Above is Isaiah's "2014 Self-Exposure," and that's going to be it from me.
Ann, Ruth and I think Great Britain's Socialist Worker has a story everyone needs to read:
Did tycoon groom girls for Prince Andrew to abuse?
by Simon Basketter
Prince Andrew (Pic: Thorne1983 on Wikimedia Commons)
It was after Virginia Roberts said that US billionaire Jeffrey Epstein groomed her and flew her to London in 2001.
This was so Prince Andrew could have sex with her.
Virginia was 17 years old, and said that she became Epstein’s “sex slave” when she was 15.
Andrew saw her three times, in London, New York and on Epstein’s private Caribbean island.
The scandal lifts a rock on how the rich and unworthy live. It’s a world where fortunes are spent to make it beautiful—but it’s brutal and ugly at its heart.
They treat people who aren’t part of their club with utter contempt and regard women as objects to be bought and used.
Virginia Roberts is referred to as “Jane Doe 3” in US court documents.
They said, “Epstein also trafficked Jane Doe 3 for sexual purposes to many other powerful men.”
Business
This included “numerous prominent American politicians, powerful business executives, foreign presidents, a well known prime minister and other world leaders.”
Throughout the last decade Epstein has been accused of keeping vulnerable teenagers, staging orgies on board his private jet and flying girls as young as 12 to “topless parties”.
An FBI investigation identified at least 20 victims who might level sexual allegations against him in court, and prosecutors prepared a lengthy indictment.
At least three women were questioned under oath about whether Andrew had had sexual contact with “underage minors”.
They refused to answer. Court papers allege that they were both “threatened and intimidated” and had lawyers paid for by Epstein.
In 2007 Epstein’s lawyers did a secret “plea deal” with the US government.
Epstein confessed to one case for which he served 13 months in jail and the rest of the wider cases were dropped. The deal means Epstein and any “potential co-conspirator” including Andrew are free from any future “criminal charges”.
Epstein wasn’t a rogue figure, but a fixer for the global elite.
He and Andrew are suitable representatives for them. This whole saga is another good reason not to venerate the royals.
It gives us more reasons to get rid of the disgusting parasites at the top a system that’s run for the super-wealthy.
The royals want to change the rules on Freedom of Information so that they can keep their secrets further hidden from public scrutiny
Closing with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
Tuesday, January 6, 2015. Chaos and violence continue, DoD admits that
there may have been civilian fatalities in those 'precision' air
strikes, this may be used to argue for more US troops on the ground in
Iraq, over 400 journalists have been killed in Iraq during the ongoing
war, the ethnic cleansing continues in Iraq, and much more.
Starting with today's Defense Dept press briefing at the Pentagon moderated by spokesperson Rear Adm John Kirby.
Q: Admiral, when you said in response to Nancy's question with numbers, that hundreds of -- we know that hundreds of ISIL fighters have been killed, can you be more specific on that number? And also, can you give us any idea of civilians killed in the airstrike campaign?
KIRBY: I cannot give you a more specific number of -- of how many ISIL fighters. We just know it's hundreds: several hundred. It's not --
I'd like to make two points. First of all, we don't have the ability to -- to count every nose that we shwack [sic]. Number two, that's not the goal. That's not the goal. The less of these guys that are out there, certainly that's the better, but the goal is to degrade and destroy their capabilities.
And we're not getting into an issue of body counts. And that's why I don't have that number handy. I wouldn't -- I wouldn't have asked my staff to give me that number before I came out here. It's simply not a relevant figure.
On civilian casualties, what I know is that CENTCOM, Central Command, is investigating several, what they believe to be credible allegations of possible civilian casualties. I don't know all the details of that. I would point you to Central Command. I know that they are actively investigating what they believe to be at least a few incidents of civilian causalities that they think, you know, warrant further investigation, that they have found credible to investigate. On their own, they've done this. But again, I'd point you to Central Command for more detail on that.
And if I could just editorialize a second, I mean, this is something we always take seriously. We are very mindful of trying to mitigate the risk to civilians every time we operate, everywhere we operate. And so when we do believe that we've had occasion to cause collateral damage or hurt, kill civilians, we take it seriously and we look into it. It matters to us.
