Featured Post

The white-Left Part 1: The two meanings of white

Saturday, September 22, 2018

Garrett Ventry "resignation" shows GOP Senate Judiciary Committee hypocrisy

NBC News broke this story today:
Spokesman for GOP on Kavanaugh nomination resigns;
has been accused of harassment in the past

An adviser for the Senate Judiciary Committee has resigned amid questions from NBC News about a previous sexual harassment complaint.

by Heidi Przybyla
22 September 2018
WASHINGTON — A press adviser helping lead the Senate Judiciary Committee’s response to a sexual assault allegation against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh has stepped down amid evidence he was fired from a previous political job in part because of a sexual harassment allegation against him.

Garrett Ventry, 29, who served as a communications aide to the committee chaired by Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, had been helping coordinate the majority party's messaging in the wake of Christine Blasey Ford’s claim that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her 36 years ago at a high school party. In a response to NBC News, Ventry denied any past "allegations of misconduct." More...

Garrett Ventry was a current staff member, or employee, which would seem to give him more standing to keep his position than a job applicant, or an employee asking for a promotion, which is the position of Brett Kavanaugh, and yet there was no talk about the right to due process, or the presumption of innocent that has so animated the Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee in defense of Brett Kavanaugh. Ventry, was given no hearing, and no right to appeal. The reason he was asked to resign was simple:
Republicans familiar with the situation had been concerned that Ventry, because of his history, could not lead an effective communications response.
Meanwhile, on Fox News, Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC), the GOP congressman who joked that Ruth Bader Ginsburg had been groped by Abraham Lincoln, complained that his favorite job applicant, Brett Kavanaugh wasn't being treated fairly, saying "Where else can you write a letter and convict someone?"

I'll bet the majority of old white men in congress have law degrees, and yet they seem confused over this simple fact: Kavanaugh is not on trial for his freedom, he is applying for a job.

It may not be "fair," but when there are many qualified candidates for a position, it doesn't take much to take any one candidate off the short-list. The real possibility that someone applying for the lifetime position of Supreme Court Justice may be lying about a crime of sexual assault, even one that happened long ago, should be enough. Sorry Charlie, but the job of the Senate is to be fair to the country.

Syria is the Paris Commune of the 21st Century!

Click here for our posts on the 2016 US Election
Click here for a list of our other blogs on Syria
Click here for a list of our other blogs on Libya

UPDATED: Where were Brett Kavanaugh's loving parents when he was drinking illegally?

United States President Donald Trump recently attacked Christine Blasey Ford, the woman who is accusing Judge Brett Kavanaugh of attempted rape 36 years ago, by asking why she didn't go to her "loving parents," and the police:
We know there are many reasons #whyididntreport, check the hashtag for thousands of details. There is another question the president, and all of us, should be asking, and it is almost certainly the most socially actionable one: Where were Brett Kavanaugh's loving parents when he was illegally drinking because he was underage?

There certainly has been enough testimony and evidence of parties at which underage drinking took place in the ruling class high school environment that Christine Blasey Ford, Brett Kavanaugh, and his accomplice, Mark Judge grew up in. No doubt, they, along with many mutual friends, attended numerous such parties.

So where were the loving parents that allowed this?

Trump knows that one big reason the 15 year old Christine would not have reported the sexual assault was that she would have had to admit to illegal drinking at an illegal party to do so.

Did the 17 year old Brett Kavanaugh and Mark Judge understand the leverage they would have in sexually assaulting young girls who had already been lured into the illegal activity of underage drinking? Did these maturing legal minds understand the advantage that compromise gave them? Did they understand that even if the sex was consensual, it would still be illegal? Or did they expect the alcohol to buy them some cheap immunity?

There is also the question of who provided the alcohol? Was it the younger girls, or the older boys? Or the parents? My money is on the older boys, although some parents may have turned a blind eye to "their young men" raiding the liquor cabinet for a house party, "At least they're drinking at home," might be their excuse. No matter.

