Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills)

Wednesday, January 26, 2022

Nate

That's Nate Bargatze and Brady e-mailed asking me to note that. He loves Nate's comedy as well and thinks that's a really good compliation of Nate's comedy.

I still can't believe ABC had a chance to do a sitcom with Nate and were too stupid to put it together.

Nate's hilarious. He crosses generational boundaires. He's perfect for TV. Their loss. Well, mine too because I would've watched every episode of a Nate sitcom.

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

Wednesday, January 26, 2022. Victoria and the other uglies are stirring unrest, explain to Jane Arraf that ISIS didn't creae anything (they're just taking advantage), and much more.

There's never too much war for the crooks and creeps in the US Congress. Jake Johnson (COMMON DREAMS) reports:

Despite warnings that a dangerous war with Russia could soon be unleashed if diplomatic efforts fail, House Democrats are reportedly looking to bypass typical procedures and fast-track a vote on legislation that would send $500 million in military aid to Ukraine—a move that critics say only adds fuel to the fire.

The Intercept reported Tuesday that "Democrats in the House of Representatives are planning to expedite a massive bill that would dramatically increase U.S. security assistance to Ukraine and lay the groundwork for substantial new sanctions on Russia—hastening a war-friendly posture without opportunity for dissent as concerns over a military invasion abound."

"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told members on a caucus call Tuesday that she's looking to skip marking up the bill and move it straight to the House floor, setting up the possibility of a vote as soon as early next week," The Intercept revealed, citing two unnamed congressional sources.

Formally known as the Defending Ukraine Sovereignty Act of 2022, the legislation is co-sponsored by 13 Democrats in the House and 41 in the Senate, including Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).

News of the push for speedy passage of the bill comes just one day after President Joe Biden put 8,500 U.S. troops on standby to deploy to Eastern Europe and as anti-war voices increased their warnings against military action.

One senior Democratic aide told The Intercept that the House leadership's plan to rush a vote on the Ukraine measure "is how the space for nonmilitary options gets slowly closed off in Washington, without any real debate."

Yesterday, the always eager for war NEW YORK TIMES felt the need to spotlight propaganda on Ukraine . . . from the Russia end. Hmm. Have they ever seriously explored Victoria Nuland's efforts? Even the BBC repoted on it back in 2014 -- you know, when Joe Biden was Vice President and Barack Obama was president. Necon Victoria was noted in January of last year by Mark Episkopos (THE NATIONAL INTEREST):

President-elect Joe Biden plans to name Victoria Nuland to a top State Department post, sending the clearest signal yet on the president-elect’s likely policy approach to Russia and Ukraine.

Earlier this month, Politico reported that the Biden-Harris transition team had decided on a new round of foreign policy and national security appointees. Biden is expected to nominate veteran diplomat Victoria Nuland as undersecretary of state for political affairs, according to sources familiar with the process. These sources also told reporters that the president-elect will tap Wendy Sherman, a veteran of the Obama and Clinton administrations, as the deputy secretary of state.

Nuland was the U.S. Ambassador to NATO under President George W. Bush from 2005 to 2008. She served as State Department spokesperson under Secretary of State of Hillary Clinton before succeeding Philip Gordon as the assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs. More than simply an “Obama veteran,” Nuland played a central role in executing the Obama administration’s Ukraine policies during and after the 2014 Euromaidan revolution. She conveyed U.S. support for demonstrations in Kiev against the government of President Viktor Yanukovyvch, condemning efforts by local police to quell the protests. “It is still possible to save Ukraine’s European future, and that’s what we want to see the president lead. That’s going to require immediate security steps and getting back into a conversation with Europe and with the International Monetary Fund and bringing justice and human dignity to the people of Ukraine,” said Nuland in December 2013. She met with pro-EU protesters in Kiev on Dec. 11, distributing food in a symbolic gesture of solidarity with anti-government protesters; the move prompted widespread outrage in the Kremlin, which perceived Nuland’s outing as a brazen act of public interference in Ukraine’s domestic affairs.

