Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills): 4/10/22

Friday, April 15, 2022

Favorite Stevie Nicks video

From Wednesday night, that's Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Sam Seder's Amused."

tevie Nicks was an MTV artist -- meaning that she was popular on MTV, very popular, when it was a music channel. And she's made some great music videos in her career including "For What It's Worth" and the stark and simple "Lady."

But my favorite remains 1985's "I Can't Wait."

It's got it all. It's got Stevie symbolism, dancing, you name it.

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

Thursday, April 14, 2022. Joe Bdien cries 'genocide' -- maybe he's looking at his polling numbers?/.

This morning, Andre Damon (WSWS) reports:

On Tuesday, US President Joe Biden claimed that Russia was committing genocide in Ukraine. In a subsequent statement to reporters in Iowa, he added, “I called it genocide because it’s become clearer and clearer that Putin is just trying to wipe out even the idea of being Ukrainian.”

Biden’s accusation that Russia is engaging in genocide is aimed at poisoning public opinion and galvanizing popular hatred of Russia. It was a transparent pretext for the White House’s announcement, just one day later, that the United States would send attack helicopters and hundreds of armored vehicles to Ukraine in the largest escalation of US military involvement in the war to date.

The weapons being shipped to Ukraine include 300 “kamikaze drones” known as “Switchblades,” 300 armored vehicles, and 11 Mi-17 helicopters, as well as land mines, radars, thousands of anti-tank weapons and nuclear protective equipment.

Announcing the action, the Pentagon declared, “The United States has now committed more than $3.2 billion in security assistance to Ukraine since the beginning of the Biden Administration.” This includes $2.6 billion within the past six weeks.

On Wednesday, White House press spokesperson Jen Psaki was asked, “Is it the US policy that genocide has been committed in Ukraine, or was that the president’s personal beliefs?” To this Psaki replied, “Our objective now is evidenced by the enormous package of military assistance that we put out today.”

This exchange is revealing precisely because it stands reality so neatly on its head. In the statements of the White House, the unprecedented funneling of arms to Ukraine is a testament to how strongly the US believes Russia is committing “genocide.”

Joe Biden 'cares' -- we're supposed to beleive. Because there's a genocide taking place that he' never said 'Boo!' about. We'll get 8back to t8hat later n the snapshot.

He's looking for a reason to make the massive spedning that's going on right now look justified. It's not going to. As someone said in ZOON yesterday, "He's Diamond Joe Biden and he's spending all this money to impress the neighborhood while, at home, his own kids are starving."

Exacty.

Well, now we know how Hunter Biden ended up believeing it was okay to be a Dead Beat Dad -- the fruit didn't fall far from that rotten tree.

On Hunter, Jonathan Turley notes

There was nothing subtle about the alleged influence-peddling effort of Hunter Biden or his uncle James. In Washington, influence peddling is a virtual cottage industry. However, there was a little sophistication in these e-mails to hide the corruption. The Hunter dealings were more like influence peddling by eBay in terms of the raw pitches and open admissions.

On May 1, 2017, Hunter Biden recognized how his work with CEFC at a minimum could trigger FARA and acknowledged that his uncle was also aware of the danger:

“No matter what it will need to be a US company at some level in order for us to make bids on federal and state funded projects. Also We [sic] don’t want to have to register as foreign agents under the FCPA which is much more expansive than people who should know choose not to know. James has very particular opinions about this so I would ask him about the foreign entity.”

The e-mail is a prosecutor’s dream. FARA violations, like tax violations, can be viewed as cut-and-dried charges for jurors. In this case, the potential defendant not only incriminated himself under the law, but his associates and family, as well.

That is why, if the Justice Department applies the same standard applied to figures like Manafort, Biden would likely be indicted.

The question is whether the same standard will apply. I have long criticized the sweeping language of FARA. However, the Justice Department has shifted from prior administrative enforcement to criminal prosecutions. The Justice Department in recent years has convicted various individuals for engaging in public relations and lobbying efforts for foreign countries, including China and Ukraine.

A sudden shift away from such criminal enforcement would raise questions of favored treatment — and magnify the concern over Attorney General Merrick Garland refusing to appoint a special counsel in the scandal.