What needs to be said is that the alcohol-fueled party culture that was allowed to fester at Georgetown Prep created an environment in which the type of attack alleged by Christine Blasey Ford was encouraged and protected. I have little doubt that she is speaking the truth about what Brett Kavanaugh and Mark Judge did to her at such a party 36 years ago. I have no doubt that her participation in such a party, at 15, played a big role in her going along with Brett and Mark in covering up the attack even as rumors swirled all around the schools.

None of us should doubt that the type of sexual violence that Dr. Ford alleges Kavanaugh subjected her to, has happened to a great many teenage girls, even especially at the best schools, where illegal drinking is an accepted part of a privileged upbringing, and the young men of the ruling class are invited to join in the corruption from a very early age by their Georgetown Preparation.

UPDATE 24 Sept. 2018:

Syria is the Paris Commune of the 21st Century!

Click here for our posts on the 2016 US Election
Click here for a list of our other blogs on Syria
Click here for a list of our other blogs on Libya

Friday, September 14, 2018

Idlib: The Syrian Revolution still Lives in September 2018

Greetings to the Protests of No Alternative to the Fall of the Regime in Idlib

Once again, as soon as the Russians stop raining down bombs for a minute, the Syrian people hit the streets to protest the regime. What a shame they don't get more support from the so-called progressives in the US.

Remember these pictures. A month from now, many of them may be dead if we continue to do nothing. Al Jazeera reported on Friday:
Thousands rally against looming offensive on northwest Syria

Rebel-controlled Idlib province witnesses massive protests, as Turkey announces new meeting between Erdogan and Putin.
by Mariya Petkova
14 September 2018

Thousands attended protests in the Syrian city of Maarat al-Nouman against a looming assault on Idlib province, on September 14, 2018 [Mohammed al-Daher]

Istanbul, Turkey - Thousands of people have taken to the streets across Syria's last remaining stronghold to protest against a potential full-fledged offensive by government forces and their allies.

Activists told Al Jazeera that Friday's demonstrations took place in more than two dozen towns and villages in Idlib, a northwestern province that is home to more than three million people.

In recent weeks, the Syrian government, supported by Russia and pro-Iranian militias, has been amassing forces close to areas controlled by rebels in Idlib and northern Hama provinces, threatening a large-scale ground offensive that may result in a "bloodbath", according to the United Nations.

In early September, the forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad launched an intense campaign of shelling, air raids and barrel-bombing of opposition-held territories. The Russian-backed bombardment has receded over the past few days.

One of the biggest demonstrations was held in the city of Maarat al-Nouman in central Idlib province, where an estimated 25,000 people, including civilians from neighbouring villages and towns, gathered after Friday prayers, according to local sources.

"We want to send a message to the rest of the world that we are just an oppressed people who want freedom," said Mahmoud Harkawi, 36, who works in a printing house in Maarat al-Nouman. More...
Friday's protests in Idlib once again reveal that at the core of the Syrian Revolution, once you clear away the wood, is the people's demand for democracy and an end to the regime that the world seems intent on forcing on them.

Here is few of the videos that were posted to YouTube on Friday:

Idlib city protest now | 14 September 2018

Live from Syria | Protest In IDLIB | Syria's War | 14 September 2018

Protests in Idlib city demanding the departure of Assad | 14 September 2018

Demonstrations in Idlib | 14 September 2018

The Daily Beast is reporting:
The ‘Final Offensive’ In Syria by Putin and Assad Suddenly Looks Like It’s On Hold

Bombing has stopped, some Syrian army units have redeployed—and anti-Assad demonstrations are erupting. But the rebels may turn on each other.
By Roy Gutman
14 September 2018
ISTANBUL – Just a week after Syria’s northern Idlib province seemed on the brink of a massive military assault by the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad backed by Russian air power, tens of thousands of defiant residents took to the streets of Idlib province and beyond on Friday in demonstrations calling for the overthrow of the Assad regime. More...

"In fact, opposition leaders say that one third of the first group of 100 brought in from Dara’a had defected shortly after being brought near the front."