Of the above remarks, AFP points out, "The comments marked the first time the US military has acknowledged that the air war may have exacted a toll on civilians." Kate Brannen (Foreign Policy) offers:
Depending on whether any civilian casualties are confirmed -- and where they may have happened -- these new investigations could move the debate around whether U.S. troops need to be moved closer to the battlefield, said Paul Scharre, a former Army Ranger. He worked in the Office of the Secretary of Defense from 2008 to 2013 on intellligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance policies, among other issues, before joining the Center for a New American Security.
Some critics of the Obama administration’s strategy against the Islamic State have called for more air power, describing the current airstrikes as “pinpricks.” But to unleash more bombs on Iraq or Syria without inadvertently killing civilians would most likely require U.S. troops to move closer to the fight.
And that's the thing about selling war -- those who do can always use anything to sell even more of it. "You say we're killing civilians? Well the answer is for us to up our involvement! Ground troops will save civilians!"
Sadly, there are many who will go along with that claim -- despite the fact that the years 2003 through 2011 in Iraq, with massive numbers of US troops on the ground -- did not create a safety zone for civilians.
The point Kirby raised about civilian deaths kind of got smoothed over in press reports.
Probably because this press lives to protect itself.
The issue isn't just that there may have been civilian deaths.
There was another important comment -- one that reflects on the press so they prefer to bury it.
Kirby noted, "First of all, we don't have the ability to -- to count every nose that we shwack [sic]."
The US government -- with all its military might, its Special Ops and CIA in Iraq, et al -- can't "count every nose that we whack."
Yet, day after day, the claims by the US government and/or the Iraqi government as to how many 'militants,' 'Da'ash,' 'terrorists,' what have you are treated as fact and repeated as such.
Not only can they not "count every nose," they can't guarantee that the dead were who they claim they were.
Instead of blindly repeating numbers and blindly calling them 'terrorists' or whatever, the press should be very dubious of the claims being made when a government -- any government -- reports 'kills.' That lesson was supposed to have been learned during Vietnam when the US government regularly inflated the number of 'kills' to make it appear Vietnam was losing the war.
Let's stay with the press but move to the Iraqi press. Sunday, Iraq's Journalistic Freedoms Observatory noted the year ended with 3 Iraqi journalists kidnapped in Mosul as elements of the Islamic State invaded their homes on December 31st and abducted them. Meanwhile, Xinhua reports the Iraqi Journalists Syndicate announced today that 14 journalists were killed in Iraq in 2014 and at least 406 since the start of the war. Kitabat adds that the organization noted the "major role" that the press serves in forming public opinion.
Staying with the media, the Washington Post's Erin Cunningham offers some media criticism:
Going back to the topic of violence, Alsumaria reports 4 corpses were discovered dumped in Baghdad (all shot to death). Mohammed Tawfeeq, Jason Hanna, Laura Smith-Spark and Jethro Mullen (CNN) add, "ISIS militants attacked the Albu Risha police station in northern Ramadi, killing several police officers and injuring at least two other people, the security officials said." AFP reports, "The suicide bombers attacked a mosque in the Al-Jubba area of Anbar where anti-militant fighters were resting, killing 10, after which clashes broke out that left a further 13 security personnel dead and 21 wounded." Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) counts 132 people killed in violence throughout Iraq today with another thirty left injured.
The violence in Iraq has frequently taken the form of ethnic cleansing. Reider Visser denies this reality from the comfort of his padded cell and he's supported by the likes of Jane Arraf, Joel Wing and other of Nouri al-Maliki's bow-down-bitches but the facts support ethnic cleansing in the past and currently.
Hamza Hendawi and Qassim Abdul-Zahra (AP) report on the Sunni town of Rawashid where Shi'ite forces pushed out the Islamic State and their leader, Adnan Hassan, states Sunnis will never be allowed to return to their homes, "These are our lands."
And the bow-down-bitches?
Silence from them. Though one of them, Jane, does make a point to Tweet fairy tales.
And that really underscores how the White House is yet again failing in Iraq.
Oil is dropping.
The previous drop meant Iraq's proposed budget slashed pretty much everything but defense.
The Iraqi government wants military weapons, they want military training and the US is supplying it.
Nothing.
Where are the demands that Iraq needs to do X to get Y?
Where's the diplomatic effort?
They could have stated nothing happened until the national guard bill became law, for example.
