded into the world of rape culture and victim blaming when she said of Tara Reade, “Where has she been all of these years?”. Questioning the timing of a victim’s disclosure is the epitome of rape culture. It’s what defense attorneys who represent men accused of sexual assault do. All the time. It’s an uninformed and ignorant way of looking at rape. It’s understandable when it comes from the mouths of lawyers defending rapists, like when it was uttered by Harvey Weinstein’s lawyers – that’s their job. It is completely unacceptable when it comes from a leading Democrat like Feinstein. The Democrats were supposed to be the party of #MeToo. They were supposed to be the party that didn’t defend men credibly accuse of rape. They were supposed to be the opposite of the Republicans, who defended Trump and Kavanaugh. They were supposed to be, but when it comes to rape and sexual assault, they are not.

Lara Tweets:

When I saw how the Democrats handled Tara Reade, that was my last straw. Will never be a part of a party who dismisses a survivor and encourages rape culture. I thought me too was real but it was a political weapon where survivors are used as pawns. All this opened my eyes.

The whores of the corporate media can't stop whoring. Remember Joe Biden's sniffing of women, his unwanted touching and kissing? Michelle Goldberg reduces it to "kind of touching people inappropriately" on THE NEW YORK TIMES' podcast. What a whore. It's cute how Michelle, the first to attack Tara at THE NEW YORK TIMES, is pretending she was ever fair to Tara. What a whore. She is the argument for non-partisans to be hired as columnists. Whores got whore and no one does that better than Michelle Goldberg. We see you and we see your lies. Joe, she insists, needed the benefit of the doubt. But she presents allegations against Tara as fact.

Not just allegations, mind you. She presents a Tara hater's stated feelings as fact. I don't give two s**ts what some attorney thinks Tara was trying to do and, more to the point, no court gives two s**ts about the feelings of attorney. Michelle is a dirty whore and always will be.

Michelle doesn't ever note that the allegation of assault is false. She's not that much of whore -- not that much. The allegation stands. And it's cute how THE NEW YORK TIMES wants to muddy the water -- which includes bringing up Joe Biden's tax returns.

Joe Biden has an awful history. That includes Iraq. And it goes beyond his 2002 vote for war. He brags non-stop that Barack Obama put him over Iraq. Barack ran on the promise that he would remove all US troops from Iraq. After two terms, his presidency was over and US troops were still in Iraq.

Why?

ISIS is the reason given.

Let's yet again note the August 2015 broadcast of Kevin Sylvester's THIS SUNDAY EDITION (CBC) which featured Emma Sky discussing Iraq:

Emma Sky: And that [2010] national election was a very closely contested election. Iraqis of all persuasions and stripes went out to participate in that election. They'd become convinced that politics was the way forward, that they could achieve what they wanted through politics and not violence. To people who had previously been insurgents, people who'd not voted before turned out in large numbers to vote in that election. And during that election, the incumbent, Nouri al-Maliki, lost by 2 seats. And the bloc that won was a bloc called Iraqiya led by Ayad Allawi which campaigned on "NO" to sectarianism, really trying to move beyond this horrible sectarian fighting -- an Iraq for Iraqis and no sectarianism. And that message had attracted most of the Sunnis, a lot of the secular Shia and minority groups as well.

Kevin Sylvester: People who felt they'd been shut out during Maliki's regime basically -- or his governance.

Emma Sky: Yes, people that felt, you know, that they wanted to be part of the country called Iraq not -- they wanted to be this, they wanted Iraq to be the focus and not sect or ethnicity to be the focus. And Maliki refused to accept the results. He just said, "It is not right." He wanted a recount. He tried to use de-Ba'athification to eliminate or disqualify some Iraqiya members and take away the votes that they had gained. And he just sat in his seat and sat in his seat. And it became a real sort of internal disagreement within the US system about what to do? So my boss, Gen [Ray] Odierno, was adamant that the US should uphold the Constitutional process, protect the political process, allow the winning group to have first go at trying to form the government for thirty days. And he didn't think Allawi would be able to do it with himself as prime minister but he thought if you start the process they could reach agreement between Allawi and Maliki or a third candidate might appear who could become the new prime minister. So that was his recommendation.

Kevin Sylvester: Well he even calls [US Vice President Joe] Biden -- Biden seems to suggest that that's what the administration will support and then they do a complete switch around. What happened?