Here are some of the tweets:

As the three million people under seige in Idlib, come under the cross hairs of Russian bombers and ground troops, Amy Goodman and Democracy Now are reporting all week from the Climate Summit in San Francisco, with no time for a show segment on Syria, just as they are all about #NoDAPL as Aleppo was being bombed into the stone age. Others are screaming that everyone in Idlib is Al Qaeda and deserves to die. And so it goes on the white-Left.

Click here for our posts on the 2016 US Election
Click here for a list of our other blogs on Syria
Click here for a list of our other blogs on Libya

Meanwhile, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard becomes the voice of Assad in the US Congress:

Tuesday, September 11, 2018

Glenn Greenwald: What would have been different if Clinton won?

30 August, Glenn Greenwald asked this question in the Huffington Post:
“What are these grave differences that the rest of the world is suffering under Donald Trump which they wouldn’t have been suffering under Hillary Clinton?”
Apparently, he is blissfully unaware of the terrible effects the Trump presidency is having on the rest of the world outside of his villa, so I have put together this partial list for his education:

  • Consider these:
  • The Dreamers wouldn't be facing deportation.
  • Thousands of Puerto Ricans would probably still be alive.
  • Hundreds of children wouldn't have been separated from their parents.
  • A Supreme Court likely to overturn Roe v. Wade, and much more wouldn't be in the making.
  • Many Federal judges committed to a white nationalist agenda wouldn't have been appointed.
  • Muslims from many countries wouldn't be banned from visiting the United States.
  • Environmental regulations designed to stem climate change wouldn't have been gutted.
  • A vicious white supremacists/neo-Nazi movement wouldn't feel empowered.
  • Transgender soldiers wouldn't be kicked out of the military.
  • Hundreds, and possibly thousands, of Hispanic-Americans would be having their US citizenship challenged.

For starters!

Syria is the Paris Commune of the 21st Century!

Click here for our posts on the 2016 US Election
Click here for a list of our other blogs on Syria
Click here for a list of our other blogs on Libya

Friday, September 7, 2018

Laura's bent @IngrahamAngle on Carter Page

Thursday night on The Ingraham Angle on Fox News, Laura Ingraham made this extraordinary claim about how the Russian government viewed Trump foreign policy adviser Carter Page [YouTube 37m40s]:
Russia viewed Carter page as an idiot. They didn't think, they, of course they want to recruit everybody. They tried to recruit ... He's an idiot.. no really. They didn't put that in the FISA application either, correct? That wasn't..There was no red flag about that. How do you get an application to spy on Carter Page when the Russians themselves toss him to the side as not someone [garbled]...?

This is exactly what they want you to believe. They want you to believe that Carter Page was a real light weight, a real nothing. This is the "Carter Page" that Carter Page plays when he is making the rounds on all the US network news shows. He acts like a real doofus. What was Trump thinking when he named this "office boy" his "foreign policy adviser"? I mean, would the FBI even bother opening an investigation on such a nobody if he wasn't connected to the Trump campaign?

But that's not the Carter Page the Russians knew. When he came to Moscow to lecture in July 2016, Katehon wrote:
Carter Page is one of the youngest advisors of Donald Trump. He is an energy and economic development expert, particularly regarding the countries of the former Soviet Union and the socialist bloc in Eastern Europe. He collaborated with the Council on Foreign Relations, where he led a research group on the Caspian Sea region.

Page lived in Moscow for three years, where he was advising Gazprom. After the reunification of Crimea with Russia and the beginning of operations in Ukraine, he was one of the few American experts who called for understanding the actions of Russia.

Page came out openly against the interventionist policy of NATO, which, in his opinion, provoked Russia with its expansion.

For reference Katehon is the think tank led by Alexander Dugin, and Dugin is Vladimir Putin's ideological mentor. He has been called "Putin's brain." All of this is to say that quite contrary to what Ingraham would have you believe, Carter Page is highly thought of in the most influential circles in Moscow.