They could have used the Iraqi government's desires as levers to press for needed reforms.
They didn't.
And instead of calling out this diplomatic failure, where are we on the left?
As Mike pointed out, Ray McGovern (retired CIA) notes the State Dept . . . in terms of John Kerry. In the conspiracy-crazed mind of bow-down-bitch Ray McGovern, the Secretary of State is controlling the President of the United States Barack Obama.
It's when they get that nutty that bow-down-bitches should just bow out.
Although we should also question the glorification of CIA Ray McGovern to begin with.
This is the man who defended the dirty tricks of the US government in Vietnam -- defended it on Pacifica Radio -- and not in ancient times but during the reign of his blessed Barack. Years, decades, after the bulk of the world -- and the left in the US -- disowns the travesty and crimes of US counterinsurgency efforts in Vietnam, bow-down-bitch Ray McGovern takes to Pacifica to shine those efforts on.
The left needs to learn that when you lay down with the likes of Ray McGovern, gonorrhea may be the least of the problems you awake with.
And it's a mystery why anyone would listen to -- or, heaven forbid, follow -- a bow-down-bitch who, six year into War Hawk Barack's presidency, still makes excuses and peddles fantasies to avoid holding Barack accountable.
Reminder if you missed them last week, 2014 year-in-review pieces: Isaiah's "2014 Self-Exposure," Kat's "Kat's Korner: 2014 In Music," Ruth's "Ruth's Radio Report 2014," Martha and Shirley's "2014 in Books (Martha & Shirley)" Ann and Stan's "2014 in Film (Ann and Stan)" which first went up at their own sites as Ann's "2014 in Films (Ann and Stan)" and Stan's "2014 in film (Ann and Stan)," Third's "2014 Notable Events," Trina's "Detroit" and my "2014: The Year of Self-Exposure."
This morning, I forgot to include the community updates (and we'll know Jody Watley as well):
iraq
foreign policy
kate brannen
xinhua
the washington post
erin cunningham
Starting with today's Defense Dept press briefing at the Pentagon moderated by spokesperson Rear Adm John Kirby.
Q: Admiral, when you said in response to Nancy's question with numbers, that hundreds of -- we know that hundreds of ISIL fighters have been killed, can you be more specific on that number? And also, can you give us any idea of civilians killed in the airstrike campaign?
KIRBY: I cannot give you a more specific number of -- of how many ISIL fighters. We just know it's hundreds: several hundred. It's not --
I'd like to make two points. First of all, we don't have the ability to -- to count every nose that we shwack [sic]. Number two, that's not the goal. That's not the goal. The less of these guys that are out there, certainly that's the better, but the goal is to degrade and destroy their capabilities.
And we're not getting into an issue of body counts. And that's why I don't have that number handy. I wouldn't -- I wouldn't have asked my staff to give me that number before I came out here. It's simply not a relevant figure.
On civilian casualties, what I know is that CENTCOM, Central Command, is investigating several, what they believe to be credible allegations of possible civilian casualties. I don't know all the details of that. I would point you to Central Command. I know that they are actively investigating what they believe to be at least a few incidents of civilian causalities that they think, you know, warrant further investigation, that they have found credible to investigate. On their own, they've done this. But again, I'd point you to Central Command for more detail on that.
And if I could just editorialize a second, I mean, this is something we always take seriously. We are very mindful of trying to mitigate the risk to civilians every time we operate, everywhere we operate. And so when we do believe that we've had occasion to cause collateral damage or hurt, kill civilians, we take it seriously and we look into it. It matters to us.
Of the above remarks, AFP points out, "The comments marked the first time the US military has acknowledged that the air war may have exacted a toll on civilians." Kate Brannen (Foreign Policy) offers:
Depending on whether any civilian casualties are confirmed -- and where they may have happened -- these new investigations could move the debate around whether U.S. troops need to be moved closer to the battlefield, said Paul Scharre, a former Army Ranger. He worked in the Office of the Secretary of Defense from 2008 to 2013 on intellligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance policies, among other issues, before joining the Center for a New American Security.
Some critics of the Obama administration’s strategy against the Islamic State have called for more air power, describing the current airstrikes as “pinpricks.” But to unleash more bombs on Iraq or Syria without inadvertently killing civilians would most likely require U.S. troops to move closer to the fight.