In The Washington Post, the Manafort and other FARA cases were heralded as essential to protecting democracy. A columnist concluded, “FARA can be a powerful tool for detecting those foreign instruments. We should use it. No matter whom it ensnares.”

It has now ensnared the son of President Biden. The question is whether the Justice Department and the media still have the same appetite for FARA prosecutions.

Despite rumors for the last five days, Nouri al-Maliki has not been put forward as a nominee for prime minister by the Coordinating Framework -- the body tht's trying to put together support now that Moqtada al-Sadr' repeat failures at forming a government have led Moqtada to step away (for 40 days). They appear to be struggling the same way that Moqtada did though their efforts are still young. Moqtada has failed three times so far -- three times a vote was scheduled for Parlaiemtn, three times it failed to take place because not enough MPs shoed due to the fact that Moqtada can't garner enough support.

This, please remember, is the man that the western press hailed as a king maker.

The Coordinating Framework is said to be favoring Mustafa al-Kahdimi for the post.

Grasp that.

Why did they even have elections?

Yeah, Moqtada wants his own cousing to be prime minister -- an underling with no national presecnec.

Bu tthe Iraqi people are deeply unhappy with their government.

And yet thanks to Moqtada, the Speaker of Parliament will be the same person.

The Coordinatign Framework wants Barham Saleh to8 remain as Iraqi president and now they're flirting wit8h Mustafa?

Why wasted the time and the money on elections if nothing is going to change.

There's also the fact that Mustafa -- a failure and a liar 8-- o8nce declared he would serve only one term.

October 10th the elections took place and still the Parliament can't elect a president and, without a president, no one can be named prime minister designate. (Once named prime minister designate, the person has 30 days to form a Cabinet. If they do so, they are supposed to then become prime minister. That rule's been fudged repeatedly over the years.)

MEMO noted:

After Parliament failed several times this year to elect a new president, Iraq has entered a constitutional vacuum.

These events led to the end of the constitutional deadline set by the Federal Supreme Court on 6 April.

This required the court to resort to legal jurisprudence and issue a decision to continue the term of current President Barham Salih until a new president is elected.

Since its first session on 9 February, Parliament has been unable to elect a president from 40 candidates led by the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) candidate, the current president, Barham Salih, and the Kurdistan Democratic Party's candidate, Rebar Ahmed.

Did the Court extend it to April 6th?

Well if you think it's a crisis, why don't you get honest with your readers. The due date, per the Constitution, not the Court, passed in February. That's reality.

And it's yet another example of the Court trying to make law and not interpret it. That's not their function. They came under heavy criticism for their recent decision against the KRG and what the KRG can do with oil because their decision was not based upon existing law.

Laws are written by the legislative branch, not by the Court. The Court can uphold them or find them unconstitutional. But they cannot write laws, that's not their power. Maybe if the world's press would pay attention, the Iraqi Supreme Court would feel less likely to attempt to grab powers that they have no right to?

Little that needs attention receives it. For example, a certain figure started calling the stalemate a ''crisis'' on Saturday and while some reported on it, most refused to explain how this was about a politician's self-interest. Amr Mostafa (THE NATIONAL) reported:

Iraq’s President Barham Salih on Saturday said that the current political deadlock in the country would have dangerous repercussions, and called for the process of forming a new government to be speeded up.

Nearly six months have passed since Iraq held parliamentary elections, yet the country still has no government, due to wrangling over who will take the roles of president, prime minister and important posts in the Cabinet.

The parties have been unable to agree on a candidate for president, a problem that may also extend to the position of prime minister.

Barham insists it's a "crisis." Well if he really feels that way, he holds the highest office of any member of the PUK political party. They have been one of the stumbling blocks in forming a government because they want him to have another term as president. The PUK has gotten less and less votes every election (we've addressed the why of that before). And this go round? Their worst ever. So why do they get to hold the post of the president? It's one thing to say that the post has to be held by a Kurd, it's another thing to say it has to be held by an unpopular party.

The KDP has consistently gotten more votes than the PUK.

Again, Barham's the one calling it a ''crisis.'' If he really believes that, then, for the good of the country, he should announce that his political party is withdrawing their nomination (the PUK is nominating him).

He doesn't do that.