Emma Sky: Well the ambassador at the time was a guy who hadn't got experience of the region, he was new in Iraq and didn't really want to be there. He didn't have the same feel for the country as the general who'd been there for year after year after year.

Kevin Sylvester: Chris Hill.

Emma Sky: And he had, for him, you know 'Iraq needs a Shia strongman. Maliki's our man. Maliki's our friend. Maliki will give us a follow on security agreement to keep troops in country.' So it looks as if Biden's listening to these two recommendations and that at the end Biden went along with the Ambassador's recommendation. And the problem -- well a number of problems -- but nobody wanted Maliki. People were very fearful that he was becoming a dictator, that he was sectarian, that he was divisive. And the elites had tried to remove him through votes of no confidence in previous years and the US had stepped in each time and said, "Look, this is not the time, do it through a national election." So they had a national election, Maliki lost and they were really convinced they'd be able to get rid of him. So when Biden made clear that the US position was to keep Maliki as prime minister, this caused a huge upset with Iraqiya. They began to fear that America was plotting with Iran in secret agreement. So they moved further and further and further away from being able to reach a compromise with Maliki. And no matter how much pressure the Americans put on Iraqiya, they weren't going to agree to Maliki as prime minister and provided this opening to Iran because Iran's influence was way low at this stage because America -- America was credited with ending the civil war through the 'surge.' But Iran sensed an opportunity and the Iranians pressured Moqtada al-Sadr -- and they pressured him and pressured him. And he hated Maliki but they put so much pressure on to agree to a second Maliki term and the price for that was all American troops out of the country by the end of 2011. So during this period, Americans got outplayed by Iran and Maliki moved very much over to the Iranian camp because they'd guaranteed his second term.

Kevin Sylvester: Should-should the Obama administration been paying more attention? Should they have -- You know, you talk about Chris Hill, the ambassador you mentioned, seemed more -- at one point, you describe him being more interested in putting green lawn turf down on the Embassy in order to play la crosse or something. This is a guy you definitely paint as not having his head in Iraq. How much of what has happened since then is at the fault of the Obama administration? Hillary Clinton who put Chris Hill in place? [For the record, Barack Obama nominated Chris Hill for the post -- and the Senate confirmed it -- not Hillary.] How much of what happens -- has happened since -- is at their feet?

Emma Sky: Well, you know, I think they have to take some responsibility for this because of this mistake made in 2010. And Hillary Clinton wasn't very much involved in Iraq. She did appoint the ambassador but she wasn't involved in Iraq because President Obama had designated Biden to be his point-man on Iraq and Biden really didn't have the instinct for Iraq. He very much believed in ancient hatreds, it's in your blood, you just grow up hating each other and you think if there was anybody who would have actually understood Iraq it would have been Obama himself. You know, he understands identity more than many people. He understands multiple identities and how identities can change. He understands the potential of people to change. So he's got quite a different world view from somebody like Joe Biden who's always, you know, "My grandfather was Irish and hated the British. That's how things are." So it is unfortunate that when the American public had enough of this war, they wanted to end the war. For me, it wasn't so much about the troops leaving, it was the politics -- the poisonous politics. And keeping Maliki in power when his poisonous politics were already evident was, for me, the huge mistake the Obama administration made. Because what Maliki did in his second term was to go after his rivals. He was determined he was never going to lose an election again. So he accused leading Sunni politicians of terrorism and pushed them out of the political process. He reneged on his promises that he'd made to the tribal leaders who had fought against al Qaeda in Iraq during the surge. [She's referring to Sahwa, also known as Sons of Iraq and Daughters of Iraq and as Awakenings.] He didn't pay them. He subverted the judiciary. And just ended up causing these mass Sunni protests that created the environment that the Islamic State could rear its ugly head and say, "Hey!" And sadly -- and tragically, many Sunnis thought, "Maybe the Islamic State is better than Maliki." And you've got to be pretty bad for people to think the Islamic State's better.