And that's the thing about selling war -- those who do can always use anything to sell even more of it. "You say we're killing civilians? Well the answer is for us to up our involvement! Ground troops will save civilians!"
Sadly, there are many who will go along with that claim -- despite the fact that the years 2003 through 2011 in Iraq, with massive numbers of US troops on the ground -- did not create a safety zone for civilians.
The point Kirby raised about civilian deaths kind of got smoothed over in press reports.
Probably because this press lives to protect itself.
The issue isn't just that there may have been civilian deaths.
There was another important comment -- one that reflects on the press so they prefer to bury it.
Kirby noted, "First of all, we don't have the ability to -- to count every nose that we shwack [sic]."
The US government -- with all its military might, its Special Ops and CIA in Iraq, et al -- can't "count every nose that we whack."
Yet, day after day, the claims by the US government and/or the Iraqi government as to how many 'militants,' 'Da'ash,' 'terrorists,' what have you are treated as fact and repeated as such.
Not only can they not "count every nose," they can't guarantee that the dead were who they claim they were.
Instead of blindly repeating numbers and blindly calling them 'terrorists' or whatever, the press should be very dubious of the claims being made when a government -- any government -- reports 'kills.' That lesson was supposed to have been learned during Vietnam when the US government regularly inflated the number of 'kills' to make it appear Vietnam was losing the war.
Let's stay with the press but move to the Iraqi press. Sunday, Iraq's Journalistic Freedoms Observatory noted the year ended with 3 Iraqi journalists kidnapped in Mosul as elements of the Islamic State invaded their homes on December 31st and abducted them. Meanwhile, Xinhua reports the Iraqi Journalists Syndicate announced today that 14 journalists were killed in Iraq in 2014 and at least 406 since the start of the war. Kitabat adds that the organization noted the "major role" that the press serves in forming public opinion.
Staying with the media, the Washington Post's Erin Cunningham offers some media criticism:
-
In irresponsible report on Iraq & Ebola, Daily Mail says ISIS is "against western science and medicine." Not true.
Erin Cunningham
Going back to the topic of violence, Alsumaria reports 4 corpses were discovered dumped in Baghdad (all shot to death). Mohammed Tawfeeq, Jason Hanna, Laura Smith-Spark and Jethro Mullen (CNN) add, "ISIS militants attacked the Albu Risha police station in northern Ramadi, killing several police officers and injuring at least two other people, the security officials said." AFP reports, "The suicide bombers attacked a mosque in the Al-Jubba area of Anbar where anti-militant fighters were resting, killing 10, after which clashes broke out that left a further 13 security personnel dead and 21 wounded." Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) counts 132 people killed in violence throughout Iraq today with another thirty left injured.
The violence in Iraq has frequently taken the form of ethnic cleansing. Reider Visser denies this reality from the comfort of his padded cell and he's supported by the likes of Jane Arraf, Joel Wing and other of Nouri al-Maliki's bow-down-bitches but the facts support ethnic cleansing in the past and currently.
Hamza Hendawi and Qassim Abdul-Zahra (AP) report on the Sunni town of Rawashid where Shi'ite forces pushed out the Islamic State and their leader, Adnan Hassan, states Sunnis will never be allowed to return to their homes, "These are our lands."
And the bow-down-bitches?
Silence from them. Though one of them, Jane, does make a point to Tweet fairy tales.
jane arraf
White House - Obama calls #Iraqi PM Haider al-Abbadi to commend him on unity-building steps, stress support for Sunni tribes in ISIL fight.
A bow-down-bitch can always trumpet fiction that ignores the continued
targeting of Sunnis because a bow-down-bitch always ignores the
targeting of Sunnis. Jane Arraf's certainly made that her goal for
years now.
Tuesday was the 94th anniversary of the founding of the Iraqi army.
Though Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi has participated in various
photo-ops, not all feel it's a day worth celebrating. Communities long
victimized by the Iraqi military, such as the Kurds, are not feeling joyful. It's doubtful that the Shi'ites would be if they weren't now in charge of the killing machine.
You may remember the White House has been (weakly) pushing a national guard -- one made up of various demographic components in Iraq. Pushing that since the summer.