And he didn't consider it to be a "crisis" until last week when Moqtada al-Sadr, having failed three times to build support for his presidential choice (always from the KDP though the nominee has differed) decided to step away for a few weeks *forty days) to see if the 'other side' could have any more luck forming a government.

So shame on THE NATIONAL for reporting on this without disclosing that Barham's sudden 'concern' over the 'crisis' comes as his alliance has a few weeks time to try to install him into another term as president.

At AL-MONITOR, Ali Mamouri sees three potential outcomes:

Scenario 1: The two sides reach an agreement to form a consensual government together and share the government based on a credit point system, which was common after 2003. Accordingly, each party will get a share in the government based on the number of seats they won in the elections. This is unlikely to happen this time due to Sadr's demands to form a majority government, rejecting any proposal to reach an agreement with the Coordination Framework. He has tried several times to break up the Coordination Framework and convince some of its groups (Fatah, led by Hadi al-Amiri, or State of Law, led by Nouri al-Maliki) to join him separately. However, the Coordination Framework appears solid, rejecting any offer that does not include all of them in the new government. On the other side, Sadr is facing great pressure from his social base as he had promised them since the beginning of his electoral campaign to form a majority government with the Sadrist prime minister. Sadr has nominated his cousin, Jafar al-Sadr, the son of prominent political cleric Muhammad Baqer al-Sadr, for the prime minister position. Now it is difficult to withdraw from this promise, as it would lead him to great losses in the next elections.

Scenario 2: A Sadr-Halbusi-Barzani coalition obtains the remaining required numbers to select a president and go ahead with forming a government. They have already gone through negotiations with possible allies like the PUK and independent members. But it seems difficult to achieve this goal, especially after they failed to do so three times.

Scenario 3: The current government continues indefinitely as a caretaker government, and another early election is held sometime in 2023. This is likely, due to the fact that the constitutional deadline for forming the government has already passed and the political parties have failed to form a government. Meanwhile, the two axes will compete in dominating parliament and expanding their influence in state institutions. They will also work on changing the electoral law to their benefit for the next elections, which will create another source of conflict between them.

In such circumstances, it seems the political deadlock is likely to remain for a long time and the conflict between the two sides is unlikely to be resolved, which means any newly formed government, if such occurred, would be weak and subject to collapse soon.

We'll note this statement from KRG President Nechirvan Barzani:

Today, we pay tribute to the memory of more than 182.000 innocent civilians who were killed in 1988 in one of the most heinous crimes of human history, perpetrated by the former Iraqi regime in Kurdistan.

The genocidal Anfal campaign, which was carried out in 8 stages across the Kurdistan Region, will remain one of history’s greatest infamies. It is the responsibility of all and everyone to prevent the repeat of such vicious mass crimes anywhere in the world.

As the Kurdistan Region currently moves through a critical period, the best way to honor the victims of Anfal and all the martyrs of Kurdistan is tolerance, common purpose and unity among all parties and communities in Kurdistan to ensure and preserve the constitutional rights of the Kurdistan Region and its political and federal status.

In view of the fact that the Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal recognized the Anfal as genocide and war crime against humanity, we urge Iraq’s federal government to live up to its legal, ethical and human responsibility, to restitute the victims of Anfal and their families and to alleviate their sufferings and sorrows.

The Kurdistan Region will do its utmost to better serve and support the families of the Anfal victims, and will continue its efforts to reconstruct the areas ravaged by the campaign. We will spare no efforts to return the remains of all the martyrs, and will continue to work for an international recognition of the Anfal campaign.

Tribute to the memory of the martyrs.

Nechirvan Barzani
The President of the Kurdistan Region

And we'll note this Tweet:

34 years have passed since the #Enfal genocide in which 182,000 #Kurds were massacred
———
#TwitterKurds #Anfal #Kurdistan

1:52 AM · Apr 14, 2022

RUDAW Tweets:

Nugra Salman castle, a remote prison fortress in southern Iraq, served as a concentration camp during the former Iraqi Baathist regime’s Anfal campaign against the Kurds in 1988. 

: Bilind T. Abdullah/Rudaw

1:51 AM · Apr 14, 2022

There's an ongoing genocide with Turkey attacking Kurdistan. Joe Biden won't say a word about that, will he.

80Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Sam Seder's Amused" went up last night. The following sites updated:

Wednesday, April 13, 2022

Eli Lieb

"Boys Who Like Boys." That song stuck in my head this morning. I like it and I've liked it since this summer but for some reason, it just popped into my head.

So what's your problem with boys who like boys
Maybe we just want a little love
Boys who like boys
Know one holds you like a big man does
Go keep on hating I'll just keep dancing
With boys who like boys
Yeah, I just want a little love

If he puts that on vinyl, that song, I will be purchasing but for now I just enjoy it as a digital download and a video on YOUTUBE.

Be sure to read Elaine's "Jonathan Turley and Diana Ross."

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

Wednesday, April 13, 2022. The left hurts itself by embracing a registered sex offender and presenting him as a trusted source and friend.

I thought we'd rogressed. I hoped we had. But instead, here we are again, having to discuss Pig Boy.

And maybe that's my fault. When he started slinking back in, via CONSORTIUM, my attitude was that they just needed to stop lying for him. Joe couldn't stop lying which is why we no longer note CONOSRTIUM.

Joe did a video where he praised Pig Boy. Pig Boy was an innocent. His only crime was that he told the truth a bout the Iraq War and for that the media turned on him.

No.

That's not the truth,

Right now, Johnny Depp is in court with Ambr Heard. The knee jerk reaction is to believe Amber. Why?

She's perjured herself in a pre vious court appearance. She has not been forthcoming about whether or not she donated over #3 million to the ACLU. She got headlines for doing that. Several years ago. The headlines proclaimed that she did it. But she didn't. And instead of being honest about it, the ACLU tried to insist some sort of 'private communication' standard.

I'm sorry, ACLU, private? When she grand standed for publicity, she threw away privacy. I'm told she didn't donate the money.

Doesn't surprise one bit.

When Johnny decied to marry her, I told her she would ruin his life. Because she's trash and I knew she was. When I spoke to Amber after learning of the marriage plans, I asked what she was thinking?

Did she love him?

Was this something that was supposed to last forever? If so, did that mean that they were going to have an open marriage because she was a declared bisexual.

How exactly did she a happy marriage?

She couldn't answer the question and she couldn't because she was a user who was about to take Johnny for all she could.

Now you can argue that this is a he-said.she-said issue and that no one can know (the audio clips make it pretty clear she abused Johnny). You can do that.

And we can disagree based on our own interpretations.

Will Smith assaulted Chris Rock and some idiot who is not in the industry but got a paper degree barely wanted to tell the press that no one stripped Kevin Spacey of his Oscar.

When was Kevin convicted?

In a court of law, when was Kevin convicted? He hasn't been. We have an actor on a STAR TREK show insisting that when he was 14 or 15, he went to a party at the then-20something Kevin Spacey's apartment -- without his parents, without a guardian -- and the kid was bored and went to Kevin's bedroom and got on his bed. After midnight, when all the normal guests had the decency to go home, Kevin walks into his bedroom and finds the guy on his bed. He kisses the guy.

The guy does not want to be kissed. The guy leaves. Years later, the guy tries to turn it into an assault. Not by the rules in play then and not by the rules today either.

Maybe next time, don't go to strenage men's apartments, don't stay there alone after midnight and don't get on their bed.

If you do those things and a man kisses you and you object and that's the end of it, count yourself lucky

You didn't raped.

You're a drama queen who needs the world's attention.

I don't care bout Richard Dreyfuss' kid, either. He groped you, did he? In front of your dad? What does that say about relationship you and your father have?

Kevin's not ben convicted of anything.

He may hve used his position in London to harass men and I would find that objectionable but where are the results to that investigation> To that announced investigation?

I believe Michael Jackson assaulted children. Micaheal wasn't convicted of that. We can all disagree and argue over that.

We are thinking beings. We have a brain. And we have to look at what's put before us and come to our own conclusions.

I grasp that.

Except when you try to apply that to convicted offenders.

Pig Boy is Scott Ritter.

He's suddenly become very popular in the last few weeks with Jackson Hinkle, Aaron Mate, Max Blumenthal, Lee Camp, Richard Mehurst, the so-called 'Socialist' behind ENEMA OF THE STATE, Dan DeBar, Faran Fronczak, Franc Analysis, Comrade Misty, THE CONVO COUCH . . .

Exactly why are you bringing him on?