It was revealed in early 2014 that Nuland, along with then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt, was intimately involved in ongoing U.S. efforts to curate and install a new government in Ukraine. “I think Yats is the guy who’s got the economic experience, the governing experience,” said Nuland in a leaked phone conversation with Pyatt, referring to the installation of Ukrainian politician Arseniy Yatsenyuk to a top government post. Nuland likewise voiced her strong dispreference for opposition leader Vitali Klitschko: “I don’t think Klitsch [Klitschko] should go into the government. I don’t think it’s necessary, I don’t think it’s a good idea.” The phone call is best remembered for Nuland’s colorful reference to the European Union, which did not fully see eye-to-eye with Washington on key questions involving the fate of the Yanukovych government: “OK. He’s now gotten both [proposed UN mediation team member [Robert] Serry and [UN Secretary General] Ban Ki-moon to agree that Serry could come in Monday or Tuesday. So that would be great, I think, to help glue this thing and to have the UN help glue it and, you know, F*** the EU.” After widespread rebuke from high-placed EU officials, State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki announced that Nuland “has been in contact with her EU counterparts and of course has apologized for these reported comments.”

She's a chicken hawk -- always using the lives of others to fight her petty wars and whore battles.

And she's aided by a whorish media that has bent every ethical rule int he world for her. The whore's name first appears at this site in 2004 becauase back when John Kerry was running for US president against Bully Boy Bush NPR felt the need to bring Robert Kagan on to 'evaluate' John Kerry..It never should have happened and what made it worse was the ombusperson for NPR weighed in and never mentioned the real problem with Kagan appearing. This was October, during a presidential election, and NPR gave airtime to the husband of DIck Cheney's girl Victoria Nuland.

Everyone listening to the report deserved to now that the man speaking had a wife who worked for Dick Cheney. But they weren't told that on air and, when the hideous Jeffrey Dvorkin weighed in, he also refused to supply that truth, that fact.

Dick's baby girl. Now I'm not saying the two slept together, we all know Robert's the player in that marriage -- and, honestly, who could blame him, right? I mean, you've seen her, right?

But the press has always whored for that family and continues to do so.

Victoria doesn't need a government job, she needs a fumigation.

And she's working overtime for war. The US government is ready to spend millions on Ukraine but not on Medicare For All. They'll do anything for war.

The American people can and have suffered. But they'll do anything for war.

There is no reason for anyone -- not a single person -- to be homeless in the United States but Congress won't fix that problem, will they? The number skyrocketed in the 80s. This is not a new problem and we see our inept and crooked Congress press do nothing over and over. But for war? They're always on board.

Turmoil in Ukraine has been a longterm goal of the US government. And they'll deny Americans basic rights, they'll refuse to address the needs of the American people, to push for it.

There should be a prison for these people like Victoria Nuland who work to cause war and to send people to their deaths. There should be a prison that they're kept in. Instead, they wait for the administrations to change and then they pop back in with their petty wars and plans and start working them all over again.

Let's move over to the ongoing disaster that Victoria and her family helped create: Iraq.

THE NEW YORK TIMES maintains:

An audacious attack on a prison housing thousands of former ISIS fighters in Syria. A series of strikes against military forces in neighboring Iraq. And a horrific video harking back to the grimmest days of the insurgency that showed the beheading of an Iraqi police officer.

The evidence of a resurgence of the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq is mounting by the day, nearly three years after the militants lost the last patch of territory of their so-called caliphate, which once stretched across vast parts of the two countries. The fact that ISIS was able to mount these coordinated and sophisticated attacks in recent days shows that what had been believed to be disparate sleeper cells are re-emerging as a more serious threat.

“It’s a wake-up call for regional players, for national players, that ISIS is not over, that the fight is not over,” said Kawa Hassan, Middle East and North Africa director at the Stimson Center, a Washington research institute. “It shows the resilience of ISIS to strike back at the time and place of their choosing.”

It's a piece co-written by The Whore of Baghdad, Jane Arraf. Never had a scoop her entire time in Iraq -- going back to the 90s when she did Saddam friendly propaganda for CNN (as Eason Jordan would admit after the start of the Iraq War in, where else?, THE NEW YORK TIMES). She knows who signs her check and she can't do antying else. She does these faux reports that offer nothing of value and don't pass for news so she has to make herself useful somehow.

Today, she joins Ben Hubbard to co-sign that nosnense.

ISIS? It never left Iraq, it's never been defeated. Our focus is not Syria at this website but it is true that Barack bacekd ISIS in Syria while maintaining the US was fighting them in Iraq. It's also true that to reclaim Mosul, the US government aided ISIS' escape/withdrawal to Syria from Mosul.

But our focus isn't Syria. Our focus is Iraq.

Is ISIS on the rise?

Not really.

It's a terrorist organization. It's been active because it never left Iraq. What's changed?

ISIS exists to grab any break they can to carry out fivolence and destruction.

So what's the big change in Iraq right now that would allow for this -- you know, the real issue, the thing that Jane and Ben refuse to explore, let alone lead with?

It's the lack of a government.

The US State Dept is rather surprised that US citiziens are bombarding it lately with questions about Iraq. They should be more bothered that they have no official position and are not officially working on resolving the issue of the government formation. They should be more worried that a number of American people are noting this.

The Whore of Baghdad wants US troops in Iraq. If they leave, she'd have to. And no one wants her in the US. And she only has a career as an 'expert' on the Middle East. To keep the money coming in, she needs US troops on the ground.

It's that or being a greeter at Walmart for Jane where, every day, some assistant manager is cracking down on her and insisting, "Those bakery samples are for the customers!"

October 10th? That's when elections were held. When will the government be formed?

And on Arabic social media, what do you find? Dismay as it appears that all the powerful positions will be filled by the same men who held them before the election took place.

ISIS doesn't create. It watches and it takes advantage. It's watching as the political stalemate continues and it sees opportunity.

Katie Hearth (MNN) offers:

Iraq’s political turmoil reflects a broader battle for control in the Middle East.

“Three months ago, there was an election, and [Sadr’s] group won. This is not aligned with what [Iran wants]; they are not trying to do what Iran tells them to do,” Fadi Sharaiha with MENA Leadership Center says.

“Iranians lost their seat in the parliament, and they (Iran’s leaders) did not take this lightly. They are challenging this in the courts and the streets.”

Attacks on various political institutions in Iraq fill the headlines continuously. Shooters attacked a Kurdish leader last week, days after twin explosions rocked Kurdish-owned banks in Baghdad.

“This is a clear impact of the proxy war in Iraq, as it is happening in Yemen, Lebanon, and in Libya, unfortunately,” Sharaiha says.

He adds that the battlefields change, but most of the conflict traces its roots to one issue.

As the war in Iraq continues, Joe Biden continues to persecute Julian Assange. Marjorie Cohn (TRUTH OUT) notes:

On January 24, 2022, the British High Court of Justice allowed WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange to ask the U.K. Supreme Court to hear his appeal of the extradition order. In December 2021, the High Court had overturned U.K. District Judge Vanessa Baraitser’s January 2021 ruling denying the U.S. request for extradition.

Following a three-week evidentiary hearing, Baraitser concluded that if extradited to the United States for trial, Assange was very likely to commit suicide because of his mental state and the harsh conditions of confinement under which he would be held.

During that hearing, the Biden administration didn’t provide the judge with any assurances that Assange would not be held in near-isolation in U.S. prisons. It was only after Baraitser denied extradition that the U.S. government came forward with “assurances” that Assange wouldn’t be subject to special administrative measures (SAMs) or be held in the ADX supermax prison in Florence, Colorado. But those so-called assurances contained a loophole. They would be null and void if Assange were to commit a “future act” that “met the test” for the imposition of SAMs.

The late timing of the U.S. assurances precluded Assange’s defense from arguing that they were unreliable. Nevertheless, the High Court accepted the Biden administration’s 11th-hour assurances and ruled that Assange could be extradited to the United States.

Assange is facing 175 years in prison for charges under the Espionage Act that stem from the 2010 WikiLeaks publication of evidence of U.S. war crimes in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantánamo. The Obama administration considered charging Assange for those revelations but declined to do so for fear of running afoul of the First Amendment’s freedom of the press. Donald Trump did indict Assange, however. But instead of dismissing the case, Joe Biden is vigorously fighting to extradite Assange and pursue the charges that Trump filed.

At ANTIWAR.COM, Craig Murray notes:

Questions of the viability of assurances that, inter alia, make torture a future option, were ruled not to be arguable appeal points.

So the certified point, whether assurances can be submitted at the appeals stage, is not really just about timing and deadlines, it is about whether there should be scrutiny of the assurances or not.

However it does not look like a substantial point. It looks like just a technical point on timing and deadlines. This is very important, because it may be the screen behind which the British Establishment is sidling slowly towards the exit. Was Lord Burnett looking to get out of this case by one of the curtained doors at his back?

If any of the other points had been certified, there would have been detailed discussion in court of the United States’ penchant for torture, its dreadful prison conditions, and its long record of bad faith (it is an accepted point of law in the United States that domestic authorities are not bound by any assurance, commitment or even treaty given to foreign governments). For the Supreme Court to refuse Assange’s extradition on any of those grounds would be an official accusation against the United States’ integrity, and thus diplomatically difficult.

But the Supreme Court can refuse extradition on the one point now certified by the High Court, and it can be presented as nothing to do with anything bad about the USA and its governance, purely a technical matter of a missed deadline. Apologies all round, never mind old chap, and let’s get to the claret at Simpson’s.

Can there really be an end in sight for Julian? Is the British Establishment quietly sidling to the exit?

Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Adele Borrows From Oasis" went up last night. The following sites updated:

Tuesday, January 25, 2022

Adele

I love Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Adele Borrows From Oasis." You can see my posts from last week:

Will Oasis bring the hammer down on Adele?

Adele ripped off Oasis

And if you read them, you will note that I deserve no credit on this. C.I. is the one who pointed it out and she caught it immediately.

In other news, they're saying Adele shut down her proposed Las Vegas residency over problems with the sets. Do you believe that?

I have no idea. I think it's very plausible.

Remember Cass Elliot? When she first played Vegas, she bombed. Later on, she'd admit to drugs. But another part of the problem was her sets. The stage was actually supposed to 'float' at one point but apparently didn't.

Vegas is not about brava performances and great vocals. Cher's been a Vegas star for years because she grasps that the tourists want spectacle. These days, she'd sing her own hits. But back in the 70s and 80s, she hated singing her hits and would sing hits -- hit songs by other artists. She grasps that the tourists want to hear hits and they really don't care if it's your hits or someone else's hits. They want glamour, they want familiar when it comes to music.

Sets really can matter in Las Vegas.

In other Adele news, BILLBOARD notes:

Adele‘s “Easy on Me” claims a 10th week at No. 1 on the Billboard Hot 100 songs chart. With her latest week at the summit, she equals her longest reign, previously established by the 10-week command of her 2015-16 smash “Hello.”

Meanwhile, “We Don’t Talk About Bruno,” from Encanto, pushes 4-2 on the Hot 100 as the week’s most-streamed and top-selling song. It becomes just the second song from a Disney animated film to have reached the chart’s top two positions.

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

Tuesday, January 25, 2022. Jen Psaki insists that Joe Biden respects the press -- this as he calls a reporter "a son of a bitch" for asking a question about inflation.

That's Stella Morris speaking of the court ruling that Julian Assange can appeal the previous finding that he can be extradicted to the United States. Stella Morris is an attorney and the partner of Julian Assange. They have two children together -- Max and Gabrial. Julian? He's the publisher of WIKILEAKS and he's being persecuted by US President Joe Biden for the 'crime' of journalism.

The Australian citizen is responsible for releasing the truth about several War Crimes. He's also 'guilty' of exposing corrupting at the top of the Democratic Party. A point that arose at yesterday's White House press briefing. Before we get to that, lets again note the statement from Reporters Without Borders:

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) welcomes the High Court’s decision to allow Wikileaks publisher Julian Assange to appeal to the Supreme Court, seeking review of his extradition case, but limited to one narrow ground. The Supreme Court will be asked to consider matters related to the US government’s provision of diplomatic assurances regarding Assange’s treatment if extradited.

On 24 January, the High Court granted Julian Assange the right to appeal to the Supreme Court, seeking review of the decision that could allow for his extradition to the US. Assange’s legal team now has 14 days to file an application with the Supreme Court, which could take several months to decide whether it will accept the case for review.

If accepted, the Supreme Court would consider matters related to the US government’s provision of diplomatic assurances regarding Assange’s treatment, which were filed only prior to the appeal stage of proceedings, meaning the assurances were not scrutinised in the evidentiary portion of the extradition hearing. The High Court granted permission for Assange to file an application on this ground due to the lateness of the US government’s provision of these diplomatic assurances.

“We welcome the High Court’s decision to allow Julian Assange the right to appeal his extradition case to the Supreme Court. This case will have enormous implications for journalism and press freedom around the world, and could be hugely precedent-setting. It deserves consideration by the highest court in the land. We very much hope that the Supreme Court will indeed accept the case for review,” said RSF’s Director of International Campaigns Rebecca Vincent, who was present in court for the hearing.

This decision follows the High Court’s ruling of 10 December 2021 by the same judges, overturning the District Judge’s decision of 4 January 2021 barring extradition on mental health grounds. The High Court had ruled in favour of the US government’s appeal, on the basis of the diplomatic assurances provided regarding Assange’s treatment if extradited.

RSF believes that Assange has been targeted for his contributions to journalism, as Wikileaks’ publication of hundreds of thousands of leaked classified documents in 2010 informed extensive public interest reporting around the world, exposing war crimes and human rights violations that have never been prosecuted. If he faces trial in the US, Assange would not be able to argue a public interest defence, as the Espionage Act lacks such a provision. Assange’s prosecution would set a dangerous precedent that would have lasting implications for journalism and press freedom around the world.

RSF is also gravely concerned by the state of Assange’s mental and physical health, which remain at great risk in conditions of prolonged detention in London’s high-security Belmarsh prison – risks that would be severely exacerbated if the US succeeds in securing his extradition. In December it was revealed that he had suffered a mini-stroke in prison during the appellate hearing, and in January it was reported that Covid infections were again on the rise in Belmarsh prison.

The UK and US are respectively ranked 33rd and 44th out of 180 countries in RSF’s 2021 World Press Freedom Index.

Julian was a brief topic at yesterday's White House press briefing moderated by spokesperson Jen Psaki.

Q And then, quickly: A UK court is now allowing Julian Assange to appeal his extradition to the United States. The Justice Department, as you know, isn’t commenting. But what about the President? He says press freedom is critical for democracy, so why is he continuing to pursue this case? Is the reason that he’s pursuing this Trump-era case because Julian Assange embarrassed the Democratic Party in 2016?

MS. PSAKI: Again, this is under the purview of the dem- — the Department of Justice, so I don’t have any comment from here.

Go ahead.

Q Thank you. On the Palin-New York Times case — I know you can’t maybe speak specifically to the case, but does the White House have any concerns about threats to press freedoms, to press access, to the limits of the First Amendment protection?

MS. PSAKI: I obviously can’t speak to the case, so I appreciate you saying that at the top.

I will say that I think the President has shown that he respects the value of the freedom of the press. He obviously took a step earlier this year to ensure there couldn’t be a replication of actions that had been taken over prior administrations, as it related to journalists. So, I think that speaks to his commitment, but I don’t have any more comments on the case.

We've go to touch on the second question. Freedom of the press? There is no freedom to intentionally lie about osmeone -- that's why the press that's why there are laws against slander and liberl. Palin is, of course, Sarah Palin and the edtiorial board of THE NEW YORK TIMES deliberately lied about her. This is not a ;press freedom' case no matter how much some idiot at a White House press briefing might wish it were.

This is an accountability issue -- press accountability. Libel and slander have been on the books for years. This is not new territory. We haven't noted the case so let's not Jonathan Turley who has analyzed it repeatedly and this is from his most recent analysis:

We previously discussed a major ruling restoring the defamation lawsuit of Sarah Palin against the New York Times over a false claim related to the shooting of former United States Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. Now, the New York Times is trying to introduce footage of Palin on “The Masked Singer.” The effort to introduce the video would seem to have no probative value and clearly is meant to ridicule Palin.

The case concerns an editorial by the New York Times where it sought to paint Palin and other Republicans as inciting the earlier shooting. The editorial was on the shooting of GOP Rep. Steve Scalise and other members of Congress by James T. Hodgkinson, of Illinois, 66, a liberal activist and Sanders supporter. The Times awkwardly sought to shift the focus back on conservatives. It stated that SarahPAC had posted a graphic that put Giffords in crosshairs before she was shot. It was false but it was enough for the intended spin: “Though there’s no sign of incitement as direct as in the Giffords attack, liberals should of course hold themselves to the same standard of decency that they ask of the right.”

The editorial was grossly unfair and falsely worded. Indeed, the earlier opinion began with a bang: “Gov. Palin brings this action to hold James Bennet and The Times accountable for defaming her by falsely asserting what they knew to be false: that Gov. Palin was clearly and directly responsible for inciting a mass shooting at a political event in January 2011.”

That is not about press freedom, it is about accountability. You can read on to see just how desperate NYT is over this case. They should be, they are not on strong ground, the law is against them.

Jen Psaki uses the cae case to insist that Joe Biden is all about press freedom. She states, "I will say that I think the President has shown that he respects the value of the freedom of the press."

She thought that, she insisted. She thought that on the same day Joe Biden was in the news for sharing his thoughts on a reporter. Courtney Subramanian (USA TODAY) reports:

Fox News' Peter Doocy asked the president whether he thought inflation would be a "political liability" ahead of November's midterm elections. Biden's reaction was caught on a hot mic.

"That's a great asset, more inflation," Biden said. "What a stupid son of a b----."

Moments before, Biden groused about fielding questions on the deepening crisis in Ukraine instead of being asked about the White House Competition Council meeting, which focused on the administration's efforts to promote economic competition and drive down prices for consumers.

Anyone remember this from Joe Biden:

As President, I will restore a relationship with the independent press that is grounded in mutual respect, even -- and especially when -- they critique policies or positions of my administration. In a Biden White House, there will be no bullying of the media from the press room podium or by tweet." He also pledged to have "regular, fact-based briefings.

No mocking, no bullying? Hmm.

Guess that was just more 'repsect' for the freedom of the press, eh, Jen?

The same 'respect' he shows Julian by persecuting him. Julian didn't commit War Crimes. He's not the one to punish. Unless you're trying to intimidate the press and silence it. Jen Psaki needs to put some make up on her face (I'm recovering from COVID as well, Jen, and I don't go inf ront of people looking chalky) and she needs to grasp how ridiculous her statements are.

At WSWS, JD Palmer notes the CBC's coverage of Julian which, like so many outlets, has been biased:

Having laid bare the US empire as a never-ceasing conveyor belt of war crimes, Assange exposed Washington’s lies of “nation building” in Afghanistan and Iraq as a vast “money laundering” operation.

And yet, as his legal case progressed, it was clear that the Wikileaks founder’s heroism was resulting in his slow murder via multi-state judicial corruption. In response to this remarkable case, in one of many examples of journalistic malfeasance, Chris Brown, in his report for the CBC’s flagship news program “The National,” falsely asserts that Assange “leaked” the cables that contained the infamous Collateral Murder video. Brown, a long-time CBC correspondent, can presumably distinguish between publishing and leaking. Determined to confuse the viewer, Brown fails to mention the role of whistleblower Chelsea Manning (Assange’s source) and through conflation taints the journalistic credentials of the man who exposed torture at Guantanamo.

Brown knows quite well that publishing leaks is the backbone of national security journalism with the quotidian apparatus of “legacy” newspapers like the New York Times, providing potential whistleblowers with technical instructions on their websites for evading detection. That’s why, as CBC fails to inform the viewer, the Obama administration chose not to prosecute Assange (a decision later reversed by Trump’s Department of Justice or DOJ). Due to what it deemed the “ New York Times problem,” such a precedent, Obama’s DOJ concluded, could be used against fellow elites.

Now in the hands of Biden’s DOJ, this clear case of selective prosecution by the US and its colluding vassal state, the UK, has been denounced by legal experts, a swath of trade unions and activists. And while one can reliably count on Canada’s public broadcaster to ignore grassroots campaigns, what’s remarkable is that the CBC’s reporting on this historic case sinks below even the corporate media’s degraded standards.

Turning to Iraq . . .

Nadia al-Faour (ARAB NEWS) notes:

When tens of thousands of young people took to the streets of Baghdad and towns and cities across southern and central Iraq in late 2019, one core demand resonated louder than any other — employment opportunities.

The country, which had only recently emerged from decades of tyranny, siege, war and insurgency, had delivered precious little for the generation of young Iraqis who came of age in the years after the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003.

Two years on from those protests, which fizzled out with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020, and under the brutal heel of repression meted out by Iraq’s powerful militias, young Iraqis say nothing has changed.

“If anything we’re worse than when we started,” Rashid Mansour, a hairdresser from west Baghdad, told Arab News. “Neither me nor my cousins can afford to stay here. We all work part time. Just like the country, we’re all just getting by.”

Nothing's changed. And it doesn't appear anything will change anytime soon. There's talk that Iraq's prime minister will remain the same -- despite the October 10th elections. The PUK is isnisting that the president of Iraq remain the same person and already the previous leader of Parliament has again been named Speaker.

What was the point of even holding elections?

The following sites updated:

Monday, January 24, 2022

AMERICAN DAD kicks off season 17

AMERICAN DAD started its new season tonight on TBS. It was a great episode.

Francine and Roger tried to watch their favorite new TV show with Steve but he just couldn't get into it. It was a reality show about selling houses. And one of the agents went missing so the show held auditions for a new realtor.

Though Roger slept with both judges, the crew and a door knob on the way out, Francine got the job since she was the only applicant who could identify -- from pictures -- a doorway, a sold sign and a window. Roger exclaims "Window!" because he had missed that one.

The secondary story was Klaus and Stan trying to take over Jeff's new coffee business he was running outside the house like a lemon aid stand with Hayley next to the stand strumming her guitar and singing.

It was a great episode and I loved the 'realtor' hair that Roger and Francine had. And I loved it when Roger went after Francine. :D And then he took over the reality show and offered gems to the camera like this, "Are you getting my good side? Trick question, I have two good sides. It's my front that's the problem." :D

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

Monday, January 24, 2022. News from the high court in england for Julian Assange, a serious look at the actual election events and results in Iraq (and their meanings) and much more.

Starting with news of Julian Assange. Julian is the journalist US President Joe Biden continues to persecute. Reporters Without Borders notes this morning:

The UK and US are respectively ranked 33rd and 44th out of 180 countries in RSF’s 2021 World Press Freedom Index.

BBC NEWS adds:

Stella Moris, Mr Assange's fiancee and mother of his two young sons, claimed the High Court ruling as a victory but said "we are far from achieving justice in this case".

Speaking outside the court, she said: "Let's not forget that every time we win, as long as this case isn't dropped, as long as Julian isn't freed, Julian continues to suffer.

"For almost three years he has been in Belmarsh prison and he is suffering profoundly."

She added: "Our fight goes on and we will fight this until Julian is free."

Kate Feldman (NEW YORK DAILY NEWS) notes, "Assange faces up to 175 years in prison if convicted in the U.S."

Turning to Iraq, ABNA notes, : "Iraqi sources reported that a logistics convoy of the US terrorist army was targeted in Babil province, central Iraq." They also note that there were two attacks reported on US convoys yesterday. Violence has not ended in Iraq. Joe Biden's assurances to the side, US troops remain in harms way.

Let's pick up from last night:

In other news, Dilan Sirwn (RUDAW) reports:

The Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) on Sunday voted on Barham Salih as the party’s only candidate for the Iraqi presidency, claiming that the Kurdistan Democratic Party’s (KDP) nomination of a candidate is against “Kurdish unity”.

In a statement posted by the PUK’s co-chair Bafel Talabani on Facebook following an hours long meeting of the party's leadership council, the party announced its complete endorsement for the current Iraqi president to run a second term.

The statement added that the council believed that “the KDP has taken steps independently and made agreements with some political parties without any regards to the will of Kurdish parties and Kurdish unity.”

The sense of entitlement from the failing and faltering PUK really needs to be put in check. The PUK has been a fading political party since they staged photos of fat ass Jalal Talabani sitting at a table and 'conversing' when, in fact, fat ass suffered a stroke and should have been removed from office because he couldn't speak. The Talabani's thirst for power was more important to them than the Iraqi people. It was more important to them that they held onto power than that Iraq had a functioning president. Since then, the PUK has done poorly in one election after another -- aided in their elecrtoral disasters by idiotic decisions to stand with the US government and not the Kurdish people. 2021 saw, no surprise, the KDP get more votes than the PUK. The KDP got 31 seats in the new parliament, the PUK got 17.

In what world does that qualify them to hold the presidency. They are losers and they are a fading party. Did Bafel Talabani leave the US long enough to partiicipate in a leadership meeting in Kurdistan? Oh, how fortunate that Bafel was able to drop by Kurdistan.

We'll talk more about the losers of the PUK tomorrow and how they tanked others.

Gorran. "Change." Started with CIA money near the end of Nouri al-Maliki's first term as prime minister of Iraq, Goran was a political party in the Kurdistan that insisted it spoke for the hopes and dreams of the Kurdish people -- on the CIA dime, you understand. And it slowly amassed support. To the point that it replaced the failing PUK as the second most popular political party in the Kurdistan. (Most popular was KDP.)

And then, mid 2017, the party's leader Nawshirwan Mustafa passed away. He was replaced by Omar Said Ali. And today?

Rorran does't exist -- not int he Parliament.

The laughable 'movement' was generated from outside of the Kurdistan (again, by the CIA) and its erratic and problematic history with regards to its leaders is too complicated to go into -- it includes arrest warrants and it includes targeting and assassinating Kurdish Communists -- all that before the CIA provides CIA see money -- and possibly why the CIA provided seed money.

But the decision that doomed the political party?

When you are slowly and surely pulling ahead of the Talabani-dominated PUK, what do you do? A smart political party draws the lines even sharper between themselves and the PUK -- empahsizing, for example, that they are the political party for the Kurds not dominated by a single tribe. Though the CIA could fork over money (US taxdollars, not the CIA's own money), they couldn't hand out wisdom (and maybe they have none to share in the first place).

So Gorran decided, going into the 2021 election, that the thing to do was to . . . partner with the PUK.

That's right. Partner with the losing party, the one that they were replacing previously.

The end result?

The death of Gorran. They have no seat in the Parliament. Not one.

329 seats in the Parliament. And Gorran doesn't hold a single one.

Many are saying that the political party is over. And maybe they are. For most political parties, this would be it. But Gorran was funded by the CIA before and may be again.

For now, corruption and mismanagement have resulted in the end of Gorran.

Yoking themselves to the losing PUK only elevated the PUK while pummeling Gorran.

Let's move over to tubby Moqtada al-Sadr, the caftan clad media darling. While Goran lost US tax dollars since the CIA elected not to fund them this go round, Moqtada got US tax dollars.

US tax dollars for what? For his years of leading attacks on US troops? For his killing of US troops?

No.

They wanted Moqtada to endorse the elections.

The western media had lied that Moqtada wasn't particiapting.

He was particpating, the people from his party and his bloc had filed their papers and began posting campaign material. Electoral dedlines meant they couldn't play -- the way the press did. But Moqtada was withholding his endorsement of the elections. In August, after being paid off by the US State Dept, Moqtada endorsed the elections.

The 'radical' cleric is just another money grubbign whore.

And because he had the backing of the US State Dept (Joe Biden spitting on the families of the fallen, thanks, Joe), he had the backing of the US media which lied repeatedly for him.

Moqtada, to read what passed for reproting from US and western outlets, was a winner. He was so popular. He was this, he was that.

He's a loser.

In 2010, Joe Biden, as Vcie President and as the person tasked by Barack Obama with oversight of Iraq, negotiated The Erbil Agreement. That legal contract ended the eight month political stalemate and gave Nouri al-Maliki a second term as prime minister by overruling the vote of the Iraqi people. Nouri lost in 2010 and, as US Gen Ray Odierno had predicted, refused to step down. Although the US initially insisted it would back the winner, that was soon tossed aside as Samantha Power and other idiots got their way.

A few insitutitons, the Crisis Group to name but one -- a group that the US press has strangely stepped away from promoting, have noted that the trunout was awful. 35% or so of eligible voters turned out. What few want to talk about is the slow erosion each cycle since 2010. Those of us who believed you backed the winner of the election and stood with the Iraqi people, we warned, back in 2010, that overturning the votes would harm support for and belief in the process. And you can look at the cycles and you can see that we were right.

Moqtada's party didn't win but his bloc did. And that win is what the press refuses to explore. First off, gerry mandering has arrived in Iraq. And the US State Dept tutored Moqtada on how to work it. New districtes were created for the October 10th election and Moqtada studied the newly drawn districts and was advised on how to use these new boundaries. You can be sure that other blocs and parties will pay more attention the boundaries next time.

The other news? While Moqtada's bloc has the largest number of seats in the Parliament, his bloc actually got less votes than in the last national election. Again, he learned how gerrymandered districts could be used. He did not see an increase in popular support, he saw a huge decrease in popular support.

ALmost four months after the election, we aren't the ones who should be explaing this -- or, in our case, again explaining this.

Violence in Iraq has put a temporary hold on those automatic pieces of 500 or so words about 'groovy Moqtada.' But there was never a reasonf or them to begin with.

There was a need for truth. There was a need for true analysis. The western press failed.

The only thing more idiotic than what passed for election coverage and analysis in the press would be the 'violence is back' in Iraq stories. Such as this one. Violence never left Iraq. Just because you chose to ignore it doesn't mean it ceased to take place. And ISIS never left Iraq. It was never vanquished.

We rejected that nonsense in real time. Losing Mosul was not the end of ISIS.

In other news, ASHAR AL-AWSAT notes a new rumor:

A vague report about the formation of a new military force in Iraq that is loyal to parliament Speaker Mohammed al-Halbousi has sparked fierce debate among Sunnis in the country.

The report, which was widely circulated on social media, said the "Desert Phantoms" was formed of Iraqis from the western provinces. They have been trained by American forces and were carefully selected based on their political loyalty to Halbousi's Taqaddum coalition.

The report claimed the force has been tasked with protecting the headquarters of Sunni parties and blocs in Baghdad from attacks that they have recently come under. The force is seeking to deploy in Baghdad to protect party and political headquarters.

The following sites updated:

Dissident Voice

Nostalgia at the AUKMIN Talks: Britain’s Forces Eye Australia

3 hours ago