Emma Sky wrote about her experiences in Iraq in the book THE UNRAVELING: HIGH HOPES AND MISSED OPPORTUNITIES IN IRAQ. Here's Emma's bio:

Emma Sky is director of Yale's Maurice R. Greenberg World Fellows Program and a Senior Fellow at the Jackson Institute, where she teaches Middle East politics. She is the author of the highly acclaimed The Unravelling: High Hopes and Missed Opportunities in Iraq (2015) and In a Time of Monsters: Travelling in a Middle East in Revolt (2019). Sky served as advisor to the Commanding General of US Forces in Iraq from 2007-2010; as advisor to the Commander of NATO’s International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan in 2006; as advisor to the US Security Co-ordinator for the Middle East Peace Process in 2005; and as Governorate Co-ordinator of Kirkuk for the Coalition Provisional Authority, 2003-2004. Prior to that, Sky worked in the Palestinian territories for a decade, managing projects to develop Palestinian institutions; and to promote co-existence between Israelis and Palestinians. In addition, Emma has provided technical assistance on poverty elimination, human rights, justice public administration reform, security sector reform, and conflict resolution in the Middle East, South Asia and Africa. Sky has published numerous articles including in The New York Times, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, Politico, Atlantic, Slate, Survival, Center for a New American Security, US Institute of Peace, the Guardian, and the Journal of the Royal United Services Institute for Defence and Security Studies. Sky was educated at Oxford (UK), Alexandria (Egypt), Hebrew University of Jerusalem (Israel) and Liverpool (UK). Sky is an Officer of the British Empire.

As Joe has repeatedly claimed credit for Iraq and also lied about it, is there a reason the corporate media can't find Emma Sky?

Oh, that's right, they hide or attack anyone who won't join hands and sing along to "Oh Come Let Us Adore Joe."

ISIS rose in Iraq because of Nouri al-Maliki's second term. Joe Biden made that second term possible.

MIDDLE EAST MONITOR ONLINE reports that Iraqi Brigadier General Yahya Rasoul is insisting that ISIS "has already been vanquished, no longer poses a threat to Iraq." Unfortunately, reality slaps Rasoul in the face. ISIS has never been vanquished.

Monday, ALMASDAR NEWS reported, "The Iraqi security forces announced on Monday that an Iraqi military plane was hit by terrorist forces in the Al-Rutbah Desert during an operation to destroy Islamic State" Iraqi security forces said a member of ISIS had "14.5 mm mono weapon and fired at one of the planes, lightly wounding the plane." Doesn't sound like it's been vanquished or that it no longer poses as a threat. Monday night, David Rose (THE AUSTRALIAN) reported:

Islamic State has waged its deadliest terrorism campaign in Iraq for nearly two years, raising fears jihadists are staging a resurgence.

In the past month, since the start of Ramadan, Islamic State (also known as ISIS) has claimed responsibility for more than 260 attacks across Iraq, allegedly killing or wounding 426 people.

The attacks form part of the group’s self-proclaimed “battle of attrition” campaign, which also has inspired violence by Islamic State branches in Syria, Egypt, Nigeria, Niger, Congo and Mozambique in recent weeks.

Yesterday, Persecution: International Christian Concern issued the following:

Since Ramadan’s beginning last month, the Islamic State (ISIS) has claimed responsibility for over 260 attacks across Iraq, which resulted in the death or injury of 426 people. Over the last few weeks, attacks in Syria and Egypt also increased. Fears are rising that jihadist sleeper cells view the coronavirus pandemic as an opportunity to weaken others, capitalizing on the disruption the disease has already caused.
The attacks in Iraq are primarily along the perimeter of governorates’ borders, not necessarily in Nineveh where most Christians lived before their displacement. However, the increase in attacks still brings fear to Christians. They are trying to rebuild their lives following displacement from ISIS.
More broadly, Christians throughout the Middle East still face a serious threat as they live out their faith. A resurgence in ISIS attacks means less freedom and more fear for those who follow Christ. Especially amidst the devastation of the coronavirus, many Christians experience difficult and sometimes life-threatening circumstances every day.

For interviews, please contact Olivia Miller, Communications Coordinator: press@persecution.org.

But by all means, let's pretend that ISIS is no longer a threat and vanquished because some minor little military spokesperson in Iraq said so.

Hassan al-Obeidi (DIYARUNA) reports:

In mid-May, a lengthy video produced by the "Islamic State of Iraq and Syria" (ISIS) began to circulate on extremist social media accounts.

The 50-minute video, titled "Strike Their Necks", contained a compilation of clips that show various attacks ISIS elements carried out in the preceding weeks.