When Putin wanted something like Fox News for Russia, he hired former Fox News producer Jack Hanick to create it for him and Dugin to run it. It's called Tsargrad TV. Tsargrad TV covered Carter Page "before, during and after his speech to the New Economic School in Moscow," according to McClatchy. Tsargrad TV, like Katehon, is funded by the same US sanctioned, right-wing nationalist Russian oligarch, Konstantin Malofeev, that finances much of the Dugin/Putin operation.

These connections beg the question: Was Ingraham's bent on the Russian view of Carter Page a result of ignorance, or a purposeful attempt to spread misinformation favorable to the Dugin/Putin/Trump white supremacist project?

Syria is the Paris Commune of the 21st Century!

Click here for our posts on the 2016 US Election
Click here for a list of our other blogs on Syria
Click here for a list of our other blogs on Libya

Wednesday, September 5, 2018

Kavanaugh v. Wikipedia: Who is right on Plessy v. Ferguson?

Plessy v. Ferguson was one of the most racist decisions ever made by the United States Supreme Court. Wikipedia describes it this way:
Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896),[2] was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court issued in 1896. It upheld the constitutionality of racial segregation laws for public facilities as long as the segregated facilities were equal in quality – a doctrine that came to be known as "separate but equal".[3] This legitimized the many state laws re-establishing racial segregation that had been passed in the American South after the end of the Reconstruction Era (1865–1877). The decision was handed down by a vote of 7 to 1, with the majority opinion written by Justice Henry Billings Brown and the lone dissent written by Justice John Marshall Harlan.
In his Senate confirmation hearings on today, Judge Brett Kavanaugh said that Plessy v. Ferguson was completely overturned by Brown v. Board of Education in 1954. He spoke to it in response to a question from Senator Cornyn:

Cornyn: [4:34:20] "On occasion the Supreme Court has decided that it's just wrong and overruled those previous decisions. I'm thinking about Plessy v. Ferguson for example, which was a scar on our body politic, that said that separate, but equal educational facilities met the constitutional requirement of the fourteenth amendment. But, can you talk about the extraordinary circumstances under which the Supreme Court would revisit a precedent?"

Kavanaugh: "Well, Brown v. Board of Education, of course, overturned Plessy, and, ah, Plessy was wrong on the day it was decided. It was inconsistent with the text and meaning of the fourteenth amendment, which guaranteed equal protection..."

Then he went on to talk about another case. From his answer, it's not clear if he has really given a lot of thought to this landmark ruling. He borrowed that "Plessy was wrong on the day it was decided" line from the Joint Opinion of Justices O’Connor, Kennedy, and Souter in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, in which they wrote “[W]e think Plessy was wrong the day it was decided.” And while this Supreme Court nominee was clear in his off-hand opinion that, of course, Plessy was overturned in 1954; Wikipedia is more nuanced. If I believe Wikipedia, the bottomline is that it has not been completely overturned [bold added by me]:
Plessy is widely regarded as one of the worst decisions in U.S. Supreme Court history.[4] Despite its infamy, the decision itself has never been explicitly overruled.[5] However, a series of subsequent decisions—beginning with Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, which held that Plessy's "separate but equal" doctrine is unconstitutional in the context of schools and educational facilities—have severely weakened it to the point that it is usually considered to have been de facto overruled.[1]
Cited by Wikipedia:
[5] The Plessy Case: A Legal-Historical Interpretation by Charles A. Lofgren
[1] Journal Article, Generality and Equality Frederick Schauer

So which legal opinion is correct?

If Wikipedia is right, and the task of overthrowing Plessy is one the courts have yet to complete, it would be a sorry thing to appoint a Justice that thinks it has already been handled.

So, it would seem that this would be a good time to have some clarity on this question, given the time we are living in, one in which white supremacy is trying for a come-back. Believe it or not, there are white nationalists in the Trump cabal that would like to bring separate but equal back. It is key to their vision of ethnostates. It would be good to hear more from Kavanaugh on this subject, given that he has been nominated by the leader of those trying to make white supremacy dominate again.

Please Retweet if you agree.

Syria is the Paris Commune of the 21st Century!

Click here for our posts on the 2016 US Election
Click here for a list of our other blogs on Syria
Click here for a list of our other blogs on Libya