Yesterday, National Iraqi News Agency reported MP Amin Bakr (with the Kurdish Change or Goran bloc) declared he expected the bill to come before the Parliament this month. However, the Cabinet of Ministers has still yet to vote on it. You may remember all the promises about a vote in Parliament on the budget being just around the corner.
Despite hearing that for months, it's still not happened. And it may not for months. The budget is now tied to the oil and gas deal between Baghdad and Erbil. Iraq never got around to passing a 2014 budget and, as 2015 begins, a budget for this year seems doubtful as well.
Saif Hameed, Ned Parker and Dominic Evans (Reuters) report on the issues with the Iraqi military (which include the issue of corruption which plagues all of Iraq). Al Mada notes that Prime Minister al-Abadi pledged today to end corruption in the military.
You may remember the White House has been (weakly) pushing a national guard -- one made up of various demographic components in Iraq. Pushing that since the summer.
Yesterday, National Iraqi News Agency reported MP Amin Bakr (with the Kurdish Change or Goran bloc) declared he expected the bill to come before the Parliament this month. However, the Cabinet of Ministers has still yet to vote on it. You may remember all the promises about a vote in Parliament on the budget being just around the corner.
Despite hearing that for months, it's still not happened. And it may not for months. The budget is now tied to the oil and gas deal between Baghdad and Erbil. Iraq never got around to passing a 2014 budget and, as 2015 begins, a budget for this year seems doubtful as well.
Saif Hameed, Ned Parker and Dominic Evans (Reuters) report on the issues with the Iraqi military (which include the issue of corruption which plagues all of Iraq). Al Mada notes that Prime Minister al-Abadi pledged today to end corruption in the military.
And that really underscores how the White House is yet again failing in Iraq.
Oil is dropping.
The previous drop meant Iraq's proposed budget slashed pretty much everything but defense.
The Iraqi government wants military weapons, they want military training and the US is supplying it.
The Washington Post's Rajiv Chandrasekaran Tweets:
U.S. Selling 170 More M-1 Abrams Tanks to Iraq After the Iraqi Army Lost 40 Last Summer to ISIS http://www.matthewaid.com/post/107321644241/u-s-selling-170-more-m-1-abrams-tanks-to-iraq …
And AFP Tweets:
FRANCE 24
And this is done for what?
The White House is getting what for these gifts?
Where are the demands that Iraq needs to do X to get Y?
Where's the diplomatic effort?
They could have used the Iraqi government's desires as levers to press for needed reforms.
They didn't.
And instead of calling out this diplomatic failure, where are we on the left?
As Mike pointed out, Ray McGovern (retired CIA) notes the State Dept . . . in terms of John Kerry. In the conspiracy-crazed mind of bow-down-bitch Ray McGovern, the Secretary of State is controlling the President of the United States Barack Obama.
It's when they get that nutty that bow-down-bitches should just bow out.
Although we should also question the glorification of CIA Ray McGovern to begin with.
This is the man who defended the dirty tricks of the US government in Vietnam -- defended it on Pacifica Radio -- and not in ancient times but during the reign of his blessed Barack. Years, decades, after the bulk of the world -- and the left in the US -- disowns the travesty and crimes of US counterinsurgency efforts in Vietnam, bow-down-bitch Ray McGovern takes to Pacifica to shine those efforts on.
The left needs to learn that when you lay down with the likes of Ray McGovern, gonorrhea may be the least of the problems you awake with.
And it's a mystery why anyone would listen to -- or, heaven forbid, follow -- a bow-down-bitch who, six year into War Hawk Barack's presidency, still makes excuses and peddles fantasies to avoid holding Barack accountable.
Reminder if you missed them last week, 2014 year-in-review pieces: Isaiah's "2014 Self-Exposure," Kat's "Kat's Korner: 2014 In Music," Ruth's "Ruth's Radio Report 2014," Martha and Shirley's "2014 in Books (Martha & Shirley)" Ann and Stan's "2014 in Film (Ann and Stan)" which first went up at their own sites as Ann's "2014 in Films (Ann and Stan)" and Stan's "2014 in film (Ann and Stan)," Third's "2014 Notable Events," Trina's "Detroit" and my "2014: The Year of Self-Exposure."
This morning, I forgot to include the community updates (and we'll know Jody Watley as well):
iraq
foreign policy
kate brannen
xinhua
the washington post
erin cunningham