It showed dozens of ISIS elements pledging allegiance to the group's new leader, Abu Ibrahim al-Hashemi al-Qurashi, and threatening to launch what they described as "continuous attacks" inside Iraq.

It also showed the execution of unarmed tribesmen in northern and western Iraq, labeling them as "infidels" for providing assistance to Iraqi forces during the liberation operations that took place in 2016 and 2017.

There were scenes of improvised explosive devices (IEDs) detonating, sniper operations and armed attacks against Iraqi security forces, and of civilians being beheaded under various pretexts.

Also shown was the burning of wheat fields and orchards in northern and western Iraq, the bombing of electricity pylons and the shooting of livestock.

The video showed about 30 masked ISIS elements, standing with a man whose accent indicates he is an Iraqi, as he threatened to launch new terror attacks in what he referred to as "Wilayat al-Iraq".

The video provides some insights, Iraqi security expert Fuad Ali told Diyaruna.

It shows ISIS continues to pose a threat, he said.

Imagine that.

The following site updated:

Wednesday, May 27, 2020

Joe Biden is no FDR

Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Baby Stacey Wants On The Ticket" went up Sunday as did his "Rest Assured, Judge Tootie Is Here."

That Joe could even consider Stacey Abrams goes to how not like FDR he is.

Joe could die at any minute due to his age and his health. The last thing the country needs is someone waiting in the wings with no real experience. Stacey has no experience. She's not qualified to be a Secretary in the cabinet, let alone vice president.

Here's SECULAR TALK on how Joe's no FDR.

Joe Biden is no FDR. On Joe's best day, he's Dan Quayle.

Closing with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

**Wednesday**, May 27, 2020. We all wake up grumpy these days.

I had a nightmare. And then realized it was no dream.

Joe Biden is a hideous candidate by any standard. But some in the DNC are determined to have him as the presidential candidate.

Accused of assault, his campaign pretends to be standing back and letting events unfold when in reality they are feeding 'reporters' information to attack Tara Reade's character. Despite their best efforts at embracing rape culture, nothing has changed the fact that Tara's accused him of assault and that her accusation is credible.

Whores like Katha Pollitt insist it's vote Joe or else. When what they should be insisting is that a senile War Criminal drop out and be replaced.

Joe Biden showed up last week for one of those rare appearances. He appeared on Charlamagne tha God's program and insisted that "You ain't Black" if you voted for Donald Trump. An elderly, White man telling others who was and wasn't Black -- an elderly, White man with a history of racism -- including his crime bill, including his praise for segregationists . . .

In the aftermath last Friday, Joe Biden 'apologized.' Chris Freind (THE MERCURY) points out:

What isn’t a joke is how racist, arrogant, condescending, obnoxious, tone-deaf and patronizing Mr. Biden’s statement is. About the only thing worse was his non-apology apology: “I shouldn’t have been such a wise guy…perhaps I was much too cavalier.” Perhaps? That’s the best he could muster? “Perhaps?”

Joe never really apologizes, he's a sociopath. When nine women came forward to complain about his inappropriate behavior he did a video 'apology' and then, a few days later, made fun of the women at a predominately all male event.

So no surprise, he's taken back the apology.

From "I shouldn't have been such a wise guy" to now insisting that someone else was the "wise guy." Fionnuala O'Leary (THE SUN) explains:

The presumptive Democratic nominee acknowledged the statement he made on "The Breakfast Show" was a "mistake" last Friday, but Biden claimed the radio presenter was also being "a wise guy."

"He was being a wise guy," Biden says of Charlamagne, "and I shouldn't have responded in kind."

Way to take ownership, Joe.

Charlamagne was right to doubt the sincerity of the words -- which were never an apology.

It's always someone else' fault and he never takes real accountability. That's the problem with a career politician and Joe is everything America stands against.

Margaret Kimberley (BLACK AGENDA REPORT) observes:

Joe Biden was always an intellectual light weight and he always had poor impulse control. He was always in the conservative wing of the Democratic Party. Now he believes the hype of the black misleadership class charlatans who make his case by claiming that he has some sort of special relationship with black people. The combination of all these attributes makes his presidential campaign one long train wreck.
A recent interview on the Breakfast Club radio program was the occasion of his latest bizarre statement. This time he famously said, “... if you have a problem figuring out whether you're for me or Trump, then you ain't black." He seemed to think that being overly familiar and using bad grammar gave him some sort of credibility.