He's not an expert on Ukraine. He wasn't even enough of an expert on Iraq to justify Sy Hersh doing that embarrassing tour with him -- a promotional tour that cost Hersh dearly.

You'll want to pay the cost to?

Let's look at that list for a moment.

Jackson Hinke. I was surprised when you used your platform to try to pick up women. Mainly because I thought you were gay. But also because it was such an abuse of the power you had been given by your audience. You and your buddy were drunk and you brught on the two drunk women and produced a very shoddy episode and also disgraced yourself. I don't know how you thought that was journalism or something to share with the world, but you did.

It was sad to watch and it goes to, at the very least, a level of immaturity that you need to address and, at worst, some issues that you have.

Richard Medhurst? I defended you from the gossip. I won''t do that again.. I defended you from charges -- whispers -- that you'd assaulted women. I won't do that again. You have brought Scott Ritter on repeatedly in the last weeks.

I believe tht goes to your character and I no longer am comfortable defending you.

I think you all need to take a look at your actions.

Scott Ritter was arrested three times for attempting to find underage girls online and have sex with them. The first time, he largely talked his way out of it and was able to keep it quiet. The second time, he got a slap on the wrist and, after he began speaking of Iraq, his enemies in the Democratic and Republican parties leaked to the media that he'd been arrested twice for this pedophilia. And that he was on probation for it.

That's what got him kicked off the corporate media.

Joe tried to lie on a CONSORTIUM program and claim that Scott was kicked off because he was telling truths about Iraq.

No.

Kicked off because he was a pedophile.

And yet he was being promoted by Panhandle Media. And they never noted the arrests.

If Scott's behavior continued, and it tends to do so with pedophiles, we noted that these outlets were putting young girls at risk. They could say, "I read him at THE NATION so I thought I could trust him!" (Katrina vanden Heuvel, when it was put to her in terms of her own daughter, got it and stopped highlighting him at THE NATION), or "I saw him on DEMOCRACY NOW! so I thought I could trust him!"

No surprise, two times wasn't the end of it for Scott. After Barack Obama became president (Scott had previously insisted the Bush administration had targeted him and persecuted hm and he was innocent!!!), Scott got arrested again. He didn't get a slap on the wrist this time. He got put on trial. He was found guilty on multiple counts and was sent to prison.

He is now a registered sex offender.

If Twitter bans him, like Mike, I really don't care.

I think, as a registered sex offender, his Twitter account should note that. I think it should be dislcosed anytime someone's stupid enough to bring him on as a guest.

Three times.

What does this ay about the way the left sees women and girls?

We're just disposable. We don't matter. "Larger issues," you understand.

F**k that and anyone who operates under that.

You are condoing violence against females when you bring him on. You promote as a victim and as a trusted voice. Shame on you.

Now we made all these arguments in the '00s and managed to shut down his sphere of influence.

As he began popping back up recently, I was hoping someone else would step forward and that I wouldn't have to again be the bitch that has to rain on their party and point out the obvious.

But it's not happening. Monday night, for Hilda's Mix, I noted all the e-mails coming in on this topic asking me to speak to it. I didn't yesterday morning because I was too angry. If Hinkle and Medhurst think I was hard on them, they should read the unpublished version of yesterday's snapshot.

I don't get these people. But maybe their own vanity will save them?

Scott Ritter, convicted sex offender, is not an expert on Ukraine.

When you bring him on to make your case, ou're making a weak case because anyone watching can say, "He's a sex offender. Why listen to him?"

More to the point, he's a really dumb sex offender. In the '00s he was arrested for it three times. Three. Most crooks would have gotten smarter, not Scott.

What does that say about his 'great' mind and what he has to offer?

You look like an idiot bringing him on.

And you better believe that women and survivors of assault are notcing.

And it's going to be you who suffers. Not Scott, you.

You're harming yourself because you're sending out a message that someone convicted is a good guest. This is not a person done in by a whisper campaign. This is a man three times arrested, publicly tried, found guilty and sentenced to prison. A man who is a registered sex offender.

You're making your choices obvious. Don't be surprised when women decaide you don't have a voice worth listening to.

And don't be surprised that people decide not to listen to you or trust your jdugment when you're big witness is a convicted sex offender.

The following sites updated: