Welcome to Pottersville 2 (Blogging Against Fascism!): "Poor People" Creators? The Fed Will Always Think That Unemployment’s Not a Problem, DSK EuroZone Scam Ends, Don't Be Fooled (Again)? Film Noir Wars!

Ukraine Disinformation Battle: Little Green Men, Hamsters and the Fog of War

________________
There has always been a gap in how media on both sides of the former Iron Curtain have reported world events, and it’s growing as the crisis in Ukraine escalates. It has become increasingly difficult to obtain reliable information from any side — west, east, or further east — about what is going on in Eastern Ukraine. While powerful propaganda machines fill the public space with smoke and mirrors, one of the few facts that can be positively established in Eastern Ukraine is that the body count is steadily growing: a testament of just how easy it is for self-interested foreign powers to start, either intentionally or recklessly, a civil war in the heart of Europe. Continuing coverage is available at this link and this link.

Paul Krugman:

Paul Craig Roberts:

_________________
US Media _________________
"Anyone who depends on print, TV, or right-wing talk radio media is totally misinformed. The Bush administration has achieved a de facto Ministry of Propaganda."

"The uniformity of the US media has become much more complete since the days of the cold war. During the 1990s, the US government permitted an unconscionable concentration of print and broadcast media that terminated the independence of the media.

Today the US media is owned by 5 giant companies in which pro-Zionist Jews have disproportionate influence. More importantly, the values of the conglomerates reside in the broadcast licenses, which are granted by the government, and the corporations are run by corporate executives — not by journalists — whose eyes are on advertising revenues and the avoidance of controversy that might produce boycotts or upset advertisers and subscribers.

Americans who rely on the totally corrupt corporate media have no idea what is happening anywhere on earth, much less at home."
_________________
War On Terror _________________
Roberts asked "Is the War on Terror a Hoax", and claims it has "killed, maimed, dislocated, and made widows and orphans of millions of Muslims in six countries". Roberts called the attacks "naked aggression" on civilian populations and infrastructure which constitute war crimes. _________________
Republican Party _________________
Roberts is seriously dismayed by what he considers the Republican Party's disregard for the U.S. Constitution. He has even voiced his regret that he ever worked for it, avowing that, had he known what it would become, he would never have contributed to the Reagan Revolution. _________________
American Democracy and Oligarchy _________________
Roberts has been increasingly critical of what he deems as the lessening of democracy in the U.S.; instead accusing it of being run by oligarchs by stating:

"The west prides itself that it is the standard for the world, that it is a democracy. But nowhere do you see democratic outcomes: not in Greece, not in Ireland, not in the UK, not here, the outcomes are always to punish the innocent and reward the guilty.

And that's what the Greeks are in the streets protesting. We see this all over the west. There is no democracy, there are oligarchies, some of these smaller European countries are not even run by their own governments, they are run by Wall Street... There is probably more democracy in China than there is in the west.

Revolution is the only answer... We are confronted with a curious situation. Throughout the west we think we have democracy, we hold ourselves up high, we demonize China, we talk about the mafia state of Russia, we talk about the Arabs and so on, but where is the democracy here?" _________________
Farewell Speech _________________
"Truth Has Fallen and Taken Liberty With It,"

Roberts effectively announced his journalistic retirement. The article, published at Counterpunch.org, begins:

"There was a time when the pen was mightier than the sword. That was a time when people believed in truth and regarded truth as an independent power and not as an auxiliary for government, class, race, ideological, personal, or financial interest."

It proceeds to a bitter chronicle of the demise of American intellectual integrity, particularly that of financial journalists and economists. These have been thoroughly corrupted by monetary inducements to misrepresent and ignore what has been, in effect, the systematic dismantling of the nation's productive life, in the name of globalization.

He holds the members of his own journalistic profession largely responsible for abetting relentless outsourcing of American industry, thereby gutting the American middle class and effectively dooming the nation's future.

He describes his own ostracism from mainstream media access, the consequence of his relentless and unflinching criticism of the demolition process over the past decade. His column ends, "The militarism of the U.S. and Israeli states, and Wall Street and corporate greed, will now run their course. As the pen is censored and its might extinguished, I am signing off." _________________

Liberal?

"If by a 'Liberal' they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties — someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a “Liberal,” then I’m proud to say I’m a “Liberal."

John F. Kennedy, 1960
________________
Citizen's United

"[T]his Court now concludes that independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption. That speakers may have influence over or access to elected officials does not mean that those officials are corrupt. And the appearance of influence or access will not cause the electorate to lose faith in this democracy."

– Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
_______________

Sunday, December 11, 2011

"Poor People" Creators? The Fed Will Always Think That Unemployment’s Not a Problem, DSK EuroZone Scam Ends, Don't Be Fooled (Again)? Film Noir Wars!

Nice, easy-to-understand chart on your economic future (which the folks in charge of the Austerity Regime hope you don't know) at Asymptosis. So much for ever getting a truly unbiased analysis from these guys. You'd almost think they have money on low unemployment numbers, wouldn't you?

The Fed Always Thinks That Unemployment’s Not a Problem

December 4th, 2011 7 Comments

A little behind here, but I wanted to post this eye-opener from Mike Konczal:

Their model is obviously telling them that whatever (non-)actions they’re taking at the moment will solve the problem.

And their model is obviously, consistently, and wildly wrong — and always wrong in the same direction.

Altering that model to accurately predict unemployment, of course, would require that they allow more inflation in order to address both of their mandates.

And higher inflation utterly slams the real wealth of creditors.

And the Fed is run by creditors.

Which is also why we never see high inflation numbers reported anymore (food and energy prices now being excluded) due to the figures currently used being suborned during the Neolib years (under the Alan Greenspan Commission's tutelage is my guess around the same time that they enabled that group of "clever" men to come up with the "solution" to the rising cost of Social Security, et al., by raising FICA taxes on the bottom of the paying pyramid and then working hard advocating the repeal of all taxes on those above (when they mysteriously began to be called "job creators" by a much more compliant media - see Rupert's Murdoch's special deal with Reagan for citizenship if you don't believe me) so as not to raise inflation-sensitive safety net benefits more than a very small percentage each year (no matter the real inflation in prices): thus, more poor people created! (Who are all unworthy fakers, of course.)

Yes, not "job creators."

"Poor people" creators!

Russ Baker at Who What Why fleshes out my earlier Dominique Strauss-Kahn apologia. Read it for the "whoooosh" your heart will receive when you see the co-conspirators get caught red-handed.

About two minutes after that call to police the tall unidentified man and Brian Yearwood enter an adjacent room and “high-five each other, clap their hands, and do an extraordinary dance of celebration that lasts for three minutes.”

The Dominique Strauss-Kahn Case Revisited
By Jonathan Z. Larsen

Dec 10, 2011

For fans of Edward Jay Epstein’s work, it was nice to see him weigh in on the Dominique Strauss-Kahn case in the December 22nd issue of The New York Review of Books. Epstein has a world-wide reputation as an investigative reporter—on JFK’s assassination, for instance—and trails after him a cloud of rumor that he is or has been involved with U.S. intelligence agencies.

It is never exactly clear where Epstein is coming from, or whether there is a hidden agenda, but he always comes up with something new, as he has again with this story. His recent article presents for the first time a granular, minute-by-minute account, fleshed out with new revelations, many based on Epstein’s access to the electronic key swipe records and time-stamped security camera videos of Sofitel New York, where it all took place.

The basic outline of the story is well known: a cleaning lady at Sofitel claims a sexual assault by Dominique Strauss-Kahn (often referred to familiarly in the press as DSK) just past noon of May 14, 2011; police investigate and some five hours later, Strauss-Kahn is pulled off an Air France plane by police and jailed on seven counts, including attempted rape and sexual abuse. There is forensic evidence of sexual contact between Strauss-Kahn and maid; he admits to as much but claims it was consensual. Eventually he is cleared of all charges because of the unreliable testimony of the maid, Nafissatou Diallo, a 32-year-old immigrant from the West African nation of Guinea.

Here are some of the new facts claimed by Epstein:

• On the morning of the alleged assault, Strauss-Kahn receives a text message from a female friend, temporarily working in President Nicolas Sarkozy’s political party office. Strauss-Kahn was to have opposed Sarkozy in the April 2012 elections. The friend warns Strauss-Kahn that at least one email he had sent from his BlackBerry to his wife “had been read at the UMP offices in Paris.” The speculation is that Strauss-Kahn’s phone may have been hacked, and that Strauss-Kahn “might be under electronic surveillance in New York,” according to Epstein’s article.

• At 10:07 Strauss-Kahn calls his wife in Paris to make arrangements to have his BlackBerry as well as his iPad “examined by an expert.” In other words, checked for bugs.

• The key swipe records indicate that the maid had entered a small room, #2820, near Strauss-Kahn’s “Presidential Suite,” before entering the suite itself, #2806.

• At 12:05 a waiter named Syed Haque used his key to enter Strauss-Kahn’s suite. He says he went to clear breakfast trays, but refused to be interviewed by Strauss-Kahn’s lawyers. Key swipe records do not indicate departures so there is no way of knowing when Haque left the suite or whether he might still have been there when Diallo entered.

• At 12:06 or 12:07 Diallo enters Strauss-Kahn’s suite.

• By 12:13 phone records indicate that Strauss-Kahn was on the phone to his daughter to say that he would be late for a luncheon engagement. Although there is no record of when Diallo left Strauss-Kahn’s suite, she reentered room 2820 at 12:26. This suggests that, at the outside, Strauss-Kahn and Diallo were in the suite together for 20 minutes, but far more likely for only seven minutes, the time between her entry into the suite and Strauss-Kahn’s phone call to his daughter.

• BlackBerry records show that the phone in question was disabled at 12:51. Epstein reports that no one knows to this day who disabled it, or how. Epstein writes that disabling the phone “required technical knowledge of how the BlackBerry worked.” >Immediately after the lunch, Strauss-Kahn discovers the BlackBerry in question is missing. There is a protracted search to find it.

• At 12:52 Diallo is led to the hotel’s security office for questioning. Present are Brian Yearwood, the hotel’s chief engineer, Adrian Branch, the hotel’s security chief, and a third unidentified “tall man” who escorted Diallo into the security office. A fourth man, John Sheehan, a security expert for the Accor Group that owns Sofitel, is on his way in from Washingtonville, New York, over an hour from Manhattan, texting and calling various people en route.

• At 1:31 Branch places the call to police to report the alleged assault, one hour after Diallo had first reported it to her supervisors.

• About two minutes after that call to police the tall unidentified man and Brian Yearwood enter an adjacent room and “high-five each other, clap their hands, and do an extraordinary dance of celebration that lasts for three minutes.”

• 3:28 Diallo is taken to St. Luke’s Hospital for examination.

The large question that Epstein’s article begs is, could Strauss-Kahn have been set up? Strauss-Kahn admits to a consensual sexual encounter but not to assault. Is it possible that Diallo entered into such an encounter, or even provoked it, so as to make the charge of assault and so as to provide the forensic evidence to make it credible?

Epstein leaves the following interesting questions in the air:

• Who was in room 2820, which Diallo entered before her encounter with Strauss-Kahn in the nearby Presidential Suite, and why did she lie about re-entering #2820 after the alleged attack? (She insisted to police she had not gone into any other room after the encounter with Strauss-Kahn). And why will neither Sofitel management nor the Accor Group provide the name of the guest in #2820 to the prosecutors? They claim they will not release the name on account of privacy, but they certainly know it. They also know that the mystery occupant was in room 2820 when Diallo first used her key to enter it, and possibly when she re-entered it. Diallo’s refusal to admit returning to room 2820 and the prosecutors’ certainty that she did (based on the key swipe records) seriously undercut her credibility and, among other things, led to the dismissal of the case.

• Who was the mysterious tall man who led Diallo into the security office, and who later high-fived Yearwood? Why can no one from the hotel identify him? Or do they simply refuse to identify him, just as they refuse to identify the occupant of room 2820? Could the tall man and the occupant of #2820 be one and the same? If so, then it is possible Diallo met with this Mr. X before entering Strauss-Kahn’s suite, met with him again afterward, and was eventually led down to the security office by the same man. Once the police were engaged, Mr. X celebrated with another member of the hotel staff. Maybe.

• What happened to Strauss-Kahn’s BlackBerry? It has never been found. Strauss-Kahn had it in hand when he called his daughter at 12:13, and BlackBerry records show that between then and 12:51, when its GPS circuitry was disabled, it never left the hotel. Among other things, that phone might have provided evidence of the bugging that Strauss-Kahn suspected. Perhaps that is the very reason it was disabled, and then disappeared.

Perhaps none of these questions will ever be answered. But while they hang in the air, unresolved, there is at least the possibility that the case of Dominique Strauss-Kahn might be much more than another seamy tale of sexually promiscuous politicians behaving badly, and more closely resemble an international espionage scandal.

In an article for BBC News, commenting on Epstein’s article, Christian Fraser dismisses such a suggestion with several rhetorical caveats. He writes that “perhaps the most important of these is: Why would the [French] president or his staff need to engage themselves in such a sordid plot to bring down DSK?” Why indeed? Politics is not politics without some good intrigue. Let’s remember the “fake” documents about George W. Bush’s missing National Guard service years that brought down inquiring reporters, not the president. And, of course, Watergate.

I always loved dancing, listening to and being one with the humor within The Who's Won't Get Fooled Again! Lately we've been re-schooled in that curriculum.

Don’t Be Fooled
Posted on Friday, December 9, 2011 by Bryan

The Cordray block by senate republicans Wednesday exposes the defensive nature of the party. You’re damn right they’re under attack.

Scott Brown sided with democrats in the Cordray nomination. This is an example how oblivious they are to the current American voter. Why would any republican side with the democrats on that issue? This is a regulatory agency designed to target business the Republicans own. Do you think it has something to do with the senate race in Massachusetts?

Dean Heller voted against Cordray and in his defense he says he voted against the Wall Street bail out. Does that make any sense? These guys will BE ALLOWED to vary their stance on party positions to keep independent voters interest. Key word, BE ALLOWED. They know the demographic in both states and they will continue to try and manipulate to win those seats.

When Obama was elected, the country made a statement, we don’t want your money, we want you out! Now, what is most important to the American public is justice. Those seats are critical to continuing the path we are on.

The republican party will continue to try and position both the house and senate to deregulate financial and any other markets at the expense of the rest of us. It is all they do.

Don’t be fooled.

The New York Crank writes a fine denouncement today of both our Fig Newt (sweetly tempting (to some) on the outside with a truly poisonous core) and the guardian of the Rethug "Libertarians," in reality off the fringe far Rightists:

Republicans have an odd habit of worshipping losers, liars, lunatics, and lunkheads.

Among their company is Newt Gingrich, whose star is now on the ascendancy after Herman Caine’s fell, owing to what used to be called “wimmin troubles.”

Before that was Michelle Bachmann and Governor Tex Whatzisname, who could stick their own feet in their mouths while standing up ramrod straight with their lips tightly shut.

Now one of the lunatic fringe candidates – no I take that back. He’s not on the fringe. He’s batshit crazy. Anyway, looney tunes Doctor Ron Paul has decided that Newt is a serious threat to his own candidacy, and has taken his case of the vapors to the Internet to denounce Newt.

Of course, in my own cranky opinion, Newt deserves denouncing. It’s just that I wish Doctor Ron wouldn’t blame the fall of western civilization on Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac, when they were mere bit players.

Fanny and Freddy followed after the big boy players in the mortgage meltdown, from Bear Sterns (remember them?) and Lehman Brothers (and remember them too – and also Countrywide Financial?) to the still-standing Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America and other Wall Streeters who are occupied with their bonuses rather than the troubles they’ve caused America.

That said, without further ado, I turn my blog piece for today over to my guest blogger, Ron Paul, who sent me the following screed in an e-mail (he thinks I’m a conservative libertarian for some reason) along with this video denouncing Newt. Take it away, Ron:

As usual, click on the link.

My bestest buddy, Tony, at Wolves in the City makes what I take to be the final comment on the eerily film noir wars that the service-evading connivers have brought to our beloved troops.

Right.

And, no, it won't be the final one by a long shot.

The contrast between what happened latterly at Abu Ghraib and the 'standard' way prisoners were tortured during Saddam's regime is striking. Instead of the direct, brutal infliction of pain, the US soldiers focused on psychological humiliation. And instead of the secrecy practised by Saddam, the US soldiers recorded the humiliation they inflicted, even including their own faces smiling stupidly as they posed behind the twisted naked bodies of the prisoners.

When I first saw the notorious photograph of a prisoner wearing a black hood, electric wires attached to his limbs as he stood on a box in a ridiculous theatrical pose, my reaction was that this must be a piece of performance art. The positions and costumes of the prisoners suggest a theatrical staging, a tableau vivant, which cannot but call to mind the 'theatre of cruelty', Robert Mapplethorpe's photographs, scenes from David Lynch movies.

This brings us to the crux of the matter. Anyone acquainted with the US way of life will have recognised in the photographs the obscene underside of US popular culture. You can find similar photographs in the US press whenever an initiation rite goes wrong in an army unit or on a high school campus and soldiers or students die or get injured in the course of performing a stunt, assuming a humiliating pose or undergoing sexual humiliation.

This, then, was not simply a case of American arrogance towards a Third World people. The Iraqi prisoners were effectively being initiated into American culture: they were getting a taste of the obscenity that counterpoints the public values of personal dignity, democracy and freedom.

No wonder, then, that on 6 May, Donald Rumsfeld admitted that these particular photographs were just the 'tip of the iceberg', that there are stronger things to come, including videos of rape and murder.'
Posted by TONY on 9.12.11

Comment:

RealityZone said:

And who sits in an isolation cell? Manning. Not Cheney, Rummy, Wolfowitz, Woo, or any of the other Neocon gangsters. Where is the justice?