Symone Sanders, his most prominent black campaign staffer, was left to clean up after him yet again and defend his stupidity by saying that he spoke in jest. The damage was bad enough that Biden had to apologize himself and said that he shouldn’t have been “a wise guy.”
Biden is like Donald Trump, in that he is thoroughly unqualified to be president. Yet black people are desperate to see anyone other than Trump in the White House and that is how the party establishment got away with foisting him upon them. When they aren’t trying to minimize his shortcomings, they admonish anyone who points them out. “But he’s better than Trump!” is their rallying cry lest anyone think for themselves and point out the many reasons why Biden is so problematic.
Any words of doubt or well deserved humor are frowned upon and even attacked. There is a strange magical thinking afoot that equates acknowledgement of Biden’s faults with support of Trump. A joke at his expense can lead to foolish argument. The Democratic Party propagandists and their friends in the black misleadership class are to blame for this sad state of affairs.

Allegiance and subservience to their donor class requires them to lie to the party rank and file. Their scam depends upon convincing voters that they work on their behalf when they do nothing of the sort. They had to explain away Hillary Clinton’s defeat with tales of Russian intrigue and blame directed at the left. Trump’s awfulness makes him the perfect foil. They can pretend to oppose him with an impeachment charade which satisfies their base but when he proposes a space force or $700 billion in defense spending they go right along with whatever he wants.

He is not qualified to be president. He doesn't know where he is, he tells people to vote him into the Senate, he is just not fit.

And his team knows this and has begun the process of lowering expectations. So they whisper to the press that Joe will have a solid team behind him, the team will be running things, the team . . .

Sorry, that's not what the US Constitution defines.

He qualifies right now, before the election, as incapacitated. If he were president right now, there would be a solid case for removing him from office.

The interview with Charlamagne was Joe's first real appearance in months. Coronavirus was a gift to Joe. He was getting tired and the eyes were starting to water and he was snapping at people. Along came coronavirus and the man who can't handle the campaign trail was handed a gift. But all the resting he did while 'sheltering' (instead of campaigning) did not do him any good.

He is unfit for the office and he really can't handle the campaign.

This is America's nightmare.

The Democratic Party refuses to nominate a candidate that inspires or even one that's just competent. Instead, they go with Joe.

Katha Pollitt, Norman Solomon and other whores have already begun the roll out of attempt to bully people into voting for Joe. That sort of behavior usually takes place in the fall, after the DNC has their convention. But Biden's so weak that they're having to start it months earlier.

Let's go back to Chris Freind:

A joke making the rounds shows a Wheel of Fortune puzzle missing one letter. It reads: “JOE BIDEN IS A RA_IST.” Underneath, two choices: “C” and “P.”

Tommy Virgl (THE DEPAULIA) explains:

If the Democratic party actually wanted to beat Trump, they would replace Biden. Not only is he dishonest and an alleged rapist, but he does not represent the moral high ground that the Democratic establishment touts him as — it would make sense to have a candidate who can contrast Trump’s corruption as an effective strategy.
The logical replacement, if Biden were to withdraw from the race, would be the next person on the ballot with the most delegates, which would be Sen. Bernie Sanders. Not only is Sanders backed by grassroots support, but his clear record would be a great way to contrast Trump’s corruption.
“Standing with survivors doesn’t have a political agenda,” Blenck said.

While the election this November is critical, so is applying a consistent standard of believing sexual assault victims. I believe Dr. Ford. I believe Tara Reade. I don’t believe in a party that’s only willing to defend women and sexual assault survivors when it’s convenient for them.

Bernie Sanders and the media keep talking about my/his supporters. Bernie Sanders had very few supporters. The issues he ran on had a ton of supporters. Bernie is trying to sheep dog everyone which is offensive enough but every time he speaks of 'my supporters,' I cringe. He's a fake ass and his war on delegates, reported by Genevieve Leigh (WSWS), is very telling.

And the lack of concern of what Biden on the world stage would mean? Very scary. He did not just vote for the Iraq War. He repeatedly destroyed Iraq -- most infamously by overturning the votes of the Iraqi people in the 2010 election. He is not asked about that, the press ignores it. It is a very key issue and maybe instead of bullying people to vote for him supposed independent writers should be pressuring him to speak to that.

New content at THIRD:

The following sites updated:

Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills)